News archives: 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019
Photograph of Professor David Satter’s lecture on November 20, 2016, in the auditorium of the St. Photios Orthodox Theological Seminary, which seats fifty and which was filled to capacity. (See story below this entry.)
David Satter, former Moscow correspondent for the “Financial Times of London” and former special correspondent on Soviet affairs for “The Wall Street Journal” will deliver a lecture on contemporary (post-Soviet) Russia in the auditorium at the St. Photios Orthodox Theological Seminary, in Etna, on Sunday evening, November 20, at 6:30 p.m. Space may be limited, so we ask that those interested in attending contact the seminary at (530) 467-3544 (between 12 noon and 1 p.m. or between 6 and 8 p.m.) and leave a name and the number of attendees in their party. There is no charge for the lecture.
Professor Satter, a graduate of the University of Chicago and Oxford University, where he was a Rhodes Scholar, is currently a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute in Washington, DC, and a fellow of the School of Advanced International Studies at the Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland. He has also been a Guggenheim Fellow, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, and a visiting professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Satter is the author of a plethora of articles in the popular press about Russia and—of special interest to the St. Photios Seminary students and faculty—the persecution and collaboration of the Orthodox Church in the Soviet Union and under Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin. He has authored four major books on Russia, all published by Yale University Press, the latest entitled The Less You Know, The Better You Sleep: Russia's Road to Terror and Dictatorship under Yeltsin and Putin.
We received news this morning, September 1 (September 14, New Style), from the Convent of the Holy Angels in Aphidnai (Athens), Greece, of the repose of our Holy Synod's representative in Sardinia (Italy), His Eminence, the Most Reverend Michael, Bishop of Nora. He died yesterday, August 31, 2016 (Old Style), the Feast of the Deposition of the Precious Cincture of the Theotokos, to whom he was particularly devoted, at 83 years of age and after an extended illness. His body is being flown today to Greece, where he will be buried at the Holy Monastery of Sts. Cyprian and Justina, in Phyle.
Born Michele Piredda, His Eminence was born in 1933 in Cagliari, Sardinia, into a family of pious Roman Catholics. One of nine children, he became a Roman Catholic monk and, in the course of his studies, discovered Orthodoxy, which, as he once told His Eminence, Bishop Auxentios of Etna and Portland, he found to be the purest form of Christianity and the traditional religion of his ancestors on the island of Sardinia, prior to the Great Schism of the Orthodox East and the Roman Catholic West in the mid-eleventh century. He converted to Orthodoxy in 1966. He was eventually ordained a Deacon (1983), Priest (1984), and, as an auxiliary to Metropolitan Cyprian of Oropos and Phyle (1995), a Bishop at the monastery in Phyle.
Bishop Michael established a small but vibrant diocese in Cagliari. He several times visited our monastery in Etna, including a visit that coincided with the Glorification of St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco, for whom he had a profound veneration. His Eminence had close ties to our monastery. Since he spoke, like many older Sardinians, some Catalan, Metropolitan Chrysostomos, who has both Greek and Catalan roots, was able to communicate with and translate for him during his visits. Our communities here in Etna, therefore, feel especially deeply the loss of this humble and remarkably dedicated servant of the Church.
We would be remiss not to mention Bishop Michael's abiding, unswerving, loving, and inspiring devotion to his spiritual Father, Metropolitan Cyprian of Oropos and Phyle, whom he considered a truly genuinely holy man. It is partly because of his devotion to Metropolitan Cyprian and the monastery of his repentance in Phyle that his wish was to be buried in Greece, so as to be near his Abba and spiritual guide, a wish that will now be realized.
We extend condolences to His Eminence's spiritual children in Sardinia.
Αἰωνία ἡ μνήμη! Memoria Eterna! May his memory be eternal!
The Fathers,
St. Gregory Palamas Monastery
Two of the four Orthodox foundations in the small village of Etna, CA, which in total comprise a monastery, convent, seminary, and small parish Church, have established a working relationship, with the approval of their respective Board of Advisors and Directors. The Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies (C.T.O.S.), established in 1981, will offer its services to the newly established St. Photios Orthodox Theological Seminary (S.P.O.T.S.), which received its first six students in September of 2016.
Together with the Metropolitan Cyprian Theological Library, with 9,500 volumes and 4,000 periodical holdings, the Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies occupies a two-story building on the grounds of the St. Gregory Palamas Monastery. The St. Photios Orthodox Theological Seminary is located in a former state governmental administrative facility and NGO training center about two miles from the monastery. Its more than 10,000 square feet of renovated space houses, in a large two-story facility, classrooms, offices, a library, an auditorium, a kitchen and cafeteria, student dormitory space, a student activities room, and a small apartment for the seminary housemaster.
With the exception of the Dr. and Mrs. Martin S. Jaffee Collection, the Dr. Nikolai E. Khokhlov Collection, and a number of Greek Patristic collections and rare books, the majority of the Metropolitan Cyprian Theological Library’s holdings, and all of its periodical collections, will be transferred to the new seminary library. This, together with its own acquisitions to date, will expand the seminary book holdings to about 15,000 volumes, with planned additions on a yearly basis.
The C.T.O.S. will maintain, along with the Jaffee and Khokhlov collections, a limited collection of books and will expand its private study and reading areas, primarily for the use of the Fathers, maintaining its upstairs lecture area for smaller and non-seminary-related lectures and presentations. The Metropolitan Cyprian Theological Library will be available, when needed, to students in the seminary’s Master’s program, which is slated to begin in the Fall of 2017.
The Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies will also serve as the seminary press, publishing, in addition to its own sponsored research, faculty lectures, articles, and books, as well as works that may in the future be submitted for consideration by the seminary. Nonetheless, the C.T.O.S. and the seminary will remain entirely independent in their corporate structure, administration, and finances. The seminary will also be subject to all of the regulations of the California State Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education and the requirements of the accrediting commission for religious higher education with which it now holds applicant status, the Association for Biblical Higher Education (A.B.H.E.), one of the four national faith-related accreditation associations recognized by the U.S. Department of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation.
The last correspondence degrees issued by the Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies, which will continue its educational credentialing programs for prospective Priests and Church teachers through the degree programs at the St. Photios Orthodox Theological Seminary in Etna, CA, were awarded in August of 2016 to the following candidates:
The Diploma in Orthodox Theological Studies was awarded to Subdeacon James Michael Kalbasky, who holds a B.S. degree in Law Enforcement Administration from Youngstown State University, in Youngstown, OH. The Licentiate in Orthodox Theological Studies was awarded to David Eugene Sanders, who holds an M.A. degree in Multicultural Education from the Jesuit Catholic University of San Francisco, in San Francisco, CA, and Andrei Raevsky, who earned his M.A. degree at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, in Washington, D.C., a division of the Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, MD.
The editors of Orthodox Tradition and the administration of the Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies congratulate these last graduates of the Center’s degree programs, who bring to an end almost three and a half decades of service to the Church in educating and forming clergy and lay teachers and theologians in the traditional teachings of Orthodoxy and the Church Fathers.
When, two years ago, the Holy Synod in Resistance and the Church of the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Greece united, the Synod in Resistance brought to the union, not only its three Sister Churches, the Old Calendar Orthodox Churches of Romania and Bulgaria and the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad under Metropolitan Agafangel, but a number of missions in Africa. These missions were for many years, with the blessing of the former President of the Synod in Resistance, Metropolitan Cyprian, under the guidance of His Grace, Bishop Ambrose of Methone, who worked indefatigably and, during times of political turmoil, at great personal risk to build not just many parishes, but several monastic communities. His work has continued with the support and enthusiasm of our united Synod, and tremendous progress, despite the crippling poverty that prevails on the continent of Africa, has been made; the missions are flourishing and the enthusiasm and piety of the faithful are extraordinary. We would like, here, to present a small photographic montage of several communities in the largest of the Synod’s African missions, those in the Democratic Republic of Congo, representative of established parishes and the many parishes under construction. Anyone wishing to support this work may contact Bishop Ambrose at: ambrosec@\hsir.Vorg.
His Beatitude, Archbishop Kallinikos of Athens and All Greece celebrated his Nameday on the Feast of the Holy Martyr Kallinikos, on July 29, 2016 (Old Style), with a Liturgy at the Katholikon (the main Church) of the monastery of his residence, the Monastery of the Holy Archangels (Ἁγίων Ταξιαρχῶν, hagiōn Taxiarchōn), in Athikia (Corinth), Greece. Concelebrating and honoring him on his Nameday were Metropolitans Chrysostomos of Attica, Gerontios of Piraeus, Gregorios of Τhessalonike, Photios of Demetrias, and Bishop Klemes of Gardikion, along with a large number of Presbyters and Deacons. An Agape Meal for the Clergy and lay people in attendance was served after the Divine Liturgy. (See below, at center, His Beatitude and the gathered Clergy.)
Between June 17 and 19, 2016 (Old Style), the American Eparchy of our Church marked two important events in the life of its Clergy and Faithful.
On Thursday, June 17, under the aegis of the President of the Eparchial Synod, His Eminence, Metropolitan Demetrios of America, a synaxis of the American Clergy of our Church was convened at the monastery and spiritual center of our Sister Church, the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, in Mountain View, New York, at the invitation of Archbishop Andronik of Syracuse, who administers the Mountain View monastic community and the attached cultural facilities and who offered the visitors fraternal hospitality. The tremendously successful gathering of Clergy featured a number of informative talks on pastoral issues and matters of Faith, offering an occasion for fellowship and interaction between the participants. (See, below, the Clergy, together with His Eminence, Archbishop Andronik.) In conjunction with the synaxis, a regular meeting of the Eparchial Synod was held, in which His Eminence, Bishop Auxentios participated through teleconferencing, since he was unable to attend the meeting or the associated festivities in person.
On Saturday, June 19, a second important event took place at the newly established Monastery of St. John of San Francisco, still under construction (see, below, the beautful τέμπλον, or Iconostasis, already adorning the monastery Church), in Cobleskill, NY. The historic significance of the event was underscored by the fact that, on this day, the great luminary’s Feast Day, the Church was celebrating the fiftieth anniversary of the repose of St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco. His Eminence, Metropolitan Demetrios performed the Service of Θυρανοίξια (thyranoixia or, literally in Greek, the service of “opening the doors” of a new Church), i.e., the Dedication or Inauguration of the new monastery, and presided at an Hierarchical Liturgy in the Saint’s honor with four other Bishops and some forty Presbyters, Hieromonks, Deacons, and Hierodeacons.
The festivities were followed by a traditional Agape meal for the Clergy and the large crowd of Faithful in attendance.
On Thursday, May 13, 2016 (Old Style), an Inter-Orthodox Consultation of the canonical Bishops and clergy of the anti-ecumenical Genuine (Old Calendar) Orthodox Churches, with Synods centered in Greece, Romania, Russia, Ukraine, and Bulgaria, and local Eparchies throughout the world, was held in Acharnai (Athens), Greece. The meeting was convened in the light of the so-called “Holy and Great Synod” of the Orthodox Church held in Crete in June, 2016, at which the historical local Orthodox Churches convened to discuss agenda ranging from a condemnation of Orthodox anti-ecumenists (“Orthodox fundamentalists,” in the language of the preparatory commissions for this gathering) to the “modernization” of the Church’s stands on various social issues (marriage, Orthodox relations with the heterodox, etc.).
Though the Orthodox summit in Crete was largely a failure, since the national Church of Russia and other autocephalous bodies did not attend, the consultation of the Genuine Orthodox Christians, meeting before the gathering in Crete, very effectively expressed the traditional “conscience” of the Orthodox Faith, providing a very striking contrast to the discussions, deliberations, and, to a very significant extent, the final documents and pronouncements issued by the Bishops at the failed synod in Crete. Not only did the latter’s exclusion of the Genuine Orthodox opponents of the religious syncretism and liberalism of ecumenism from its deliberations, but rather its attempts to condemn them at an official level, call into question its motives and Orthodox character, but its violation of the protocols and provisions that apply to the convocation of a valid synod or council provoked a strong reaction to its pretensions, even well after the fact of its obvious failure, to being such.
In his erudite and eloquent introduction to the Consultation, His Beatitude, Archbishop Kallinikos of Athens (see below) put forth a preassessment of the summit in Crete which carefully enumerated the objections of the Genuine Orthodox Christians to its very conception:
Whatever the decisions of the so-called Great Synod of the ecumenists, it should be understood solely from the fact that, firstly, no issue of heresy will be submitted for examination; secondly, the Bishops who will be participating in it are knowing and active ecumenists, that is, false teachers and false bishops; thirdly, issues for discussion have been set forth from the outset ‘in conformity with the demands of the contemporary era’; and finally, that it has a patently ecumenist orientation, based on the cacodox Encyclical of 1920 [from the Oecumenical Patriarchate]—solely from these given points, I reiterate, the Synod of the ecumenists will in any event be a pseudo-synod, not an Orthodox Synod, but a synod in favor of ecumenism and at odds with the Genuine Orthodox Church: a veritable anti-synod.
The authentic Patristic Tradition concerning Orthodox Synods, as expressed, for example, by St. Athanasios the Great of Alexandria, envisions the following pellucid criteria:
a. It is not possible for those who are impious with regard to the Faith to take part in an Orthodox Synod: ‘For it is not possible to count in a Synod those who are of impious belief.’
b. The examination of extraneous business must not be given precedence; salient issues of Faith are to be examined first, and then other issues: ‘nor is it proper that the scrutiny of any matter take precedence over the examination of matters of the Faith.’
c. Any contention regarding the Faith must be removed from consideration first, and then the remaining matters are to be investigated: ‘All disagreement concerning the Faith ought first to be removed from consideration, and only then may inquiry be made into other matters’ (Patrologia Græca, Vol. XXV, col. 736B).
The Consultation, at which His Eminence, Bishop Auxentios represented the Diocese of Etna and Portland, adopted, after its final deliberations, two very significant documents: 1) “The Confession of Faith of the Genuine Orthodox Christian”; and 2) “A Message of Vigilance and of Allegiance to the ‘Right Confession of Faith’ of the Genuine Orthodox Christians.” These documents can be found in English and other languages on the Internet at http://www.hsir.org/index-en.html.
On June 13, 2016 (Old Style), the Feast of the Holy Martyr Aquilina, the small parish of the Holy Nativity of the Theotokos, in Portland, OR, which holds the title of the Cathedral Church of the Diocese of Etna and Portland (an historical designation), sponsored a reception, at the Sunday Agape Meal after the Divine Liturgy, to celebrate the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Ordination of the parish Rector, the Very Reverend Protopresbyter Constantine Parr, to the Priesthood, and also to honor him and his wife, Presbytera Deborah, on the occasion of his simultaneous retirement from the active Priesthood for reasons of ill health.
Father Constantine will remain in the parish as an assistant to the new Rector, Father Photios Cooper, his spiritual son.
His Eminence, Bishop Auxentios, Ruling Bishop of the Diocese, was unable to attend the reception, owing to ongoing meetings and discussions surrounding the acquisition of state licensure and academic accreditation for the St. Photios Orthodox Theological Seminary (under construction in Etna, California), from which activities he was unable to absent himself. Nonetheless, he sent a beautiful arrangement of flowers and a personal letter praising and expressing his gratitude to Father Constantine and his wife for their years of faithful service to the Church and parish, which was read to those present by Subdeacon James Kalbasky. The following moving tribute is taken from His Eminence’s letter:
Just as I ask the congregation to express, as I am sure they will, their deep devotion and gratitude to you, as their Elder and Father, and to Presbytera Deborah, so I implore them, in honoring you, to help and encourage Father Photios, younger in his Priesthood and with the responsibilities of a very large family and other burdens, in his very first priority, the one thing necessary and important above all else, his Priesthood. I hope that, as a spiritual family and a loving community in the Lord, the parish will do all that it can to aid you in meeting your family and personal needs, since you will stay on as one deserving of reward for his years of service, and, as much as possible, to help Father Photios, as he assumes your mantle and, I would hope, follows the good example of your sacrifice and dedication to the parish.
We wish Father Constantine every blessing in retirement, wish Father Photios Grace and strength in fulfilling his new duties, and entreat the Lord that the parish might experience spiritual growth and progress in an atmosphere of unity and Christian love.
On Saturday, January 24, and Sunday, January 25, 2016 (Old Style)—February 6 and 7, according to the civil calendar—His Grace, Bishop Auxentios of Etna and Portland made a pastoral visit to the small parish of the Holy Archangel Michael in Bakersfield, CA, which is served periodically by His Grace, the Right Reverend Sergios, emeritus Bishop of Portland, and clergy from his monastery, dedicated to St. Gregory of Sinai, in Loch Lomond, CA. Bishop Auxentios was accompanied by Archimandrite (Father Abbot) Akakios and Deacon Father Photii from the St. Gregory Palamas Monastery, in Etna, CA, as well as Mother Elizabeth, Abbess of the Convent of St. Elizabeth the Grand Duchess of Russia, also in Etna, and six of her nuns, who comprise the convent’s choir. The Most Reverend Chrysostomos, Metropolitan emeritus of Etna, also joined the visiting clergy.
The community in Bakersfield worships in a small but warmly adorned Church with an attached reception room and trapeza (refectory). His Grace and the clergy celebrated Vespers on Saturday evening and Matins and an Hierarchical Liturgy on Sunday morning, honoring the Feast of St. Gregory the Theologian, Archbishop of Constantinople. The small Church was filled to capacity for the Hierarchical Liturgy, at which His Eminence, Metropolitan Chrysostomos delivered a sermon on the life, significance, and mystical theology of St. Gregory. The services were beautifully sung by the nuns, well trained in music, who sang a number of magnificent Byzantine hymns in Greek and a large part of the Divine Liturgy in English to traditional Russian and Romanian melodies.
After the Liturgy a very nice luncheon was served, and His Grace, Bishop Auxentios was able to speak with and encourage those present, several of whom had travelled from neighboring Los Angeles and Tehachapi and as far away as Nevada to participate in the services.
On Saturday evening, John and Marie Engel, who are active and indefatigable servers in the parish, hosted a dinner in a local seafood restaurant for the visitors and the faithful in attendance at the Vespers service. Again on Sunday evening, the visiting clergy—the nuns having returned to Etna—were the guests of Mr. and Mrs. Engel at a meal at their residence, following the blessing of their home by Bishop Auxentios with Holy Water from Theophany. On Monday morning, the clergy joined Michael and Philothei Gombos, two stalwarts and generous patrons of the small parish in Bakersfield, and their son, John, for breakfast at their beautiful home. His Grace, Bishop Auxentios noted that the fellowship and spiritual atmosphere at the gathering were memorable and inwardly encouraging.
The weekend was reckoned by all of the visitors from Etna, clergy and nuns alike, a wonderful opportunity to worship with, and be inspired by a small flock with an enduring spirit, great potential, and a strong commitment to the witness of genuine Orthodox spirituality. All were immensely grateful for the hospitality shown to them.
Archimandrite Gregory
To Contemplate in Reading this Short Commentary
Tradition: "Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and
maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you” (I Corinthians 11:2).
The authority of the Fathers: "For though ye have ten thousand instructors
in Christ, yet [have ye] not many fathers” (I Corinthians 4:15).
The goal of Christianity: "For we are made partakers of Christ" (Hebrews 3:14).
"Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that
by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature" (II St. Peter 1:4).
Εὐλογία Κυρίου. May the Lord bless you.
The present commentary is my response to a request from two of our clergy in Europe, the Reverend Dr. Father Jiří (George) Ján (a married Czech Priest living in Greece) and The Reverend Father Anders Åkerström (a married Priest in Sweden), who sent me a rather outré article, asking that I write a few words about it. I thank them for their trust in my meagre abilities to do so, asking not only for their forgiveness for any deficits in my reflections, but for the patience of those to whom I am distributing them.
Please see, below my commentary on it, the article in question, entitled (somewhat curiously), “The Future Pan-Orthodox Council on Relations with the Non-Orthodox Other: A Measured Defense of Christian Unity against those Who Consider Ecumenism a Heresy.” Its author is Paul L. Gavrilyuk. Professor Gavrilyuk holds the Aquinas Chair in Theology and Philosophy at the University of St. Thomas, a Roman Catholic University in St. Paul, Minnesota, associated with the Angelicum in Rome. After studying physics in Moscow, he came to the U.S., where he received a doctorate in Patristics from the Religious Studies program at Southern Methodist University.
Dr. Gavrilyuk's writings, which are expansive, include an interesting volume on Father Georges Florovsky (Georges Florovsky and the Russian Religious Revolution), published by the Oxford University Press. In addition to his teaching post in Minnesota, he has taught in visiting posts at Calvin College, the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas (the Angelicum), and the Ukrainian Catholic University in Lviv, Ukraine. Orthodox by faith, he is an avid ecumenist and supporter of the Orthodox Church’s participation in the World Council of Churches (WCC).
[I should note that, though one would never conclude such from his appearance, Father Gavrilyuk is an Orthodox Deacon under the jurisdiction of the Orthodox Church in America (OCA). In referring to him as though he were a layman, rather than an Orthodox clergyman, I mean no disrespect. I am simply following what is apparently his preferred style of self-presentation, one that he shares with an increasing number of modernist Orthodox clergy.]
In this article, which concerns the upcoming “Great and Holy Synod" [or “Council,” to use the western term which is used ubiquitously now, even among Orthodox] that is to be held in Crete from June 16-27, 2016 (New Style), he makes the following tendentious comment about a statement issued during the final preparatory meeting for the synod; i.e., the pre-synodal condemnation of the anti-ecumenical Old Calendarist Orthodox in Greece, Romania, Bulgaria, Russia, and, in smaller populations, among Orthodox living in the West. I would like to center my reflections on this comment in particular:
Addressing an internal problem, “the Orthodox Church believes that any efforts to divide the unity of the Church, which are undertaken by persons or groups under the pretext of the protection or defense of true Orthodoxy, must be condemned.” ...This statement is a condemnation of certain influential fringe elements within the Church, who often style themselves “traditionalists” rejecting any engagement in ecumenical dialogue as a heresy that damages the “purity of Orthodoxy.” While some Orthodox leaders have criticized such a stance, this is the first global pan-Orthodox condemnation of fanaticism, obscurantism, and traditionalism.
One cannot but express surprise at such indiscriminate words, and especially from a competent and respected scholar, an Orthodox Christian, and, paradoxically, given its far from irenic or reconciliatory tone, an ecumenist.
Professor Gavrilyuk’s comments seem incongruent with a responsible or traditional call for unity from Orthodox Hierarchs, since Orthodox unity is ultimately rooted in a common Baptism and a common Confessional (Credal) and Mysteriological life (or “Sacramental life,” to use western nomenclature again). I do not recall seeing a baptismal, confessional, credal, or Mysteriological reference to ecumenism or membership in the WCC as requirements for unity among Orthodox believers. Similarly, arguing that faithful who purport to protect the faith, whether with justification or as a “pretext” for dividing the Church, should be condemned prima facie, without examining their motivations, their arguments, and their positions, is quite a novelty in Church history. I do not recall such an overt and aggressively biased action by any legitimate synod of Orthodox Bishops faithful to the religion that they are sworn at Consecration to uphold.
One would expect any defense of the Faith to resonate with those who—if they are doing what an Orthodox synod and Orthodox Bishops are supposed to do—wish to protect the Faith from wrong doctrine and teaching. After all, every synod that the Orthodox consider oecumenical, whether the seven cited by convention or the eight or nine that many feel qualify for the appellation “oecumenical,” has convened to examine what seems to be heresy and to reaffirm, after such an examination, what is “pleasing to the Holy Spirit” and consistent with what the Church has always taught everywhere and at all times. In so doing, those in attendance, whatever their stance, were obviously attempting to unite the Church, whether through the triumph of error (in false synods) or truth (in genuine Orthodox synods). Yet this proposed synod has declared that we, with whom it has had no dialogue and whom it has called to no tribunal, are enemies of unity and worthy of condemnation in advance on account of our opposition to ecumenism.
How, indeed, does one assess the wrongness of those whose teachings are considered questionable without hearing their defense? How is any synod oecumenical when it condemns a group of faithful without allowing them to be present at its deliberations? And why should a synod convene to condemn heresy and reaffirm the faith if it declares per terram per mare, before the fact, that those in question—influential fringe elements, as they call us—are already miscreants and, by virtue of being a minority outside the circles of the Bishops who are meeting, have no voice? Furthermore, one wonders precisely who, without a single dialogue with us, determined that we are motivated by a desire to divide the Church (an astounding assumption) and are, before judgment, guilty of fanaticism, obscurantism, and traditionalism?
Granted that fanaticism and obscurantism may be contrary to the Patristic ethos, how in the world can one condemn Orthodox who believe in Holy Tradition, one of the cornerstones of our Faith, for traditionalism, summarily dismissing them, as well, for their conviction that the syncretism and ecclesiological relativism of the contemporary ecumenical movement damages the “purity” of Orthodoxy? Can this be done without allowing us to define our terms, without even addressing the issue of what we mean by our pronouncements against ecumenism? Is it not, once more, specifically out of a concern for the “purity” of Orthodoxy that the synods which the Orthodox traditionally recognize as oecumenical were convened?
Quite obviously, the good professor has not adequately thought about what he is endorsing. Equally pellucid is the fact that, whether or not we “traditonalist anti-ecumenists” are correct in our criticism of the Orthodox ecumenists, the convocation of a synod that rests its deliberations on the dismissal of dissenters and minorities is in deep trouble with regard to its status as a valid gathering.
At any rate, it behooves me, beyond these general observations, to note first that with regard to the accusation of fanaticism, our opposition to ecumenism is not based on extremism, religious intolerance, a disregard for cooperation with those who may have religious differences with us, or a lack of sensitivity for unity among all Christians. We are not advocating bigotry. We are putting forth our sincere belief that unity lies in a return to the criterion of Christianity that we believe we have preserved from the earliest Christian centuries and that we have protected and guarded as the source of unity for all Christians. Calling us bigots for holding this view is tantamount to making exactly the same charge against Roman Catholics for claiming to be the Una Sancta, a sensitivity that has survived in all church bodies that turn to the early Church as their source and adhere to a theory of valid continuity from the Early Church.
Our insistence is that unity in the Church—and let me emphasize, as I constantly do, that the greatest spiritual tragedy for us Orthodox is not centered on our separation from one another, but is Theocentric and focused on our separation from God—lies in Holy Tradition. Tradition has always been for the Orthodox the litmus test for pure Faith. St. John Chrysostomos praises tradition without restraint: “It is tradition, ask nothing else.” Moreover, the Apostle Paul admonishes us, as a rule of faith, to hold fast to the traditions handed down to us. If the ecumenists say that our traditional doctrines and dogmas are walls that do not reach up to Heaven, I would respond, in Orthodox fashion, that they are the water of life, pouring down over us from Heaven like rain, consoling our thirsty, parched souls.
These traditional doctrines and dogmas and our adherence to them are, for Orthodox Christians, the source of our unity, the footprints in which we tread in imitating the Apostles, and living evidence of our confession of Christ as the Son of God and the living Body of the Church, the Rock on which St. Peter built the Church, which we find within the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. The κριτήριον τῆς ἀληθείας, or the very measure of Truth, is what has been “handed down to us,” the meaning of the Greek word for tradition (παράδοσις), and it is to it that we turn in justifying our claims to primacy in Christianity, and not to some arrogant, sectarian desire to denigrate those of other religions. Thus, to call us traditionalists, along with such notable contemporary critics of ecumenism as St. Justin of Serbia, St. Seraphim of Sofia, and Father Georges Florosvky (a founder of the WCC and a brilliant man who tried to reconcile traditionalism with ecumenism—and questioned the possibility quite openly as he grew older), is not an insult. What is incomprehensible, however, is to imagine that we should be condemned by an Orthodox Synod, in advance of its convocation, for such traditionalism! Such a travesty borders on lunacy.
Finally, Professor Gavrilyuk notes that we anti-ecumenical Orthodox are obscurantists. I will not pretend to understand with surety what he means by that epithet, but I can guess. As Orthodox traditionalists, we believe that the traditions of our Faith (including the festal calendar that was established by a deliberate attempt at uniformity in the early Church and which held firm in the whole of Orthodoxy until the 1920s) are sacred, inspired by the Holy Spirit, basic to our self-identity, and constitute a path to union with Christ (θέωσις) by way of a life of mystical “other-worldliness.” By prayer, fasting, inner transformation, and purity of life, we acquire the Holy Spirit, a cleansing of the heart, the enlightenment of the mind, and salvation (restoration to what God created us to be before the Fall). This method is fully expressed in the Hesychastic tradition of the Church, which St. Gregory Palamas championed in the fourteenth century and which we hold to be the pure teaching of Christian life that traces to Christ and His Disciples, the Fathers, and the Saints. It is the sum of Holy Tradition and the teaching that unifies Christianity.
Hesychasm and the mystical teachings of the Church have often been dismissed in the West, and in westernized Orthodox circles (and flagrantly so in Russia and Ukraine during their periods of westernization), as obscurantist, as a deviation from the Scholastic and Reformed teachings that have dominated western Christian academic theology (standards not fairly applied to Orthodoxy), and as quasi-Christian in origin. Some unwise and self-loathing Orthodox theological voices have even tried to link the strict “other-worldly” elements in Hesychasm (shockingly enough) with medieval Gnosticism and Bogomilism. Notwithstanding the fact that to be Orthodox is to embrace Hesychasm, which is basic to Ὀρθοπραξία, or the practice and living of the Orthodox Faith and Holy Tradition, without which, according to Scripture and by Patristic consensus, Orthodoxy (correctness of belief) itself remains infecund, there are Orthodox today who wish the Church to be involved in the world, to be relevant to the world, and to complement, rather than challenge, the heterodox confessions. These individuals comprise the vast majority of the ecumenists in contemporary Orthodoxy and in their circles Hesychasm and its precepts are frequently labelled as “obscurantist.” I am dismayed that these elements would condemn a priori, in the name of an ill-advised and would-be “pan-Orthodox” or “oecumenical” synod, the foundations of Orthodox spirituality.
There are heterodox Christians who look to Orthodoxy as a bastion of traditionalism, mystical theology, and spiritual loftiness. To them, whether or not they adhere to our declaration of the primacy of Orthodoxy as the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, as the very inheritor of what Jesus Christ taught, the Apostles preached, and the Fathers preserved, Orthodoxy has often served as a bright star and distant aim. Many serious spiritual seekers, and especially those who maintain some understanding of Christianity in the light of its continuous witness to an ancient way to human transformation, look positively to Orthodoxy as a lux ex Oriente: an abiding spiritual legacy of the spiritual revelation of Christ, which so transformed the world and which is so reviled by our contemporary foolish societies. Ecumenism has unquestionably undermined this vision of the “pure” Faith that we “traditionalists” and “obscurantists” have sedulously attempted to preserve and perpetuate, and it has thus contributed, wittingly or otherwise, to the anti-Christian spirit of our day, where relativism and syncretism stand in opposition to spiritual absolutes and universal (indeed, truly ecumenical) Truth. This fact alone justifies our witness and our efforts to revive Orthodoxy from the sleep of spiritual and ecclesiological relativism and syncretism. In observing this, I must wonder what justifies the ecumenical Orthodox who:
1) have made ecumenism a criterion of Orthodoxy;
2) have condemned us Genuine Orthodox apologists as “traditionalists,” “obscurantists,” and as “fringe elements”;
3) have, despite maintaining that minority voices would be heard at their forthcoming “pan-Orthodox” synod, condemned us without dialogue, without summoning us to be heard, and before their synod has even been convened;
and
4) have admitted that we are worthy of their unjust condemnations and their ugly epithets because of the “influence” that we exercise, in our struggles for True Orthodoxy and Holy Tradition as unifying principles, as threatening the unity of the Church!
As I said above, I am afraid that Professor Gavrilyuk has not carefully thought about his comments regarding the upcoming synod, its deviations from Orthodox sobriety, and the rather unfair, perhaps crude, and inarguably inappropriate epithets that have been used, by dictatorial fiat, to exclude us—these ecumenists who champion inclusiveness—from their deliberations and to declare us—these ecumenists who nonetheless decry such words and declare all churches sisters—miscreants, schismatics, heretics, and outside the Church. That they seem to glory in seeing us depersonalized, a supposed taboo for the ecumenical movement, in a “global pan-Orthodox” condemnation of supposed fanaticism, traditionalism, and obscurantism—this I find abhorrent, fanatic traditionalist and obscurantist though I may be.
Whatever we may be, and whatever our faults, are the ecumenists and those who support them not somehow, in some small way, ashamed of their behaviors and self-assumed spiritual authority?
The Most Reverend Chrysostomos, former
Archbishop and Metropolitan emeritus of Etna
Paul L. Gavrilyuk
At the recently concluded Synaxis, the heads of the self-governing Orthodox Churches resolved to assemble the Great and Holy Council of the Orthodox Church in Crete on 16–27 June 2016. As the drafts of the documents to be promulgated by the Council become publicly available, Orthodox faithful and other Christians around the world will participate in the process of their reception. Below I will discuss the main message, select issues, and potential impact of the draft document titled “The Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World,” adopted at the Fifth Pan-Orthodox Preliminary Meeting in Chambésy, 10–17 October 2015. All references are to the paragraphs numbered in the document.
The main message of the document is to affirm a robust pan-Orthodox commitment to the pursuit of Christian unity through multi-level ecumenical dialogues. The document adumbrates the theological foundations of Christian unity and provides the guidelines for engaging in such dialogues. The unity of the Orthodox Church “cannot be violated” (6) and “is expressed in the apostolic succession and the patristic tradition” (2), especially “in the teaching of the seven Ecumenical Councils” (18, cf. 3). The Orthodox Church rejects the idea of the “equality of confessions” (18) and holds that there is a “hierarchy of difficulties” on the way to Christian unity.
Addressing an internal problem, “the Orthodox Church believes that any efforts to divide the unity of the Church, which are undertaken by persons or groups under the pretext of the protection or defense of true Orthodoxy, must be condemned” (22). This statement is a condemnation of certain influential fringe elements within the Church, who often style themselves “traditionalists” rejecting any engagement in ecumenical dialogue as a heresy that damages the “purity of Orthodoxy.” While some Orthodox leaders have criticized such a stance, this is the first global pan-Orthodox condemnation of fanaticism, obscurantism, and traditionalism.
The guidelines for engaging in ecumenical dialogue include “the efforts to coordinate the work of different pan-Orthodox theological commissions” (13). The document specifies that if the representatives of a particular self-governing Orthodox Church decide to absent themselves from a bilateral meeting, the dialogue continues without interruption (9). If this particular Church has strong grounds for discontinuing its participation in a particular dialogue, this Church should inform the Ecumenical Patriarchate and other local Churches in writing (10). This provision was introduced to prevent the practice of abandoning the floor of the meeting in protest, as did the delegation of the Russian Orthodox Church during a meeting of a joint Orthodox-Catholic International Commission in Ravenna in 2007, reacting against Constantinople’s policy vis-à-vis the Orthodox Church of Estonia.
The document notes the participation of the Orthodox Church in the work of the World Council of Churches (WCC) from its foundation and endorses the Toronto Statement (1950) “The Church, the Churches, and the World Council of Churches” as a basis of the Orthodox participation in WCC (20), especially highlighting the work of the Faith and Order Commission (21). The document also points out that the Georgian Orthodox Church and the Bulgarian Orthodox Church resigned from the WCC, indicating that these local churches have a “special opinion” regarding the work of the WCC (16). By calling attention to the “special opinion” of a dissenting minority (Georgia and Bulgaria) and indicating a strong consensus of a broad majority of the Orthodox Churches, the document sets a pattern for applying the “consensus rule” to the conciliar process.
In this document, the Council Fathers send a strong message that the quest for Christian unity is at the core of the Orthodox Church’s mission. The guidelines for engaging in the dialogue are adumbrated and the obscurantists who reject ecumenism as “heresy” are condemned.
Roman Catholics will find many parts of this document congenial. For example, the concept of the “hierarchy of difficulties” (12) echoes the language of the “hierarchy of truths” that was adopted by Vatican II’s decree on ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio. It should be noted that Unitatis Redintegratio spells out the common features of Orthodoxy and Catholicism, whereas the document under discussion is silent on the matter.
There is presently some talk about the meeting between pope Francis and patriarch Kirill of Moscow “under the tropical skies” of Central America in mid-February this year. Will the patriarch invite the pope to the Great and Holy Council? Unlikely, but a limited number of Catholic observers will be invited. Let’s hope that their participation bears as much fruit as the Orthodox participation at the Vatican II did.
28 January 2016
13 January 2016
Pickwick Publications released the following new book this week, featuring the
writings of scholars from the Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies
and the St. Photios Orthodox Theological Seminary
Selected Readings on Hellenistic and Christian
Learning and Thought in the Early Greek Fathers
by the Most Reverend Chrysostomos
with
Bishop Auxentios, Archimandrite Patapios,
Constantine Cavarnos, and the Reverend
Gregory Telepneff
local bookstore or contact the publisher at:
orders@Ywipfandstock#.9com
Available at Amazon in 6-8 weeks,
through Ingram book distributors in 4 weeks,
and as a Kindle book in 3-6 months
This book argues, from a distinctly Eastern Orthodox perspective, for the inseparability of classical Hellenism from the Greek patristic tradition, postulating a common striving for truth in both domains and laying emphasis on the contributions of the ancients and Greek paideia to Christian learning and culture. The essays contained in the volume provide a fruitful strategy, in the spirit of the late Werner Jaeger, for looking anew at the Greek classical world and Christianity through the eyes of the Greek fathers, the direct inheritors of the ancient Greek worldview. Collectively, the author and contributors forcefully demonstrate that, conflated with the visionary insights of the Jewish prophets and of Jewish messianism, the wisdom of the ancients served to pave the way for the unfolding of the fullness of Christian teaching and its spiritually enlightening revelation.
_________
• “Archbishop Chrysostomos has not merely produced a simple collection of texts. If one follows them step by step, he will certainly decipher a golden thread that goes deeper into the history of the birth of Orthodox Christianity.... The subject matter is complex and difficult. Nevertheless [the book] commends itself as an easy, fruitful, erudite, and spiritual reading.”
Remus Rus,
Professor of Theology, emeritus,
University of Bucharest, Romania
• “This fine book illustrates how early Christian thought synthesized Jewish revelation with Greek philosophy and literature, integrating intellectual knowledge with spiritual understanding. The articles illustrate this synthesis with a number of topics, such as the relationship between soul, body, and spirit. Metropolitan Chrysostomos’ clear Introduction encourages readers, in the current anti-Christian culture, to understand the powerful truths and insights of the early Christian writers.”
Jeffrey Burton Russell,
Professor of History, emeritus,
University of California, Santa Barbara
• “This engaging collection of essays, which explores the dynamic relationship between Hellenistic thought and the writings of the Greek Fathers, opens a double window on Christianity and the classical world. What readers will find here are vistas certain to inform their understanding of the link between the wisdom of Homer and Sophocles, Plato and Aristotle, and the divine revelations of patristic tradition.”
Christopher Merrill,
author of Things of the Hidden God: Journey to the Holy Mountain
Director, International Writing Program, University of Iowa
• “The publication of this new volume...is very welcome. The possibility to study in greater depth the attitudes of the early Church Fathers who wrote in the Greek language towards classical learning is very important.... May this book be a source of information, inspiration, and encouragement for many people of good will.”
Hieromonk Gorazd (Vopatrny),
Director of the Institute of Eastern Christianity,
Hussite Faculty of Theology, Charles University in Prague