www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Vatican Studying Steps To Make Lybomyr Husar a Patriarch

My friends, I think you forget that the Holy See is not the only religious authority who is also sovereign. The Knights of Malta are sovereign. Until Napolean, the Archbishop of Saltzberg was sovereign. For us Orthodox, Mt. Athos has sovreignty.

If the Patriarch wants sovereignty, he should move to Mt. Athos.

Axios

...and then the holiest, most zealously Orthodox monks will all move out!

In Christ -
Mark, monk and sinner.

Dear Axios,

According to Greek Constitution the Holy Mountain Athos is a self governed part of the Greek State and not a sovereign state. First it was part of the Byzantine Empire, later of the Othoman one, and finally, when Russia failed to make the Holy Mountain a Russian colony in the Mediterranean through the settlement of thousands of Russian “monks” (most of these “monks” celebrated the October Revolution by firing Saint Panteleimon or Russikon Monastery), part of the independent Greek state. According to the Greek Constitution and the Rector Chart of the Holy Mountain all the monks do obtain the Greek nationality at the moment they become novices at one of the monasteries. The 20 monasteries of the Holy Mountain (The Holy Community of the Holy Mountain has stated that the community of Sfigmenou Monastery is no more a canonical community) are under the canonical jurisdiction of the Ecumenical patriarch, whose see is the Archdiocese of Constantinople and not the Holy Mountain.

Dear father Mark,

Nobody doubts that there are many holy, cultivated and zealous men in the Holy Mountain (fortunately I had the oportunity of knowing some of them) but do not forget that there are also a lot of sinners and ignorant and fanatic monks in the Garden of the Most Holy Mother of God, as you will probably know (that is necessary to remind you of the pitiful case of two monks that died in the Holy Mountain by AIDS?). My question is: Is the Ecumenical Patriach so bad after all?

Yours in Christ,

+ Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us - Amen!

Dear Francisco,

You raise an interesting issue and I don't pretend to begin to understand it (which is why I raise it ).

I don't know what constitutes "fanatical" any more since this term seems to be used to tell anyone you don't agree with "Get with the program and agree with me and the majority" etc.

The fact that there are Athonite monks who don't like the EP doesn't mean they are fanatical as such.

The fact that the 26 Monk-Martyrs of Zographou Monastery preferred to die than join the Union, along with others, doesn't mean they are fanatical - any more than Catholics dying for what they believe is right are fanatical.

Personally, I would rather we not use that offensive word precisely because it has lost, if it ever had, any semblance of objective meaning.

But IF it is true that the EP has broken Orthodoxy's canons regarding ecumenism and IF that matter regarding masonry is true etc., are not the Orthodox justified in opposing him, just as the ROCOR in opposing the MP for collaboration with the Soviets?

When they were filming JAMES BOND with Roger Moore ("For Your Eyes Only") they used a Greek monastery as a backdrop.

When the monks realized their monastery was going to be used in a film glorifying sex and violence, they threw multicoloured drapes over the sides of the monastery walls and so the filming had to take place elsewhere (the research for that film was so good they had an RC confessional in an Orthodox church and the monastic habits of the spies was that of the Franciscans . . .).

Were these monks "fanatical?"

Sometimes we need to take a stand even at the risk of being called "fanatical." (That was my nickname in school by the way ).

Have a nice day.

Alex the Fanatic

Dear Alex,

I am sorry to say that you are probably misunderstanding my words. What I was trying to explain to Father Mark is that it is not your attitude towards the EP or to Ecumenism, if you prefer, which makes you a holy and zealous Orthodox monk. I condemn the idea that only traditionalist (I say "traditionalist" and not "traditional") antiecuminist Orthodox are proper, good, holy and zealous Orthodox. I also refuse the idea that all non-canonical Orthodox are fanatic just because they refuse the new calendar or the Nikonian liturgical reform. I said that there are zealous but also fanatic monks in the Holy Mountain, that has nothing to do with their ecclesiastical attitude towards the EP. There are also holy men and great sinners. That was a Athinite father, the blesses Paisios, considered by many a contemporany saint who said that fanatism was the heresy of our times and one of the greatest problems of the Orthodox Church,

+ Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, be merciful to me a sinner!

Dear Francisco,

He was right, then!

But there is still no real definition of what a "fanatic" truly is. It is a confusing word.

Was he not a spiritual disciple of St Paisius Velichkovsky and is called "Paisius the New?"

You are very versed in Eastern Christianity.

For a Spaniard. . .

How do you say the Jesus Prayer in Spanish?

Alex

Dear friends,

I consider that that is not compulsory for an Orthodox Christian to love the Ecumenical Patriarch or to agree with all his decisions, I just expect from an Orthodox Christian to accept the primacy of the Ecumenical Patriarchate over all the Eastern Churches as it is proclaimed by the Holy Canons of the Seven Ecumenical Councils (no more no less). All these accusations against the person of the Ecumenical Patriarch had made me sick and tired. They accuse him of heresy, of violation of the holy canons, of being member of the masonry…but nobody has been able to prove all these accusations. When Father Mark said that in the Divine Liturgy celebrated by the Patriarch at Raven non Orthodox had received the Holy Eucharist I doubted for a moment. When some days ago I could read in an ultra-conservative (I am sorry that I can not provide you with an appropriated definition of what this word mean) Orthodox paper (edited by members of the official Orthodox Church of Greece) that non only non Orthodox did receive the Holy Eucharist but also non Christians (Moslems, Buddhist) did receive Holy Communion I realized that the whole story about the patriarch giving communion to non Orthodox was just a lie and I will continue to believe so till they will show me a picture of the patriarch giving communion to a non Orthodox in Raven. When somebody accuses someone of heresy, or of schism and he brakes the communion with him he must have very good and holy reasons to do so, otherwise he will be committing a great sin, a sin against the unity of the Church and the Holy Spirit. Alex follows the Old Calendar, I follow the New one (revised Julian Calendar), I respect him and he respects me. But if I star saying that Alex is non a proper Christian because he does not follow the New Calendar (I am a better Christian than you), and then I say that he is an heretic and afterwards I broke the communion with him I will be committing a great sin against the unity of the Church. Blessed Father Paisios (I think he had no relation with St Paisius Velichkovsky) saw in the fanatism (I am more holy than you, so if you do not think like me and you do not follow the uses I follow I will consider you an heretic) the cause of many of the schims in the Church both in the ancient and the recent times. I will give you an example: the Catholikos-Patriarch of Georgia has broken the sacramental communion with the Church of Finland whereas he continues in communion with the other Orthodox Churches in communion with the Finish Church (I am not in communion with the heretics but I am in communion with those who are in communion with the heretics!!!). The revised New Calendar is from the astronomical point of view completely “orthodox”, and the Church of Finland continues celebrating Eastern according to the canons of the Council of Nicea, then the Patriarch of Georgia whereas he has got the right to follow the Old Calendar has no right to consider heretical or schismatic the Church of Finland. Who is the schismatic and the enemy of the union of the Church here, the Church of Finland or the Patriarchate of Georgia? Why to blame the “progressive” Church of Finland and not the “conservative” Church of Georgia of breaking the unity of the Church? Are always “progressive” wrong and “conservative” right?

Yours in Christ

Dear Francisco,

You are right, friend.

No matter which calendar we follow, we are serving the Lord.

You are doing it your way.

I am doing it His way

So how DO you say the Jesus Prayer in Spanish?

Alex

Alex,

I believe it's something like, "Jesucristo, Hijo de Dios, tiene compasion de mi, un pecador." (Correct me if I'm wrong, Francisco.)

ChristTeen287

"Senyor Jesucristo, Hijo de Dios, ten piedad de mi pecador"

Hi... a query: monk-martyrs of the Zougraph Monastery? I know that it is the Bulgarian monastery but I was not aware of anything untoward happening. Would you care to elaborate?

Anton

Dear Anton,

Yes, 26 Orthodox monks of Zographou monastery were martyred for refusing to accept the Union. They have been glorified as Venerable Martyrs. There are other Athonite Martyrs of this category.

Alex

Dear Francisco,

Is the "revised New Calendar" a Gregorian one
with celebration of Easter according to Nicean
rule and "Gregorian" aequinox?
OR
does the Finnish Church celebrate Easter just with Roman Catholics?

Sincerely,
subdeacon Peter

Dear Subdeacon Peter,

The Finnish Orthodox, and the Estonian Orthodox as well, I believe, just use the Gregorian Calendar with the Western Pascha. They are unique in the Orthodox world.

Their doxology at the end of each Stasis of the Kathismata is also different.

Instead of Alleluia (3X) Glory to Thee, O God, they sing, "Glory to Thee o Lord, Glory to Thee."

Will these innovations ever end?

Alex

Are you sure? If Francisco is right, their Easter must be celebrated after Jewish Pesach (Nicean rule), so sometimes its date must differ from the Latins'.

Are you sure these Ugrofines have separate words
for "Lord" and "God"?
BTW, it's irrelevant anyway: no one can understand
their services.

Sincerely,
subdeacon Peter

PS. I'd like to read Francisco's reply too.