DEDICATED TO THE MEMORY OF ST. JOHN, ARCHBISHOP OF SHANGHAI AND SAN
FRANCISCO
ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN WITNESS (USPS 412-260)
is published monthly by St. Nectarios American Orthodox Cathedral,
10300 Ashworth Avenue North, Seattle, Washington 98133-9410.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to
OCW, 10300 Ashworth Ave. N., Seattle, WA. 98133-9410
Fr. Neketas S. Palassis, Editor Email: frneketas@stnectariospress.com
Telephone (206) 522-4471; (800) 643-4233 U.S. & Canada;
Fax: 206-523-0550
NOVEMBER, 2004, Vol. XXXVIII, No. 11 (1542)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTER-ORTHODOX CONFERENCE
2. THE EVIL COMMUNION
3. RUSSIAN ORTHODOX "FREEZING" RELATIONSHIP WITH ECUSA
4. HELENISM AND ORTHODOXY ARE SEPARATE
5. FROM "FIRST THINGS, June-July, 2004"
6. HOLY LAND PILGRIMAGE
7. PHOTOGRAPHS AVAILABLE FROM CONSECRATION OF BP. SERGIOS
8. NEW ITEMS FROM THE BOOK CENTER
A brother asked an old man: "How is it that God promises good to the
soul in the Holy Scriptures, yet the soul does not wish to remain in
the good, but inclines to what is transitory and unclean?" The old man
answered: "Because it has not yet tasted the sweetness of heavenly
things; therefore, it turns more quickly to what is unclean."
Patrum Aegyptiorum
1. INTER-ORTHODOX CONFERENCE:
ECUMENISM: ORIGINS, EXPECTATIONS, DISENCHANTMENT
Press Release
"In love, we reject Ecumenism, because we desire to offer to
the heterodox precisely that which the Lord richly bestowed upon all of
us within His Holy Orthodox Church: the opportunity to become members
of His Body." This, among other things, was stressed at the
Inter-Orthodox Conference: "Ecumenism: Origins, Expectations,
Disenchantment", which was successfully co-sponsored by the Department
of Pastoral Theology of the Theological School of Aristotle University
of Thessaloniki and the "Society of Orthodox Studies" in the midst of
large crowds who filled Ceremony Hall at the Aristotle University of
Thessaloniki.
The conference took place from September 20-24, 2004. His
All-holiness Metropolitan Anthimos of Thessaloniki declared the
commencement of the conference. Other Metropolitans and Bishops, the
mayor of Thessaloniki, Mr. Panagiotis Psomiadis, Parliament
representatives, and university professors were all on hand to offer
greetings to the conference and its attendees. Before a packed audience
composed of the Abbots of holy monasteries, clergy, monks, and laity,
among which were many theologians and students of the Theological
School, over a five day period roughly sixty speakers, including
Hierarchs, from nearly all of the Local Orthodox Churches, analyzed
thoroughly the phenomenon of Ecumenism. At the conference it was noted
that the roughly one hundred year old movement of Ecumenism -- the
organized efforts to unite divided Christians -- even if it was, in the
beginning of its development, animated by good intentions, has today
reached a total dead end -- a truth which is confessed by even the most
fervent supporters of inter-Christian dialogue. This is due to the way
in which these dialogues were established and directed, and are
conducted even today.
Inter-Christian dialogues, with their unacceptable joint prayers and
their syncretism, quickly led to inter-religious syncretism, the
underpinning of which is the new age theory which proclaims that all of
the religions are paths which lead to the same God. Ecumenism, with
these dialogues, gatherings and joint prayers, is placed among the
so-called New Age, the New Order, and Globalization and serves
political and geo-strategic aims, which are especially visible, even to
the most uninformed observer, after the eleventh of September, 2001.
The ultimate conclusion of the conference is that the conditions have
matured and been met and now render imperative the re-examination of
the Orthodox Churchs participation in the World Council of Churches,
and the so-called Ecumenical Movement more generally, as well as
inter-religious gatherings.
Joint prayer must be flatly condemned and the Local Orthodox Churches
must undertake their heroic exodus from these assemblies. For this aim
to be attained a pan-Orthodox decision is not required, given that the
Local Orthodox Churches were incorporated into the W.C.C. and
ecumenical movement separately.
Metropolitan Ephraim's comments: This is a very good and promising
statement, but, as the saying goes, 'The proof is in the pudding.' If
the bishops do nothing, nothing will happen, and it will be business as
usual.
2. THE EVIL COMMUNION
Taken from Orthodox Christian Witness, August 25, 1980
Sulpitius Severus (363-420), long famous for his Life of St.
Martin of Tours, has recorded in his Sacred History an interesting and
revealing episode in church history. In his second book, chapter 46, he
writes that a certain Priscillian (4th century) was converted to the
teachings of a Gnostic-Manichaean sect first introduced into Spain by
Marcus, an Egyptian from Memphis. Severus tells us that Priscillian was
a man of noble birth, of great riches, bold, restless, eloquent,
learned through much reading, very ready at debate and discussion - in
fact, altogether a happy man, if he had not ruined an excellent
intellect by wicked studies. Undoubtedly, there were to be seen in him
many admirable qualities both of mind and body. He was able to spend
much time in watchfulness, and to endure both hunger and thirst; he had
little desire for amassing wealth, he was most economical in the use of
it.
This man was the author of Priscillianism, a heresy which
shook Spain and parts of Gaul till the middle of the fifth century. He
was able at the start to convert two bishops in Southern Spain to his
cause, Instantius and Salvianus. The movement then spread rapidly and
attracted many of the clergy and laity - men and women, both wealthy
and influential. Hyginus, the bishop of Cordova, was the first to
oppose the rising sect. He reported the matter to Ydacius, bishop of
Emerita, and took counsel with him. Their conference led to an
organized movement against the new errors. Ydacius seems to have been a
rough and violent man. By intolerant severity he promoted rather than
prevented the spread of the sect. Hyginus became dissatisfied and
alarmed by Ydacius' measures, and from an accuser became a protector of
the Priscillianists. At length a synod was held at Saragossa
(Caesar-Augusta) which excommunicated the four leaders of the sect,
Instantius and Salvianus the bishops with Helpidius and Priscillian the
laymen. Hyginus, bishop of Cordova, also incurred the wrath and
reproach of the synod as protector of the excommunicated, although he
had been the first to accuse them. All who shared or connived at the
new errors of faith and practice were anathematized. The task of
promulgating the decrees and executing the ecclesiastical sanctions was
given to Ithacius, bishop of Sossuba, a lamentable fact, for he too was
a man harsh and given over to violence.
The reaction of the opposition was to ordain Priscillian
bishop of Arles (Avila). Persecutions began, accusations and counter
accusations were hurled. At this point both parties appealed to the
secular authorities and by means of influential people and bribes, used
them against each other. In the beginning the opponents of Priscillian
won over the emperor Gratianus (Gratian) and an edict was given
excluding all heretics from the use of the churches and ordering them
to be driven into exile. In time the Priscillianists won over
Macedonius, the master of the offices (magister officiorus). As one
historian puts it, The wealth of Priscillian and his followers was
liberally employed. The 'silver spears' were now in the hands of the
partisans on both sides. Through the powerful influence of Macedonius
the Priscillianists were restored to their churches and sees. Ydacius
and Ithacius were charged with causing divisions and disturbing the
peace of the Church. Ithacius was even compelled to flee. The
Priscillianists now had the upper hand and with friends at court
powerful enough to ward off any moves of the opposition, all things
seemed turned to their favor.
But an unlooked-for political upheaval changed everything. In
Paris the unpopular Gratian was overthrown and assassinated and Clemens
Maximus usurped the purple. His soldiers proclaimed him emperor in
Britain and marched triumphantly into Gaul. This destroyed all the
bright hopes of the Priscillianists. The fortunes of their adversaries
revived. On the arrival of Maximus at Treves in 384, Ithacius brought a
formal accusation with heavy charges against Priscillian and his
followers. Maximus, a Spaniard by birth, reversed the vacillating
policy of Gratian. Both parties were summoned to a synod at Bordeaux in
385 which had no results. In due course both parties appeared before
Maximus at Treves. At Treves there was one in the midst of all this
confusion whose prophetic insight saw the real significance of the
issue at stake. This was Saint Martin of Tours, whose influence was
then at its height.
This is how Sulpitius Severus records the event: Thus, then,
all whom the process embraced were brought before the king. The bishops
Ydacius and. Ithacius followed as accusers; and I would by no means
blame their zeal in overthrowing heretics, if they had not contended
for victory with greater keenness than was fitting. And my feeling
indeed is that the accusers were as distasteful to me as the accused. I
certainly hold that Ithacius had no worth or holiness about him. For he
was a bold, loquacious, impudent, and extravagant man; excessively
devoted to the pleasures of sensuality. He proceeded even to such a
pitch of folly as to charge all those men, however holy, who either
took delight in reading, or made it their object to vie with each other
in the practice of fasting, with being friends or disciples of
Priscillian. The miserable wretch even ventured publicly to bring
forward a disgraceful charge of heresy against Martin, who was at that
time a bishop, and a man clearly worthy of being compared to the
Apostles. For Martin, being then settled at Treves, did not cease to
importune Ithacius, that he should give up his accusations, or to
implore Maximus that he should not shed the blood of the unhappy
persons in question. He maintained that it was quite sufficient
punishment that, having been declared heretics by a sentence of the
bishops, they should have been expelled from the churches; and that it
was, besides, a foul and unheard-of indignity, that a secular ruler
should be judge in an ecclesiastical cause. (Sacred History 2.50)
And indeed, as long as Saint Martin was present, the trial of
Priscillian was delayed; Maximus even consented to promise the holy one
that no life should be sacrificed. But as soon as Saint Martin was
obliged by the call of pressing matters to withdraw from Treves (the
whole matter was being drawn out), the emperor was surrounded by the
unyielding Ydacius and Ithacius, ably supported by two bishops of a
like mind and character, Magnus and Rufus, who were powerful at court.
All these unremittingly urged Maximus to take severe measures.
The verdict was not long in coming. Priscillian and his chief
followers were condemned to death by the imperial consistory at Treves.
Some, after confiscation of their goods, were banished to the Scilly
Isles, others into Gaul. Priscillian is recorded as the first of those
who suffered death (gladio perempti). With him died two presbyters,
lately become disciples, Felicissimus and Armenius, and Latronianus a
poet, and Euchrocia the rich and noble matron of Bordeaux. Instantius,
deposed from his bishopric by the synod of Bordeaux, and Tiberianus,
were banished to the desolate Scilly Isles. Asarinus and Aurelius, two
deacons, were executed. Tertullus, Potamius, and Johannes, as meaner
followers who turned king's evidence, were temporarily banished within
Gaul. This was the first instance of capital punishment for heresy in
the history of the Church. It should not pass unnoticed that it was at
the instigation of Spanish bishops. Centuries later it would be
repeated on a grand scale during the Inquisition.
The immediate consequences of the sentence were not reassuring
to the persecuting party. At Treves a violent strife arose between the
bishops present concerning Priscillian's execution. Theognitus, a
bishop of independent mind, boldly led the non-contents, refusing
church communion to Ithacius and the others guilty of the judicial
bloodshed. In Spain the Priscillianist enthusiasm was for a while
intensified. The number of followers grew. The bodies of those who had
suffered at Treves were brought to Spain and honored as relics of
martyrs. The opposition became terrified. Additional severities were
proposed. Maximus resolved to send military tribunes to Spain with
unlimited powers. They were to investigate charges of heresy, examine
heretics, take life and property from the guilty. They were men little
likely to temper justice with mercy.
But let us hear Sulpitius Severus in his own words describe what
followed. I will now come to an event which he always concealed, owing
to the character of the times, but which he could not conceal from us.
In the matter referred to, there is this of a miraculous nature that an
angel conversed, face to face, with him. The Emperor Maximus, while in
other respects doubtless a good man, was led astray by the advices of
some priests after Priscillian had been put to death. He, therefore,
protected by his royal power Ithacius the bishop, who had been the
accuser of Priscillian, and others of his confederates, whom it is not
necessary to name. The emperor thus prevented every one from bringing
it as a charge against Ithacius that, by his instrumentality, a man of
any sort had been condemned to death. Now Martin, constrained to go to
the court by many serious causes of people involved in suffering,
incurred the whole force of the storm which was there raging. The
bishops who had assembled at Treves were retained in that city, and
daily communicating with Ithacius, they had made common cause with him.
When it was announced to them expecting no such information, that
Martin was coming, completely losing courage, they began to mutter and
tremble among themselves. And it so happened that already, under their
influence, the emperor had determined to send some tribunes armed with
absolute power into the two Spains, to search out heretics, and, when
found, to deprive them of their life or goods. Now there was no doubt
that that tempest would also make havoc of multitudes of the real
saints, little distinction being made between the various classes of
individuals. For in such circumstances a judgment was formed simply by
appearances, so that one was deemed a heretic rather on his turning
pale from fear, or wearing a particular garment, than by the faith
which he professed. And the bishops were well aware that such
proceedings would by no means please Martin; but, conscious of evil as
they were, this was a subject of deep anxiety to them, lest when he
came, he should keep from communion with them; knowing well as they
did, that others would not be wanting who, with his example to guide
them, would follow the bold course adopted by so great a man. They
therefore form a plan with the emperor, to this effect, that, officials
of the court being sent on to meet him, Martin should be forbidden to
come any nearer to that city, unless he should declare that he would
maintain peace with the bishops who were living there. But he
skillfully frustrated their object, by declaring that he would come
among them with the peace of Christ. And at last, having entered during
the night, he went to the church, simply for the purpose of prayer. On
the following day he betakes himself to the palace. Besides many other
petitions which he had to present, and which it would be tedious to
describe, the following were the principal: entreaties in behalf of the
courtier Narses, and the president Leucadius, both of whom had belonged
to the party of Gratian, and that, with more than ordinary zeal, upon
which this is not the time to dilate, and who had thus incurred the
anger of the conqueror; but his chief request was, that tribunes,
with the power of life and death, should not be sent into the Spains.
For Martin felt a pious solicitude not only to save from danger the
true Christians in these regions, who were to be persecuted in
connection with that expedition, but to protect even heretics
themselves. But on the first and second day the wily emperor kept the
holy man in suspense, whether that he might impress on him the
importance of the affair, or because, being obnoxious to the bishops,
he could not be reconciled to them, or because, as most people thought
at the time the emperor opposed his wishes from avarice, having cast a
longing eye on the property of the persons in question. For we are told
that he was really a man distinguished by many excellent actions, but
that he was not successful in contending against avarice. This may,
however, have been due to the necessities of the empire at the time,
for the treasury of the state had been exhausted by former rulers; and,
he, being almost constantly in the expectation of civil wars, or in a
state of preparation for them, may easily be excused for having, by all
sorts of expedients, sought resources for the defense of the empire. In
the meantime, those bishops with whom Martin would not hold communion
went in terror to the king, complaining that they had been condemned
beforehand; that it was all over with them as respected the status of
every one of them if the authority of Martin was now to uphold the
pertinacity of Theognitus, who alone had as yet condemned them by a
sentence publicly pronounced; that the man ought not to have been
received within the walls; that he was now not merely the defender of
heretics, but their vindicator; and that nothing had really been
accomplished by the death of Priscillian, if Martin were to act the
part of his avenger. Finally, prostrating themselves with weeping and
lamentation, they implored the emperor to put forth his power against
this one man. And the emperor was not far from being compelled to
assign to Martin, too, the doom of heretics. But after all, although he
was disposed to look upon the bishops with too great favor, he was not
ignorant that Martin excelled all other mortals in faith, sanctity, and
excellence; he therefore tries another way of getting the better of the
holy man. And first he sends for him privately, and addresses him in
the kindest fashion, assuring him that the heretics were condemned in
the regular course of public trials, rather than by the persecutions of
the priests; and that there was no reason why he should think that
communion with Ithacius and the rest of that party was a thing to be
condemned. He added that Theognitus had created disunion, rather by
personal hatred, than by the cause he supported; and that, in fact, he
was the only person who, in the meantime, had separated himself from
communion; while no innovation had been made by the rest. He remarked
further that a synod, held a few days previously, had decreed that
Ithacius was not chargeable with any fault. When Martin was but little
impressed by these statements, the king then became inflamed with
anger, and hurled him out of his presence; while, without delay,
executioners are appointed for those in whose behalf Martin had made
supplication. When this became known to Martin, he rushed to the
palace, though it was not night. He pledges himself that, if these
people were spared, he would communicate; only let the tribunes, who
had already been sent to the Spains for the destruction of the
churches, be recalled. There is no delay: Maximus grants all his
requests. On the following day, the ordination of Felix as bishop was
being arranged, a man undoubtedly of great sanctity, and truly worthy
of being made a priest in happier times. Martin took part in the
communion of that day, judging it better to yield for the moment, than
to disregard the safety of those over whose heads a sword was hanging.
Nevertheless, although the bishops strove to the uttermost to get him
to confirm the fact of his communicating by signing his name, he could
not be induced to do so. On the following day, hurrying away from that
place, as he was on the way returning, he was filled with mourning and
lamentation that he had even for an hour been mixed up with the evil
communion, and, not far from a village named Andethanna, where remote
woods stretch far and wide with profound solitude, he sat down while
his companions went on a little before him. There he became involved in
deep thought, alternately accusing and defending the cause of his grief
and conduct. Suddenly, an angel stood by him and said, 'Justly, O
Martin, do you feel compunction, but you could not otherwise get out of
your difficulty. Renew your virtue, resume your courage, lest you not
only now expose your fame, but your very salvation, to danger.'
Therefore, from that time forward, he carefully guarded against being
mixed up in communion with the party of Ithacius. But when it happened
that he cured some of the possessed more slowly and with less grace
than usual, he at once confessed to us with tears that he felt a
diminution of his power on account of the evil of that communion in
which he had taken part for a moment, through necessity and not with a
cordial spirit. He lived sixteen years after this, but never again did
he attend a synod, and kept carefully aloof from all assemblies of
bishop (Dialogues 3.11-12).
From this incident we see how the God-bearing Martin of Tours refused
to have communion with Ithacius and those with him for the sole reason
that they had instigated bloodshed, even though the condemned were
heretics. Rightly did he maintain that it was quite sufficient
punishment that, having been declared heretics by a sentence of`
bishops, they should have been expelled from the churches, and that it
was, besides, a foul and unheard-of indignity, that a secular ruler
should be judge in an ecclesiastical cause. Although bloodshed is a
great crime, yet Ithacius and the bishops with him were not heretics,
that Saint Martin should refuse to have communion with them as Maximus
the emperor had argued, no innovation had been made by them. True, one
could argue that manslaughter or even killing as a soldier in war is an
impediment to ordination, according to the canons; therefore if a
clergyman after ordination should be guilty of the shedding of blood
either by his own hand or by having instigated it, he should be
deposed. Yet in this instance a synod held a few days previously had
decreed that Ithacius was not chargeable with any fault. But Saint
Martin was little impressed, as it is recorded, by any and every
argument brought in defense of Ithacius and those with him guilty of
bloodshed. If he finally relented and agreed to concelebrate with them,
it was solely to prevent the further bloodshed of hundreds if not
thousands of others similarly accused.
Yet the angel informed him in a revelation that justly did he feel
remorse for having concelebrated, even though otherwise he could not
have gotten out of his difficulty, and rebuked him lest you not only
now expose your fame, but your very salvation, to danger. In
verification of this warning it happened that he cured some of the
possessed more slowly and with less grace than usual and felt a
diminution of his power on account of the evil of that communion in
which he had taken part for a moment, through necessity, and not with a
cordial spirit, How awesome indeed are the things one encounters in the
Scripture and in the lives of the saints concerning the judgments of
God. Yet who heeds!
The other day, leafing through an issue of the Journal of the
Moscow Patriarchate, we saw a panoramic color photograph of world
Orthodoxy gathered together on the occasion of the 60th Anniversary of
the Restoration of the Moscow Patriarchate, which took place in May of
1978, in Moscow, and the above incident of the Priscillians in the
fourth century came to mind. Here were the representatives of virtually
all the official Orthodox churches with the Soviet patriarch and his
bishops (there were a few Armenians, Copts, Ethiopians, Roman
Catholics, Episcopalians, Lutherans, Evangelicals, etc., just to make
sure that all the branches of the church were represented), and in the
midst of all these venerable hierarchs, pastors, and ministers, a
non-clergyman (we would not call him a layman for that would presuppose
that he was a member of the Church). Who might this esteemed gentleman
be, so honored to be photographed with all these hierarchs? None other
than the Chairman of the Council for Religious Affairs of the USSR
Council of Ministers, Vladimir A. Kuroedov, the real head of the Soviet
Church, an avowed atheist and enemy of the Church. And there was not
found one hierarch of any rank and origin to step out of the group and
refuse to be photographed with this sinister enemy of our Faith. The
same thing was repeated at the official banquet and other gatherings.
Mr. Kuroedov was always seated at the head table in a central place of
honor. He even gave an address (which is beyond description) to the
whole assembly. One should read the full text in the Journal of the
Moscow Patriarchate, no. 8 (1978), page 32, to appreciate his
erudition. The man should have been a comedian on television. And there
was not found one person in that whole pious assembly to get up and
leave.
Mayhaps today it would be too much to expect to find a God-bearer in
the strength of Saint Martin of Tours among the bishops of world
Orthodoxy, yet not even a Theognitus was found to refuse to sit in the
seat of the pestilent or to be found in the "counsel of the ungodly."
But why speak of the atheist Kuroedov and not speak of the Soviet
Patriarch Pimen and those with him. Since the days of the lamentable
Metropolitan Sergei, (the later Soviet Patriarch Sergei), who in 1927
betrayed the Church and his fellow bishops and signed over the Church
in Russia to the God-haters, have not the Soviet patriarchs and bishops
of the Soviet Church the blood of the confessing bishops and new
martyrs on their hands? Have not all these confessors and new martyrs
been charged with disobedience and insubordination to their "canonical
head," the Soviet patriarch and his holy synod? Have they not been
persecuted, arrested, imprisoned, tortured, exiled, and murdered
because they refused to follow the example of the-Soviet churchmen,
remaining faithful rather to the confession of Patriarch Tikhon and the
martyred bishops with him? Is not the recognition of and cooperation
with the Soviet authority of Sergei and those of like mind with him the
legal basis by which all who disagree are arrested and liquidated by
one means or another?
Ithacius the bishop in Spain of the fourth century and those
with him had the blood of the sectarian bishop Priscillian and a half
dozen of his followers on their hands. How much more so have the Soviet
Patriarchs Sergei, Alexei, and Pimen, and those with them, the blood of
tens of thousands of Orthodox believers, hierarchs, priests, deacons,
monastics, laity - who were specifically tortured and put to death
because they censured and uncovered their betrayal of the Church? (The
victims of the Soviet terror run into the millions as do the number of
new martyrs also. Here we are speaking specifically of those clergy and
laity who were arrested and liquidated precisely because they refused
to accept the betrayal of Sergei; we are speaking of the bishops in his
day: Peter, Cyril, Agathangelos, Joseph, etc., and those who later
uncovered and protested against this betrayal, such as Boris Talantov,
who exposed the lamentable Archbishop Nikodim of Leningrad of sorry
memory, and the Soviet patriarchate, and who was for this reason
arrested and liquidated while in prison.)
The blood of these countless innocents and confessors cries
out of the ground unto the living God, and yet there is not found one
bishop of world Orthodoxy to refuse communion with the Soviet bishops
on this account. Not one imitator of Saint Martin of Tours, yet many of
Judas. No one feels remorse. No one fears lest he expose his very
salvation to danger, to use the words of the angel to Saint Martin. No
one fears a diminution of grace on account of the evil of that
communion, to use again a phrase from that account. Even if the Soviet
Church had not espoused the heresy of Ecumenism, no conscientious
Orthodox Christian should have communion with it precisely because of
the blood of the righteous which it has denounced and betrayed. Until
such a day as the Soviet Church ceases being a Soviet Church and
becomes again the Church of Christ by denouncing its allegiance to the
Soviet state, protesting the persecution of religion in the Soviet
state and asking forgiveness for its two-fold sin, of betrayal of that
which is God's to Caesar for the last fifty years, and of the heresy of
Ecumenism - which is a sin against the unity and uniqueness of the
Church - for the last twenty years, no Orthodox can recognize it as a
canonical Orthodox Church. As for all those who have communion with it,
they only partake in the blood of all the righteous shed upon the
earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of all them that
are slain even unto this very day for righteousness' sake.
They tell us that we are out of the mainstream of world
Orthodoxy. We thank God for this, for we would never wish to be found
in the photograph of world Orthodoxy of the Journal of the Moscow
Patriarchate, with the enemies of our Saviour, partaking of that evil
communion.
HOLY TRANSFIGURATION MONASTERY
Editors' Note: Unfortunately, the bishops of the Moscow
Patriarchate have not learned their lesson. They have not yet forgotten
their KGB tactics of the past. The persecution of the traditional
Orthodox Christians in Russia continues unabated, as it does in the
lands of Byelorussia and Georgia, thanks to the activities of the
Orthodox bishops and clergy there. The same is occurring on the Holy
Mountain, Athos, against the Monastery of Esphigmenou (the Ecumenical
Patriarchate, the Ierá Epistasía, and the Greek police
work hand in
hand there). We thank God for this persecution - because it exposes the
true nature of Ecumenism's tolerance and love."
Also, we note here that we emphatically condemn in the
strongest terms the activities of one old calendar priest in the
Republic of Georgia (under the jurisdiction of Metropolitan Cyrian of
Fili), who has been accused repeatedly of countless acts of brutal
violence against various sectarian groups in that country.
Acts of violence against others for their religious convictions are
unacceptable, no matter who commits them.
St. Martin, pray to God that He may convert the hearts of the
hierarchs who partake of the evil communion of apostasy and Ecumenism,
and bring them back to the Faith of the Saints. Amen
3. RUSSIAN ORTHODOX "FREEZING" RELATIONSHIP WITH ECUSA
(The Wanderer, December 4, 2003)
The Russian Orthodox Church on November 17 announced it was
"freezing" its relationship with the Episcopal Church in the United
States, following the latter's decision to move forward with the
consecration of an openly homosexual bishop, Gene Robinson, reported
Bill Bowder for the U.K. Anglican Church's Church Times November 21.
In a statement published on the Russian Orthodox Church's web
site, the Moscow patriarchate affirmed: "Homosexual sexual contact has
always been considered a grave sin by the Christian Church." The
propaganda campaign to legitimize homosexuality, the statement
continued, "leads to a terrible consequence: People with normal sexual
orientation are introduced to homosexuality.
"We have no right to allow even a shadow of agreement with
their position, which we consider deeply anti-Christian and
blasphemous."
Bowder reported that "the five-day meeting of the year-old
Anglican Oriental Orthodox International Commission, which was
scheduled for the end of [October] at Walsingham, would have seen six
Anglican bishops and five clergy from across the world meet their
Orthodox counterparts.
"But the three Orthodox [sic] leaders of the commission
postponed the meeting in mid-October, when they met in Antelias,
Lebanon. They are the head of the Coptic Orthodox Church, Pope Shenouda
III; the head of the Syrian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Zakka I; and the
head of the Armenian Orthodox Church's Catholicosate of Cilicia,
Catholicos Aram I. Anglicans, they decided, needed time to take proper
account of, and reflect on, Bishop Robinson's consecration....
"In Uganda . . . the outgoing archbishop, the Most Rev.
Livingstone Mpalanyi-Nkoyoyo, warned parents that foreign scholarships
were being used to lure young people into homosexuality. Ugandans who
got fully sponsored courses should not fall prey to gay institutions'."
4. Hellenism and Orthodoxy Are Separate
By Dean Calvert
[National Herald, March 27, 2004]
About the only thing I agree with in Mr. Coritsidis' recent
editorial, "The Hellenic Code," (The National Herald March 14, 2004) is
that a debate is necessary. Frankly, I view his analysis about the
importance of Hellenism as a product of a racist interpretation of
Hellenism and a distorted perspective of Orthodoxy.
Your own synod (Constantinople, 1872) issued the following with regard
to phyletism in the late 19th century:
"We have concluded that when the principle of racial division
is juxtaposed with the teaching of the Gospel and the constant practice
of the Church, it is not only foreign to it, but also completely
opposed, to it. We decree the following in the Holy Spirit: 1. We
reject and condemn racial division, that is, racial differences,
national quarrels and disagreements in the Church of Christ, as being
contrary to the teaching of the Gospel and the holy canons of our
blessed fathers, on which the holy Church is established and which
adorn human society and lead it to Divine piety. 2. In accordance with
the holy canons, we proclaim that those who accept such division
according to races and who dare to base it on it hitherto unheard-of
racial assemblies are foreign to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic
Church and are real schismatics."
It also said, "Orthodoxy confesses that each person,
independent of color, religion, race, ethnicity, or language, is a
bearer of the icon of God, our brother or our sister, equal members of
the human society."
Moreover, the great saints of the church, St. John
Chrysostom, St. Basil the Great, St. Gregory, St. Photios, St.
Constantine that any of the saints of the entire Byzantine period would
not have known what a "Greek" Orthodox was. In fact, they would have
been positively insulted to be called a "Hellene." Go back to the
Runciman histories and you will discover that the Byzantines called
themselves "Romai," i.e. Romans, from the day the City was founded by
Constantine, until the last day of the empire in 1453 and they were
proud of it. Romans - not Greeks, Hellenes, or otherwise.
To make matters worse, the term "Hellene," during the entire
1,100 year Byzantine period, was used to mean one of two things: either
1.) pagan, or of the time of the ancient Periclean Greeks, or 2.) a
derogatory term referring to the semi-barbaric and far-off and
backwater province of Hellas. The term was clearly one of
disparagement, and could be likened to the way New Yorkers might refer
to backwoods inhabitants of Arkansas or West Virginia. Certainly not a
compliment in any case.
In short, despite the importance Mr. Coritsidis attaches to
the term, St. Nicholas, St. Basil and certainly St John Chrysostom
would not have appreciated being called a "Hellene." In fact, they
would have been insulted.
If Hellenism is such an important mission of the Church, then
where are the sermons, treatises, and publications on the topic
authored by the Church Fathers? Surely St. John Chrysostom, St. Basil,
and St. Photios could not possibly have left such an important topic
unaddressed? Can anyone point to even one sermon on the topic by any of
them? Did they ever even mention the word "Hellene" or "Hellenism" in
the sense that Mr. Coritsidis uses it? If so, where?
Mr. Coritsidis' interpretation of Hellenism is about as
skewed as George Wallace's interpretation of Civil Rights. This is not
the view of the Church as promulgated by Christ, or of the Church
fathers. As a matter of fact, the argument about the special place of
ANY language (Greek included) was debated and settled over 1,000 years
ago in Constantinople, when St. Photios sent Sts. Cyril and Methodios
to preach to the Slavs in their own language. The decision of the
Church was clear: NO language has a special place in the sight of
God-isn't that what Pentecost was all about?
And how successful would the missions to the Bulgarians,
Russians, Romanians, and Aleutians have been had they utilized your
preferred formula (i.e. one of promoting Hellenism as well as preaching
Orthodox Christianity)? Would a Russian Orthodox Church even exist
today? Or would the Church today be limited to those 2,000 poor souls
left in Istanbul?
Mr. Coritsidis' vision of preserving Hellenism has no place
in the Church. If the AHEPA and other ethnic organizations wish to
preserve our ethnic roots, more power to them. I would support them
wholeheartedly. But when ethnic preservation is done at the expense of
newly evangelized American souls, and causes a more rapid
disintegration of our Church (by wasting precious resources on Quixotic
pursuits), then you have removed Christ as the head of the Church, and
replaced him with a heresy.
Mr. Calvert is a member of the St. Andrew House - Center for Orthodox
Christian Studies board of directors (www.orthodoxdetroit.com), as well
as a member of the advisory board of the OCL. He also served as a past
treasurer of the Modern Greek Cultural Association of metropolitan
Detroit
5. From FIRST THINGS, June-July,2004
The demographics of the abortion controversy are often
overlooked. Recent months have seen a number of reports indicating that
opposition to abortion is growing dramatically among young people. In a
Gallup survey of youth aged thirteen to seventeen, only 19 percent say
that abortion should be legal in all circumstances (the current regime
of Roe v. Wade) while 72 percent say that abortion is morally wrong and
should be entirely prohibited (32 percent) or permitted only in rare
instances (40 percent). Undoubtedly related to these changes is the
fact that pro-life couples have an average of three children while
pro-choicers average only one child. Of course children do not always,
to put it gently, agree with their parents on abortion or anything
else, but one cannot discount parental influence. Moreover, there is
the deeply poignant but seldom mentioned factor that millions of people
born in the last thirty years know that they have a brother or sister,
or even brothers and sisters, who were aborted. I have often tried to
imagine what I would think were I one of those children missing a
sibling. "Honey," Mom explains, "we just weren't ready for another
baby." I know the pro-abortion people say that a child told this is
filled with warm feelings that he or she was really wanted. Maybe so,
but I expect there are many more who cannot erase from their minds that
Mom had their brother or sister killed. Not to mention the moral and
spiritual ramifications of knowing that their existence was contingent
not upon an act of nature or gift of God but solely upon their parents'
decision. "Thanks for not having me killed, Mom." That touches upon the
spiritually weird and murky, but I expect it has a great deal to do
with the growing number of young people who view abortion with horror.
6. HOLY LAND PILGRIMAGE 2004:
Extracts from a bief note of Fr. Neketas to a friend.
Well we left Seattle on October 4. Stayed in Boston for the
Clergy Synaxis. Another week was spent in Boston visiting Presbytera's
relatives. On Sunday, October 17 we left Boston for Zurich and then on
to Tel Aviv. All together we were 54 pilgrims, including Fr.
Panteleimon and Fr. Nicholas (Rodion). As it turned out this was the
first pilgrimage in which English was the only language used. We had 15
people from St. Nectarios Cathedral, Seattle; 17 from St. Nektarios
Cathedral, Toronto, and the balance of pilgrims were from New England,
Australia, Minneapolis, New York and a few other places I don't recall.
Oh yes, we had an 83 year lady from Philadelphia who had more energy
than I did.
We stayed at the old tried and true Metropole hotel near the Old Walls
of the City, about two blocks from Damascus Gate. The hotel was an old
one, but we did have hot water, electricity and meals in the basement
dinning room. We were the only guests. The hotel literally remains open
for the pilgrims.The personnel were very helpful and kind. We generally
ate breakfast & supper there. Breakfast was olives, bread, some
semi-sweet middle-eastern treat whose Greek or English name I can't
recall and tea or coffee. Also on non fast days we had scrambled eggs.
Supper was some sort of soup, vegetables and a salad.
The younger people made daily pilgrimages to the Church of the
Resurrection prior to our departures. We had a great bus driver who
knew how to get to everywhere, including getting us to Bethlehem
through a third way even though we had been blocked by soldiers at two
prior entrys.
Each day on the bus Fr. Panteleimon lead us in prayer in Greek while
the nuns repeated all the chants in English. We had four nuns with us.
Fr. Panteleimon is probably the best pilgrim guide we could have asked
for. The clergy welcomed him every where with open arms of joy and
love.
Jacob's well's church shell is completed (it cost $2,500,000. ) We were
first group to visit church in five years. Day after our visit it was
blocked off again by Israeli soldiers. It was at this church that Fr.
Philoumenos, the guardian of the Shrine, was slaughtered (he was
slashed to death by a Jewish extremist around 1980. Later the same man
threw a bomb at one of the nuns who had been helping at the site. As a
result the priest (Fr. Justin) now carries a gun to protect himself
from extremists. . Here at Jacob's well, Fr. Justin welcomed Fr.
Panteleimon with rose petals as we entered the Monastery. The priest
has managed to complete the shell of the church whose construction had
begun before the Russian revolution. The Church is now walled in and it
is a bit safer for him and the two young men who live there to protect
him The priest at the site of our Lord's Ascension suffered similar
attacks from Jewish extremists. His newly erected church was bulldozed
by the Israeli army soldiers because it was built without a permit,
(The priest had waited 12 years for a permit.) His mother was killed by
Jewish extremists who did not want a Church built on the hillside
several blocks away from their cemetery. They felt it was a sacrilege
to be near their cemetery. The Holy Sepulcher, the Church of the
Resurrection and the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem were constant
sources of spiritual refreshment.
7. PHOTOGRAPS OF CONSECRATION OF BISHOP SERGIOS
Photographs from the Consecration are now available: The portrait of
Bishop Sergios and the picture of the three hierarchs which appeared in
the September OCW may be had in 8x10 or 5x7. A packet of 20 4x6
snapshots (including portrait and hierarchs), as well as a CD for Quick
Time may be had. Please mail orders to St. Nectarios Benevolent Fund.
8x10 photo: $7.50 ea.
Snapshot set: $6.00 ea.
5 x 7 photo $5.00 ea.
Quick Time CD: $5.00 ea.
Please add $2.50 for shipping and handling in US and $3.00 outside of
the US..
8. NEW ITEMS FROM THE BOOK CENTER
Click here to
order the titles below
(BOY) THE BOY, A
KITCHEN AND HIS CAVE: The Tale of Saint Euphrosynos the Cook by
Catherine K. Contopoulos. An embellishment on the few details known
about St. Euphrosynos to acquaint young readers with the "patron saint
of cooks" and monastic life Large format, age 4 up. 32pp. Hard cover
d$17.00
(HOB1) THE HOLY
ORTHODOX BIBLE, V. 1, The Pentatuch. Translated from the Septuagint by
Peter Papoutsis into a slightly modernized form of traditional English.
This is a very readable and accurate translation, the first of a series
of volumes making up the entire Old Testament. Cloth 279pp. d$52.00
(AGA) AKATHIST TO THE
GUARDIAN ANGEL, Who keepeth unceasing watch over one's life. Translated
from the Russian. 40pp. Paper e$4.00
(TM47) MAKE READY O BETHLEHEM. A new CD of music from the
Nativity season in Byzantine chant in English from the group
"Anaphora." Very well chanted with ison, and an excellent "learning"
tool. e$16.00