Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Meletios Metaksakis, Metropolitan, Archbishop, Pope and unfortunate Patriarch

Expand Messages
  • Basil Yakimov
    July 1935. Zurich, Switzerland. After six difficult days in the throes of death, there dies a man whose personality was one of the most scandalous in the
    Message 1 of 11 , Jul 2, 2006
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      July 1935. Zurich, Switzerland. After six difficult days in the throes of
      death, there dies a man whose personality was one of the most scandalous in
      the two-thousand year history of the Orthodox Church. His body is taken to
      Cairo in Egypt and buried with great pomp. One of the greatest Church
      reformers leaves behind him a painful, unstable and alarming situation, the
      consequences of which will be felt for many decades, probably even
      centuries. Against the background of his image and actions, a question
      arises. What was his personal contribution to contemporary and future
      tribulations, concerns and challenges facing the Orthodox Church?

      We are now at a sufficient historical distance for both historians and
      theologians to give an objective assessment. Today, in our view, his
      personality and contribution demand this. We shall attempt to show why. We
      present only the basic information and some of the historical facts, which
      concern this personality, unprecedented in Church history. In his
      relatively short, but very tempestuous life, this man managed to become the
      head of three autocephalous Local Churches and to have taken a number of
      decisions, which until his time were incompatible with Orthodoxy. Here was
      a man who tried to change the very bases of Orthodox ecclesiology, raising
      questions to which many generations of Orthodox theologians are still to
      give mature and spiritually sober answers. But let us start at the
      beginning.

      Patriarch Meletios Metaksakis was born on 21 September 1871 in the village
      of Parsas on Crete and was baptized Emmanuel. In 1889 he entered the Holy
      Cross seminary in Jerusalem. In 1892 he became a monk and was ordained
      hierodeacon. After completing his theological education, in 1900 Patriarch
      Damian appointed him secretary of the Holy Synod of the Patriarchate of
      Jerusalem. Eight years later, in 1908, the same Patriarch expelled Meletios
      from the Holy Land for 'activities against the Holy Sepulchre'. (1)

      According to the historian Alexander Zervoudakis, an official in the
      British Ministry of Defence (1944-1950), in 1909 Meletios visited Cyprus
      and there, together with other Orthodox clergy (2), became a member of a
      British masonic lodge (3). In the following year Metaksakis became the
      Metropolitan of Kition in Cyprus and already in 1912 tried to become the
      Patriarch of Constantinople. Failing in this, he devoted himself to
      becoming the Archbishop of Cyprus. Meanwhile his undisguised political
      ambitions, authoritarian character and, above all, his modernism seemed to
      have played a decisive role in his defeat (4). Disillusioned, he left his
      flock and in 1916 headed for Greece. There, in 1918, with the support of
      his relative Venizelos, who headed the Greek government, he became the
      Archbishop of Athens. In the following year, when Venizelos lost the Greek
      elections, Metaksakis was deposed.

      While still Archbishop of Athens, Metaksakis visited Great Britain together
      with a group of his supporters. Here he conducted talks on unity between
      the Anglican Church and the Orthodox Churches. At that time he also set up
      the famous 'Greek Archdiocese of North America'. Until then there had been
      no separate jurisdictions in America, but only parishes consisting of
      ethnic groups, including Greeks, and officially under the jurisdiction of
      the Russian bishop. With the fall of Imperial Russia and the Bolshevik
      seizure of power, the Russian Church found herself isolated and her
      dioceses outside Soviet Russia lost their support. Archbishop Meletios’
      foundation of a purely Greek ethnic diocese in America became the first in
      a whole series of divisions which followed. As a result, various groups
      demanded and received the support of their national Churches (5).

      After losing the see of Athens, in February 1921 Meletios set off for
      America. At that time, according to the decsion of the Sacred Episcopal
      Council of the Serbian Orthodox Church (SOC), Bishop (now Saint) Nicholas
      Velimirovic had been sent with a mandate ‘to investigate the situation,
      needs and wishes of the Serbian Orthodox Church in the United States’. In
      his report to the Sacred Episcopal Council on 13/26 June 1921, Vladyka
      Nicholas mentions meeting Meletios, also informing them that:

      ‘The position of the Greeks was explained to me best of all by the
      Metropolitan of Athens, Meletios Metaksakis, who is now in exile in
      America, and Bishop Alexander of Rhodes, whom the same Metropolitan
      Meletios sent to America three years ago and to whom he delegated duties as
      Bishop of the Greek Church in America.

      Metropolitan Meletios considers that, according to the canons, the supreme
      oversight of the Church in America is to belong to the Patriarch of
      Constantinople. He quotes Canon 28 of the Fourth Oecumenical Council,
      according to which all churches in ‘barbarian’ lands belong to the
      jurisdiction of the Patriarch in Constantinople. In his opinion, this
      jurisdiction would be more honorary than anything else, and would be more
      real only in matters of appeal on the part of a dissatisfied party’ (6).

      Naturally, this was interesting news for Bishop Nicholas and he mentioned
      it in his report to the SOC Council, because nobody until that time had
      interpreted Canon 28 of the Fourth Council in such a way. Not a single
      Patriarch of Constantinople until Meletios had yet tried to substitute a
      primacy of power for the primacy of honour, or some myth of supreme
      judgement in ‘matters of appeal by the dissatisfied party’ for the
      catholicity of the Church.

      Apart from his work to establish completely new arrangements among the
      Local Churches and their diasporas, in America Meletios also showed great
      concern to develop exceptionally cordial relations with the Anglicans
      (Episcopalians). On 17 December 1921 the Greek Ambassador in Washington
      informed the authorities in Thessaloniki that Meletios, vested, took part
      in an Anglican service, bowed with the Anglicans in prayer, kissed their
      altar, preached and later blessed those present! (7).

      When the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece learned of Meletios’ activities
      in November 1921, a special commission was set up with the task of
      investigating his situation. Meanwhile, while this investigation was
      ongoing, Meletios was unexpectedly elected Patriarch of Constantinople. The
      Synodal commission extended its work and on the basis of its conclusions on
      9 December 1921 the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece expelled Meletios
      Metaksakis for a whole series of infringements of Canon Law and also for
      creating a schism (8). Despite this decision, on 24 January 1922 Meletios
      was raised to the Patriarchal see. And then, under strong political
      pressure, on 24 September that same year the decision to expel him was
      revoked.

      Metropolitan Germanos (Karavangelis), who at that time had already been
      legally elected Archbishop of Constantinople, relates the following
      regarding the circumstances connected with the unexpected change of
      situation: ‘There was no doubt about my election to the Oecumenical Throne
      in 1921. Of 17 votes, 16 were for me. Then a layman known to me offered me
      10,000 pounds if I renounced all my rights to the election in favour of
      Meletios Metaksakis. Naturally, irritated and annoyed I rejected the offer.
      Immediately after this a three-man delegation from ‘The National Defence
      League’ visited me one night and energetically persuaded me to renounce my
      election in favour of Meletios Metaksakis. The delegation told me that
      Meletios could obtain $100,000 for the Patriarchate, that he was on very
      good terms with Protestant bishops in England and America, that he could be
      very useful in Greek national interests and that international interests
      required Meletios to be elected as Patriarch. Such were the wishes of
      Eleutherios Venezelos.

      All night long I thought about this proposal. Economic chaos reigned in the
      Patriarchate. The Greek government had stopped sending aid and there were
      no other sources of income. Salaries had not been paid for the last nine
      months. The charitable organizations of the Patriarchate were in a critical
      material situation. With these considerations in mind and for the sake of
      the welfare of the people I accepted the proposal (9).

      After this agreement, on 23 November 1921, there was accepted a proposal of
      the Synod of the Patriarchate of Constantinople to postpone the election of
      the Patriarch. Immediately after this, the bishops who had voted to
      postpone the elections were replaced by others, so that two days later, on
      25 November 1921 Meletios was elected. The bishops who had been removed met
      in Thessaloniki and issued a statement saying that ‘Meletios election was
      completely against the holy canons’ and they promised ‘to conduct an honest
      and canonical election of the Patriarch of Constantinople’ (10). Despite
      all this, two months later, amid general astonishment, Meletios
      nevertheless became Patriarch of Constantinople.

      It may be said that from the moment that he was elected there begins a
      completely new chapter in the history of the Orthodox Church. As a fiery
      warrior for the political ideas of Panhellenism, an energetic modernist and
      Church reformer, Meletios initiated a series of reforms and influenced the
      acceptance of numerous resolutions which had extremely tragic consequences.
      In 1922 the Synod of his Patriarchate issued an encyclical which recognized
      the validity of Anglican orders (11) and, from 10 May to 8 June, at
      Meletios’ initiative a ‘Pan-Orthodox Congress’ took place in Istanbul.

      Despite the resolutions of the Councils of 1583 (12), 1587 and 1593, the
      Congress took the decision to change the calendar of the Orthodox Church.
      It is remarkable that at this Conference, which goes under various names –
      ‘Pan-Orthodox Congress’, ‘Orthodox Assembly’ (13) and so on –
      representatives of only three Local Churches were present: from Greece,
      Romania and Serbia. At the same time representatives from others, and
      moreover from the closest – the Patriarchates of Antioch, Jerusalem and
      Alexandria - decided not to take part. As Oecumenical Patriarch, Meletios
      chaired the sessions of the meeting, at which the Anglican Bishop Charles
      Gore was present. At Meletios’ invitation, Gore sat on his right and took
      part in the work of the Congress (14).

      It can be said that the introduction of the new calendar provoked extreme
      disappointment all over the Orthodox world, among parish clergy and
      laypeople, and above all among monastics. This gesture was taken as the
      visible sign of Constantinople’s intention to draw closer to the West to
      the detriment of the age-old liturgical unity of the Local Orthodox
      Churches. The so-called ‘Pan-Orthodox Congress’, consisting of
      representatives from three Local Churches, managed to accept the new
      calendar for the very same reasons of Unia, for which the preceding
      Orthodox Councils had condemned and rejected it: ‘For the sake of the
      simultaneous celebration of the great Christian feasts on the part of all
      the Churches’ (15).

      Whatever and whoever this conference represented, historians will most
      probably be forced to recognize that it was one of the most tragic events
      in the life of the Church in the twentieth century. The agenda, set from
      above and forced onto people in contradiction with previous Conciliar
      decisions, introduced under political pressure the so-called new calendar.
      This caused schisms and bloody clashes in the streets, which Meletios
      himself did not escape. Meletios' modernist reforms of the Church were not
      to the taste of the faithful. In Istanbul there were serious incidents,
      during which the outraged Orthodox population sacked the Patriarch's
      apartments and physically beat Meletios himself (16). Soon after this, in
      September 1923, he was forced to quit Istanbul and renounce the Patriarchal
      throne.

      Judging by all this, Patriarch Meletios had ambitious plans and this small
      and inglorious meeting looked at more than one problem. Apart from the
      issue of changing the calendar, they also examined the question of whether
      to reject a fixed Easter Day, priests and deacons marrying after
      ordination, second marriages for priests, relaxing the fasts, transferring
      great feasts to Sunday and so on (17). On the subject of this meeting,
      Archimandrite (now Saint) Justin Popovich wrote in his presentation of May
      1977 to the Sacred Episcopal Council of the SOC:
      'The issue of preparing and holding a new 'Oecumenical Council' of the
      Orthodox Church is not new and does not date back merely to yesterday in
      our period of Church history. This question was already raised at the time
      of the unfortunate Patriarch Meletios Metaksakis, the well-known and
      presumptuous modernist, reformer and creator of schism in Orthodoxy, at his
      so-called 'Pan-Orthodox Congress' in Istanbul in 1923'.

      As Oecumenical Patriarch, Meletios gave special attention to attempts to
      completely reorganize relations between the Local Orthodox Churches in the
      world, especially with regard to their diasporas. His decisions, letters,
      tomos and encyclicals were not only controversial, but sometimes logically
      contradicted one another. Thus, refusing to recognize the autocephaly of
      the Albanian Orthodox Church on the pretext that the Orthodox population
      was a minority, Meletios, despite all the official documents issued by the
      Russian Church, recognized the separation of the Polish Church, which in
      exactly the same way was also a minority in Poland (18).

      As Vladyka Nicholas Velimirovich said in his report, Patriarch Meletios
      attempted to extend the interpretation of Canon 28 of the Fourth
      Oecumenical Council and in some way seize not only the Greek diaspora, but
      also other national diasporas. For the first time in history, a Patriarch
      was trying to launch the Patriarchate of Constantinople into an absolutely
      uncanonical and scandalous administrative invasion campaign in other
      people’s countries and against other people’s flocks. Fr Zhivko Panev
      writes of this:

      ‘Without consulting the Synod in Athens, in 1922 he used his connections
      with the Greek diaspora in America and subordinated it to himself. In that
      year he issued a Tomos on the foundation of an Archdiocese in North and
      South America in New York, with three bishops, in Boston, Chicago and San
      Francisco. At the same time he also took steps to subordinate to
      Constantinople diasporas of other nationalities. The first step in this
      direction was made in 1922, when he appointed an Exarch for the whole of
      Western and Central Europe in London, with the title of Metropolitan of
      Thyateira. Following this Constantinople began to dispute the right of
      Metropolitan Eulogius to run Russian parishes in Western Europe.

      On 9 July 1923 Meletios subordinated to himself the dioceses of the Russian
      Church in Finland in the form of an autonomous Finnish Church. On 23 August
      1923 the Synod in Constantinople issued a Tomos about the subordination to
      Constantinople of the Russian dioceses in Estonia, in the form of an
      autonomous Church.

      Presided by Meletios, the Synod in Constantinople decided that it was
      indispensable to form a new diocese for the Orthodox diaspora in Australia,
      with a Cathedral in Sydney, under Constantinople. This was done in 1924’
      (19).

      Thanks to Meletios’ activities the Serbian Church also clashed with the
      Patriarchate of Constantinople. It had its diocese in Czechoslovakia, for
      which on 25 September 1921 the Serbian Patriarch Dimitri consecrated bishop
      the Moravian Czech Gorazd Pavlik (shot on 4 December 1942 by the Germans
      and now canonized) (20). Despite this, on 4 March 1923, Patriarch Meletios
      consecrated an Archimandrite Sabbatius as ‘Archbishop of Prague and All
      Czechoslovakia’ and gave him Tomos No 1132 on the restoration of the
      ancient Archdiocese of Sts Cyril and Methodius, which he then placed under
      the jurisdiction of Constantinople (21).

      Apart from the Autocephalous Albanian Church, which Meletios did not
      recognize, there were also Serbs who lived on Albanian territory and whose
      spiritual care was in the hands of the Serbian Church. The secretary of the
      Monastery of Dechani, Victor Mikhailovich, was consecrated on 18 June 1922
      as Vicar-Bishop of Scutari. Meanwhile, the Patriarchate of Constantinople
      argued with the Serbian Church for many years over the question of
      jurisdiction in Albania. In the meantime, Uniat propaganda, spread directly
      by the Vatican was successful. Bishop Victor of Scutari underwent terrible
      hardships from which he was delivered on 8 September 1939, when he died. He
      was buried in the Monastery at Dechani at his request (22).

      Meletios’ recognition of Anglican orders even provoked the indignation of
      the Roman Catholics. Meletios’ innovations in the Church caused outrage and
      anger and the new calendar even caused schisms. In Istanbul, on 1 June
      1923, there gathered a large group of indignant clergy and laity, who
      attacked the Phanar with the aim of deposing Meletios and chasing him out
      of the City. However, Meletios held out in the exceedingly overheated
      atmosphere for another month, only on 1 July 1923 to quit Istanbul on the
      pretext of illness and the need for medical treatment. Later, under strong
      pressure from the Greek government and the intervention of the Archbishop
      of Athens, Patriarch Meletios finally resigned from his post on 20
      September 1923.

      Only three Local Orthodox Churches at first introduced the new calendar,
      which had been accepted at his insistence at the unfortunate congress in
      Istanbul in 1923. These were Constantinople, Greece and Romania. It was not
      introduced in others for fear of further disturbances and schisms and also
      because of the strong negative reaction. The Patriarch of Jerusalem
      declared that the new calendar was unacceptable for His Church because of
      the danger of proselytism and the spread of the Unia in the Holy Land.
      Probably the most serious opposition to the new calendar came from the
      Church of Alexandria. There, Patriarch Photius, after an agreement with
      Patriarchs Gregory of Antioch, Damian of Jerusalem and the Archbishop of
      Cyprus, Cyril, called a Local Council, at which it was decided that there
      was no need whatsoever to change calendars. The Council expressed great
      regret that this issue was on the agenda, pointing out that the calendar
      change represented a danger for the unity of Orthodoxy, not only in Greece,
      but all over the world.

      However, great changes were soon coming to the Patriarchate of Alexandria
      itself. After the Greek defeat of 1924 in Asia Minor at the hands of Kemal
      Ataturk, big changes took place on the Greek political and military scene.
      Then came population exchanges, as a result of which some 1,400,000 Greeks
      from Asia Minor were forced to resettle in Greece and some 300,000 Turks
      left Greece (23). After his resignation from the see of Constantinople and
      the stormy and fateful events there, Patriarch Meletios turned up in
      Alexandria, where, with political support, he was named second candidate
      for the see of the Patriarchate of Alexandria (24).

      At that time, Egypt was under British mandate and the Egyptian government
      had the right to confirm the candidacy of either of the two candidates who
      had been put forward. The government in Cairo dragged its feet on the
      decision for a whole year, only on 20 May 1926, under British government
      pressure, to confirm their choice of Meletios to the see of the Pope and
      Patriarch of Alexandria. Not in the least discouraged by the Local Council
      called by his predecessor, pretexting the unity of the Greek diaspora with
      their homeland (the new calendar had already been introduced in Greece
      under pressure from the revolutionary government), Meletios introduced the
      new calendar in Alexandria too. Thus, supposed concern for the Greek ethnic
      diaspora took precedence over concern for Church unity and the decisions of
      previous Councils.

      In 1930, as head of a Church delegation, Meletios Metaksakis took part in
      the Lambeth Conference (25), where he negotiated on unity between Anglicans
      and Orthodox.

      Before Meletios Metaksakis died, this exile from the Holy Land, Kition,
      Athens and Constantinople, with his unstable, tireless and ambitious
      spirit, despite serious illness, tried to advance his candidacy for the see
      of Jerusalem. However, on 28 July 1935 he died and was buried in Cairo. In
      his wake there is still a stormy period, a restless time of political
      pressure and diplomatic intrigues, unacceptable in the Church of Christ,
      the consequences of which will be felt for many more years to come…


      Priest Srboliub Miletich

      Translated by Fr Andrew

      14/27 June 2006
      St Methodius, Patriarch of Constantinople

      NOTES:

      [1] Batistos D., Proceedings and Decisions of the Pan-Orthodox Council in
      Constantinople, May 10 - June 8, 1923, Athens, 1982

      [2] One of them was the future Metropolitan Vasilios, an official
      representative of the Patriarchate of Constantinople

      [3] Alexander I. Zervoudakis, 'Famous Freemasons', Masonic Bulletin, No.
      71, January - February 1967

      [4] Benedict Englezakis, Studies on the History of the Church of Cyprus,
      4th - 20th Centuries, Vaparoum, Ashgate Publishing Limited, Aldershot,
      Hampshire, Great Britain, 1995, p. 440

      [5] Metropolitan Theodosius, Archbishop Of Washington, The Path To
      Autocephaly And Beyond: 'Miles To Go Before We Sleep'
      http://www.holy-trinity.org/modern/ theodosius.html

      [6] Bishop Nikolai Velimirovich, Collected Works, Vol. 10, 1983. p. 467 (In
      Serbian)

      [7] Delimpasis, A.D., Pascha of the Lord, Creation, Renewal, and Apostasy,
      Athens, 1985, p.661

      [8] Delimpasis, A.D., Pascha of the Lord, Creation, Renewal, and Apostasy,
      Athens, 1985, p.661

      [9] Ibid., p.662

      [10]Ibid., p.663

      [11] Encyclical on Anglican Orders, from the Oecumenical Patriarch to the
      Presidents of the Particular Eastern Orthodox Churches, 1922,
      http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgbmxd/ patriarc.htm

      [12] The Local Council of 1583 in Constantinople was summoned in response
      to the proposal of Pope Gregory XIII to the Orthodox to accept the new
      calendar. Patriarch Jeremiah of Constantinople, Patriarch Sylvester of
      Alexandria, Patriarch Sophronios of Jerusalem and other fathers took part
      in the Council. The Council clearly said: If any do not follow the customs
      of the Church, founded in the Oecumenical Councils, including holy Pascha
      (Easter) and the calendar, which they command us to follow, but wish to
      follow the newly devised Paschalia and the calendar of the atheist
      astronomers of the Pope and contradict (the customs of the Church), wanting
      to reject and sully the dogmas and customs of the Church, which we have
      inherited from our fathers, may ANATHEMA be on them and may they be
      excommunicated from the Church and communion with the faithful.

      [13] Sibev T., The Question of the Church Calendar, Synodal Publishing,
      Sofia, 1968, pp. 33-34 (In Bulgarian).

      [14] The very name 'Congress' witnesses to the fact that this meeting does
      not fit in with Orthodox Tradition

      [15] The Encyclical of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, 'To All the
      Churches of Christ', January 1920

      [16] 'The Julian Calendar', Orthodox Life, No. 5, 1995, p. 26

      [17] Hieromonk Sava (Yevtich), Ecumenism and the Time of Apostasy, Prizren,
      1995, p. 11 (In Serbian)

      [18] Priest Zhivko Panic. The Question of the Diaspora - A Historical and
      Canonical Review, Paris, Manuscript (In Russian)

      [19] Ibid.

      [20] Sava, Bishop of Shumadia, Serbian Hierarchs from the Ninth to the
      Twentieth Centuries, Belgrade 1996, pp. 135-135 (In Serbian)

      [21] Serge Troitsky, Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction over the Orthodox
      Diaspora, Sremski Karlovtsy, 1932, p. 4 (In Serbian)

      [22] Dr Dimsho Perich, The Serbian Orthodox Church and Her Diaspora,
      Istochnik, The Journal of the Serbian Orthodox Diocese in Canada, 1998, No.
      38

      [23] ‘In the twentieth century the Greek population of Turkey underwent
      terrible persecutions and genocide. In 1920 in Istanbul alone there were
      about 100,000 Greeks. After the First World War and the Greek defeat at
      Smyrna (Izmir) in 1922, the Greeks there suffered a real disaster - ‘the
      great disaster’. The Greeks of Asia Minor fled and resettled elsewhere.
      This happened after the signing of peace in Lausanne in Switzerland in
      1923. After this only an insignificant number of Greeks remained in
      Istanbul and of Turks in western Thrace. At the present time there are
      about 4,000 Greeks in Istanbul’. Archpriest Radomir Popovich, Orthodoxy at
      the Turn of the Centuries, Belgrade, 1999, p.23 (In Serbian)

      [24] The first candidate was Metropolitan Nicholas of Nubia

      [25] The Conference of all the Anglican Bishops which takes place every ten
      years in the Palace of the Archbishop of Canterbury. It looks at questions
      of faith, morality and order in the Anglican Communion
    • Fr. John R. Shaw
      ... JRS: For some reason, Fr. Basil Yakimov did not mention that this article was translated from pravoslavie.ru . I was impressed that the Moscow
      Message 2 of 11 , Jul 3, 2006
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, Basil Yakimov <byakimov@...> wrote:

        > July 1935. Zurich, Switzerland. After six difficult days in the throes of
        > death, there dies a man whose personality was one of the most scandalous in
        > the two-thousand year history of the Orthodox Church. ...

        > Priest Srboliub Miletich
        >
        > Translated by Fr Andrew
        >
        > 14/27 June 2006
        > St Methodius, Patriarch of Constantinople

        JRS: For some reason, Fr. Basil Yakimov did not mention that this article was translated
        from "pravoslavie.ru".

        I was impressed that the Moscow Patriarchate's site had carried this strongly critical
        account of the introduction of the new calendar.

        In Christ
        Fr. John R. Shaw
      • Basil Yakimov
        Father John - it was taken from Father Andrew Phillips site - there was no mention of pravoslavie.ru - so please do not make your own assumptions when they
        Message 3 of 11 , Jul 3, 2006
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Father John - it was taken from Father Andrew Phillips' site - there was no
          mention of "pravoslavie.ru"- so please
          do not make your own assumptions when they are not required....




          "Fr. John R.
          Shaw"
          <vrevjrs@execpc.c To
          om> orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com
          Sent by: cc
          orthodox-synod@ya
          hoogroups.com Subject
          [orthodox-synod] Re: Meletios
          Metaksakis, Metropolitan,
          03/07/2006 10:36 Archbishop, Pope and unfortunate
          PM Patriarch


          Please respond to
          orthodox-synod@ya
          hoogroups.com






          --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, Basil Yakimov <byakimov@...> wrote:

          > July 1935. Zurich, Switzerland. After six difficult days in the throes of
          > death, there dies a man whose personality was one of the most scandalous
          in
          > the two-thousand year history of the Orthodox Church. ...

          > Priest Srboliub Miletich
          >
          > Translated by Fr Andrew
          >
          > 14/27 June 2006
          > St Methodius, Patriarch of Constantinople

          JRS: For some reason, Fr. Basil Yakimov did not mention that this article
          was translated
          from "pravoslavie.ru".

          I was impressed that the Moscow Patriarchate's site had carried this
          strongly critical
          account of the introduction of the new calendar.

          In Christ
          Fr. John R. Shaw
        • Fr. John R. Shaw
          ... JRS: What assumptions did I make? I said that for some reason , you had not mentioned that the Russian original was (and still is) at pravoslavie.ru .
          Message 4 of 11 , Jul 3, 2006
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, Basil Yakimov <byakimov@...> wrote:

            > Father John - it was taken from Father Andrew Phillips' site - there was no
            > mention of "pravoslavie.ru"- so please
            > do not make your own assumptions when they are not required....

            JRS: What "assumptions" did I make?

            I said that "for some reason", you had not mentioned that the Russian original was (and
            still is) at "pravoslavie.ru".

            To see it, you have to scroll down fairly far, because new articles are being put up all the
            time. It has a photo of the late Meletios Metaksakis.

            I had been thinking of translating it myself, because for the most part we only hear such
            things from those who have their own axe to grind, their own positions to support. The
            Moscow Patriarchate does not need to discredit the new calendarists, which makes this
            article the more convincing.

            In Christ
            Fr. John R. Shaw
          • myhrr101
            ... there was no mention of pravoslavie.ru - so please ... Russian original was (and still is) at pravoslavie.ru . ... ? this is getting silly..because it
            Message 5 of 11 , Jul 4, 2006
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "Fr. John R. Shaw"
              <vrevjrs@...> wrote:
              >
              > --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, Basil Yakimov <byakimov@>
              wrote:
              >
              > > Father John - it was taken from Father Andrew Phillips' site -
              there was no mention of "pravoslavie.ru"- so please
              > > do not make your own assumptions when they are not required....
              >
              > JRS: What "assumptions" did I make?
              >
              > I said that "for some reason", you had not mentioned that the
              Russian original was (and still is) at "pravoslavie.ru".
              >

              ? this is getting silly..because it wasn't mentioned on the site the
              piece was taken from you jump to the conclusion that he is
              withholding information which he might or might not have because you
              know it's on another site in its original russian? So what if it's
              on the pravoslavie.ru site, did it orginate there?





              > To see it, you have to scroll down fairly far, because new
              articles are being put up all the
              > time. It has a photo of the late Meletios Metaksakis.
              >
              > I had been thinking of translating it myself, because for the most
              part we only hear such things from those who have their own axe to
              grind, their own positions to support. The Moscow Patriarchate does
              not need to discredit the new calendarists, which makes this article
              the more convincing.
              >
              > In Christ
              > Fr. John R. Shaw
              >


              This article's inclusion on the MP site has not a lot to do with
              needing or not needing to discredit the new calendarists, but
              everything to do with discrediting the Ecumenical Patriarch. More
              ammunition to the MP's arsenal in the fight for its claim to be the
              Third Rome, arguing the irrelevancy of the EP in today's global
              Orthodox consciousness which honour it got because of its importance
              as the new capital of the Empire, after all, isn't the MP Church now
              the largest and therefore the most important?

              Anything on Metaxakis can be as useful to the MP as it is to the old
              calendarists, if not more so as the stakes are higher for the MP,
              and there's certainly no shortage of material!

              http://www.holy-trinity.org/ecclesiology/afonsky-constantinople.html

              Other OCA pages carry information about Metaxakis as it's in their
              interest to show re the US that he began by attempting to create a
              Greek Church controlled autonomous entity out of the Greek Orthodox
              in dispersion while he was associated with this Church and then
              tried grabbing it all for the EP when he became patriarch in
              Constantinople by claiming that those in diaspora always belonged to
              the EP.

              That's when the Greek churches in Britain came under the EP.

              Myrrh
            • Julio Vázquez
              Dear List, This article was originally written by Priest (now Protopriest) Srboljub Miletic in Serbian, and as noted in pravoslavie.ru, it was translated into
              Message 6 of 11 , Jul 5, 2006
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear List,

                This article was originally written by Priest (now Protopriest)
                Srboljub Miletic in Serbian, and as noted in pravoslavie.ru, it was
                translated into Russian by Hierodeacon Ignatij (Shestakov). The
                original Serbian text, which has been available online for a few years
                now, may be accessed at the following address:

                <http://www.svetosavlje.org/biblioteka/Istorija/meletios.htm>

                I hope this is helpful.

                Julio Vazquez
                San Juan, Puerto Rico
              • Fr. John R. Shaw
                ... JRS: I did not make any accusations. But I had thought of translating that article myself, because it was unusual for such an indictment of Meletios
                Message 7 of 11 , Jul 6, 2006
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "myhrr101" <myhrr101@...> wrote:

                  > ? this is getting silly..because it wasn't mentioned on the site the
                  > piece was taken from you jump to the conclusion that he is
                  > withholding information which he might or might not have because you
                  > know it's on another site in its original russian? So what if it's
                  > on the pravoslavie.ru site, did it orginate there?

                  JRS: I did not make any accusations.

                  But I had thought of translating that article myself, because it was unusual for such an
                  indictment of Meletios Metaxakis' introduction of the new calendar to appear on a Moscow
                  Patriarchate site.

                  If you remove the article from its Patriarchal site, it loses part of its effect. It would not
                  have been unusual at all to find it in "Orthodox Life" or in something published by the
                  Greek OC's.

                  > This article's inclusion on the MP site has not a lot to do with
                  > needing or not needing to discredit the new calendarists, but
                  > everything to do with discrediting the Ecumenical Patriarch.

                  JRS: Discrediting a deposed Meletios Metaxakis does not per se discredit Pat. Bartholomew
                  today. I am afraid Patriarch Bartholomew has done more of that himself, than any article
                  about long ago events could achieve.

                  Incidentally, "Myrrh" is only a nom de plume. I have no idea who you are. You could even
                  be Patriarch Bartholomew...

                  In Christ
                  Fr. John R. Shaw
                • michael nikitin
                  Fr.John thinks it unusual for the MP to indict Meletios Metaxakis introduction of the new calendar, because the MP has new calendar parishes. Michael N ...
                  Message 8 of 11 , Jul 6, 2006
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Fr.John thinks it unusual for the MP to indict Meletios Metaxakis' introduction of the new calendar, because the MP has new calendar parishes.

                    Michael N


                    "Fr. John R. Shaw" <vrevjrs@...> wrote: --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "myhrr101" <myhrr101@...> wrote:

                    > ? this is getting silly..because it wasn't mentioned on the site the
                    > piece was taken from you jump to the conclusion that he is
                    > withholding information which he might or might not have because you
                    > know it's on another site in its original russian? So what if it's
                    > on the pravoslavie.ru site, did it orginate there?

                    JRS: I did not make any accusations.

                    But I had thought of translating that article myself, because it was unusual for such an
                    indictment of Meletios Metaxakis' introduction of the new calendar to appear on a Moscow
                    Patriarchate site.

                    If you remove the article from its Patriarchal site, it loses part of its effect. It would not
                    have been unusual at all to find it in "Orthodox Life" or in something published by the
                    Greek OC's.

                    > This article's inclusion on the MP site has not a lot to do with
                    > needing or not needing to discredit the new calendarists, but
                    > everything to do with discrediting the Ecumenical Patriarch.

                    JRS: Discrediting a deposed Meletios Metaxakis does not per se discredit Pat. Bartholomew
                    today. I am afraid Patriarch Bartholomew has done more of that himself, than any article
                    about long ago events could achieve.

                    Incidentally, "Myrrh" is only a nom de plume. I have no idea who you are. You could even
                    be Patriarch Bartholomew...

                    In Christ
                    Fr. John R. Shaw






                    ---------------------------------
                    Want to be your own boss? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • myhrr101
                    ... part we only hear such ... positions to support. The ... calendarists, which makes this ... It s a source of constant wonder to me that priests of ROCOR
                    Message 9 of 11 , Jul 6, 2006
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "Fr. John R. Shaw"
                      <vrevjrs@...> wrote:
                      >

                      > I had been thinking of translating it myself, because for the most
                      part we only hear such
                      > things from those who have their own axe to grind, their own
                      positions to support. The
                      > Moscow Patriarchate does not need to discredit the new
                      calendarists, which makes this
                      > article the more convincing.
                      >
                      > In Christ
                      > Fr. John R. Shaw
                      >


                      It's a source of constant wonder to me that priests of ROCOR have
                      done so little research on The Moscow Patriarchate, which name by
                      the way is synonymous with the Russian Orthodox Church according to
                      its own Statutes.

                      The Moscow Patriarchate created by Stalin has every interest in
                      publishing the metaxian history as it bolsters its own claim to
                      Third Rome status on the world stage. Of course it can't push the
                      uncanonical nature of Metaxakis' rise to power too far, but once it
                      owns all Russian Orthodox worth bothering with it will be better
                      able to convince the world to ignore its own beginnings. After all,
                      everyone now accepts the MP as the Mother Church, don't they?

                      Well, when you all commemorate your Great Lord Alexei II or his
                      successor there will still be some wondering how so many left
                      Christ's ecclesiology for the system He ruled against.


                      Myrrh

                      http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/3/15.aspx

                      I.2. The Self-governing Churches, Exarchates, Dioceses, Synodal
                      departments, Deaneries, Parishes, Monasteries, Brotherhoods,
                      Sisterhoods, Theological educational institutions, Missions,
                      Representations and Church representations (hereinafter
                      called `canonical units'), which constitute the Russian Orthodox
                      Church, canonically comprise the Moscow Patriarchate.

                      `The Moscow Patriarchate' is another official name of the Russian
                      Orthodox Church.


                      IV.3. The name of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia shall be
                      mentioned during the divine services in all churches of the Russian
                      Orthodox Church with the following wording: `For our Great Lord and
                      Father (name), His Holiness the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia'.
                      `The Moscow Patriarchate' is another official name of the Russian
                      Orthodox Church.
                    • myhrr101
                      ... you are. You could even ... I can assure you I am no one of any position at all, just yer bog standard member of Christ s Jurisdiction wandering through
                      Message 10 of 11 , Jul 6, 2006
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "Fr. John R. Shaw"
                        <vrevjrs@...> wrote:
                        >




                        >
                        > Incidentally, "Myrrh" is only a nom de plume. I have no idea who
                        you are. You could even
                        > be Patriarch Bartholomew...
                        >
                        > In Christ
                        > Fr. John R. Shaw
                        >


                        I can assure you I am no one of any position at all, just yer bog
                        standard member of Christ's Jurisdiction wandering through the
                        Orthodox communities in cyberspace, in these interesting times...

                        Myrrh
                      • Fr. John R. Shaw
                        ... JRS: A source of constant wonder to me: that anonymous posters on the internet, who refuse to identify themselves but criticize others, expect to be taken
                        Message 11 of 11 , Jul 6, 2006
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "myhrr101" <myhrr101@...> wrote:

                          > It's a source of constant wonder to me that priests of ROCOR have
                          > done so little research on The Moscow Patriarchate...

                          JRS: A source of constant wonder to me: that anonymous posters on the internet, who
                          refuse to identify themselves but criticize others, expect to be taken seriously.

                          In Christ
                          Fr. John R. Shaw
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.