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

2nd Letter of the Holy Kinot of Mt Athos 4/17/2007

Expand Messages
  • Reader Timothy Tadros
    Second open letter to the holy Superiors and the holy representatives of the twenty Monasteries of the Holy Community of the Holy Mount Athos. Locally.
    Message 1 of 4 , May 1 6:47 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Second open letter to the holy Superiors and the holy
      representatives of the twenty Monasteries of the Holy Community of
      the Holy Mount Athos. Locally.

      Communication: Ecumenical Patriarchate

      Holy Superiors and Holy Fathers, Bless

      We feel the urge to respond for a second time with this letter of
      ours and to express our deepest sorrow for the two recent
      Declarations of the Administration of the Holy Community, which were
      addressed, on the one hand, to the ecclesiastical and on the other
      hand to the daily press and the Mass Media. In advance we consider
      that both these Declarations were made in order to calm down us and
      to deceive us, those who are worried and reacting negatively towards
      the happenings in our days, the unorthodox and heretical actions of
      the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew.
      First of all, the Declaration of the Holy Community Administration is
      suspicious and tasteless. Suspicious because, while it should be
      addressed to the two chief instigators of the great heresy of
      Ecumenism, that is, Patriarch Bartholomew and Archbishop
      Christodoulos, it was addressed to the Mass Media, as if the Mass
      Media committed the improprieties we are talking about. Furthermore,
      here it is clearly detected the cowardice of the Holy Community
      Administration in censuring the perpetrators of the crime, those who,
      as evil representatives of the Church are betraying the Faith; but
      instead it turned to the Mass Media, declaring theoretically and
      without any cost to them their orthodoxy, something that can be
      disputed from an orthodox point of view, for the reasons we are going
      to mention further down. It may also be noted that we, who also sent
      the first letter, did not receive any answer.
      This declaration is also tasteless because the Holy Community
      Administration made similar declarations and confessions in the past,
      such as the one of April 9/22, 1980, which you mention in your
      declaration to the ecclesiastical press, however without any concrete
      result. Thus we do not understand what other purpose the declarations
      we talk about may be serving, except to calm us down and to create
      impressions.
      Therefore, we wish to tell you, as in a confession, what did not let
      us rest from the two declarations, and which actions of the Holy
      Community Administration, according to our opinion, would be
      appropriate at the present situation.

      1. In order to praise the Ecumenical Patriarch, and because you did
      not find any achievements of his in favor of the Faith, or a public
      declaration in favor of the Faith which would have any concrete
      results, or at least some actions which would indicate that he walked
      in the path of the Holy Fathers, you mention his efforts to protect
      the interests of the Patriarchate, his support to the Orthodox
      Churches and the proclamation of the message of the Orthodox Church
      to the World. All these, forgive us for saying that, are pious
      babbling. As far as the proclamation of the message of the Orthodox
      Church to the World, what you mention, we think, is a deception and a
      lie. Except, of course, if you consider as a proclamation of the
      Orthodox message, the common prayers and the common declarations with
      the heretics, the recognition of the sacraments of the heretics, or
      even the environmental interest and concerns.
      2. You mention, furthermore, that you live the mystery of the Church
      and that you guard, as good as you would the bud of your eyes, your
      dogmatic conscience. Here you mention the efforts of Holy Fathers and
      especially St. Gregory Palamas and the Martyrs of the Holy Mountain,
      who died at the hands of the Latin-lover Patriarch John Vekkos. At
      this point it is strange, holy fathers, how you can say that you live
      the mystery of the Church, while you commemorate the name of a
      heretic Patriarch, and how can you mention the holy Fathers who died
      as martyrs at the time of Vekkos, who died exactly for this reason,
      because they did not commemorate the name and did not accept as
      Patriarch the follower of the Papacy Patriarch John Vekkos.
      The Great St. Gregory Palamas, an Athonite Monk himself, considers
      that does not belong to the Church of Christ, he who does not have
      the truth and does not confess it with his words and his actions,
      even if he is a monk, a superior, Bishop or Patriarch. "Those who are
      members of the Church of Christ they also have the truth and those
      who do not have the truth, they are neither members of the Church of
      Christ, especially and even if they themselves are lying, calling
      themselves pastors and chief pastors and by calling and being called
      the same by each other, because we have learned that we must not
      characterize something Christian because of the respect for
      individuals but because of the truth and the correctness of the
      faith. ( E.Ð.Å. 3, Page 608).
      How then is it possible to belong to the true Orthodox Church the
      Patriarch who performed this theater recently, during the feast of
      St. Andrew, in Constantinople, who considers that our forefathers
      were misguided, those who created the schism with the Roman
      Catholics? Because the Patriarch declared that : "….those who
      bequeathed to us the schism, our forefathers, were unfortunate
      victims of the evil serpent and are already in the hands of the
      equitable judge, our God. We ask for them the mercy of God, but we
      are compelled in front of Him, to correct their mistakes" (
      Periodical Episkepsis(of the Ecumenical Patriarchate), No. 563,
      30/11/98, page 6. ).
      How can he be an Orthodox, who participates in the World Council of
      Churches and who, simply, is an ardent supporter and pioneer in the
      heresies of Ecumenism? Here we must note that your expression "we
      guard as the bud of our eyes our dogmatic conscience" is not correct,
      because the dogmatic conscience of each individual or the collective
      conscience of a group of people may deviate from the truth, even if,
      as you say, they study the writings of the Orthodox Fathers,
      something that happens oftentimes. You should say that we "guard like
      the bud of our eyes the dogmatic conscience of the Orthodox Church"
      which, of course, is expressed by the Holy Scriptures, the Holy
      Synods and the Holy Fathers.
      3. You say that "we are afraid to keep silent, whenever problems
      appear concerning the inheritance of the Holy Fathers". Here we must
      again express our objection. At least during the last few years,
      whenever the Administration of the Holy Community, whether it talks
      or keeps silent, it the same thing, because, whenever it speaks, it
      speaks from a safe distance, without nerve and in an impersonal
      manner, with servile submission to persons rather than with respect
      to the institutions. It mainly and primarily speaks taking extreme
      care not to offend the conscience of the religious and political
      authorities and the powerful of the earth, so that hey will not
      suffer the consequences of their talks. In a way it shoots with blank
      bullets like the ones we hear during the New Year's celebrations,
      which create impressions but no one is afraid of them. There is no
      sense mentioning here that the Holy Fathers did not speak nor did
      they protect the truths of the Faith in a similar manner.
      4. You also mention that: "the welcoming of the Pope took place in a
      way as if he was the canonical Bishop of Rome". We think that
      Patriarch Bartholomew, at this point, is more sincere than the
      Administration of the Holy Community because, he acted in a manner
      depicting how he sees the Pope, during the most formal Divine Liturgy
      and in front of the eyes of the whole world. He addresses the Pope as
      Beloved brother in Christ, accepts his sacraments, considers as
      unfortunate victims of the Devil, those who protected us from the
      heresy of the papacy, elevated him on a high pedestal during the
      Divine Liturgy of the feast of the throne etc. What else, holy
      fathers, should he do, in order to accept him as the canonical Bishop
      of Rome?
      However, the problem here is of a different kind and here can be seen
      the lack of sincerity from the part of the Administration of the Holy
      Community. In essence, all those who commemorate the name of the
      Patriarch, express the same faith with him, according to the
      teachings of the Holy Fathers and the Tradition of the Church. We do
      remind you here of the words of the Martyrs of the Holy Mountain,
      whom you say that you deeply respect and honor, to the latin-lover
      emperor Michael the 8th : "The Orthodox Church is from above; the
      commemoration of the name of the High Priest in the altar indicates
      complete agreement with him. Because it is mentioned in the comments
      about the Divine Liturgy that the priest commemorates the name of the
      high priest, indicating thus his obedience to the higher authority,
      that he is in complete communion with him and that he considers
      himself his successor in the Faith and in the holy Sacraments".
      From the above confession of the Martyrs of the Holy Mountain and
      from the liturgical tradition of the Church it is perceived that the
      Administration of the Holy Community, as far as its faith is
      concerned, is in full agreement with the Patriarch, as far as it
      concerns the Pope, the World Council of Churches, the Ecumenical
      Movement etc. Accordingly, protesting in this lukewarm manner in the
      Mass Media, fathers, you are trying to put off the fire of the heresy
      with the watering pot of the garden.
      5. Further down in your Declaration you mention that the hymns sang
      to the Pope, were not composed by a monk of the holy mountain. You,
      definitely, claim this in order to declare false the information
      given by the Mass Media. Here we must note the following: We all
      watched in the TV that during the broadcasting of the happenings
      there was a representative of the Patriarchate, the Great
      Protopresbyter Dr. George Tsetsis, who did explain and made comments
      on the happenings. If then, there was a misinformation by the Mass
      Media, the above mentioned priest should put it straight and he
      should be the first to declare the information false, especially
      because he is considered as someone who is very well informed about
      everything that is happening in the Patriarchate.
      Furthermore, how can the Administration of the Holy Community be so
      sure that the hymns were not composed by a monk of the holy mountain
      since, according to what it writes, it only presumes that. "We take
      this opportunity to officially inform the pious Christians that their
      composer( of the hymns), is not and could not be a monk of the holy
      mountain". Here it can be seen the cowardice of the Administration of
      the Holy Community to criticize its superiors, in order that the
      truth may come out, that is, that the name of the real composer may
      be made public and then there will be no need to disclaim the rumors.
      But, fathers, it is really strange the fact that you were offended by
      the rumors that the composer is a monk of the holy mountain,
      considering it an affront for the Holy Mountain, that the composer
      could be a monk of the holy mountain, and you were not offended by
      the contents of the hymns and that they honored the Pope as a saint?
      Because, it is known that, hymns are sang only to saints and not to
      living people, even if they are considered as pure Orthodox and
      saints.
      How then do you explain the "blessed is he who comes in the name of
      the Lord" addressed by the Patriarch to the Pope, something that is
      used only for Christ, and how do you justify the hymns sang to the
      Pope: "The city of Constantine and the lantern of the First called
      celebrate gloriously the reception of the Leader of the respected
      Church of the Romans, the See of the Leading Disciple, and so, with
      brotherly feelings of the soul, let us pray with joy : Stay,
      Comforter, with us, leading us to Thy truth, so that we, with one
      voice and one heart, may glorify Thee", and "The honorable boat of
      Orthodoxy is brightened receiving from the West respected Shepherd
      and Leader, and with great love rejoices openly, praying to Jesus
      with piety: Protect the world with Thy power, keeping it in concord,
      for Thou art the Supreme Good one".
      Do we have to do here with simple speech irregularities or do they
      indicate the extent of the erosion of the Patriarchate and the
      leveling of everything in Orthodoxy as if with a bulldozer? We, the
      cosignatories of this letter, personally believe that the second is
      true. And this opinion of ours is strengthened by the fact that all
      these things were addressed at a very solemn and holy moment, in
      front of the eyes of the whole world, to the greatest enemy of
      Orthodoxy through the ages. To him who for ten centuries is fighting
      Orthodoxy. To him who, through the Uniat, converted to Catholicism
      countless numbers of Orthodox people. To him who aspired to become
      God on earth.
      The Administration of the Holy Community is content with a simple
      denial concerning the composer of the hymns, without to realize, when
      you say that you live the sacrament of the Church, that we, all the
      Orthodox, sang with one heart these hymns to the Pope, and through
      the Patriarch we sang the hymn "blessed is he who comes in the name
      of the Lord", and we embraced him during the Liturgy, the embrace of
      peace, him whom St. Kosmas, the Aitolos, said that we must curse as
      antichrist and the cause of all our evils, and we sang to him and
      wished him "Many Years" , so that he may live for many years in order
      to achieve his plans for world domination and finally we asked him to
      bless the crowds in our Church, so that he may confirm his authority
      over them and our complete obedience to him, who comes "in his own
      name". Let us note here, that the above hymns were published in the
      press before they were sang during the feast of the throne, ( See TO
      VEMA, Sunday, Nov. 26, 2006), something which indicates, on the one
      hand, the eagerness and the zeal of the Patriarchate to walk the path
      of the apostasy, and on the other hand, that all shame and modesty
      have disappeared completely so that even the most illegal and
      antichristian we advertise with the greatest ease.
      Finally, something else, to put an end to the hymnological
      achievements and the verbal amiabilities. The Administration of the
      Holy Community definitely is aware that during the visit of the
      Patriarch to the Monastery of Karakalou, just a few days before the
      theatre played in Constantinople during its throne feast, ( Nov. 30,
      St. Andrews day), the fathers of the Monastery sang to their big
      visitor hymns of glorification especially written for him, obviously
      by a monk of the Holy Mountain. We would like to know how your
      dogmatic conscience which, as you say, you guard as the bud of your
      eyes, approves of this fact.
      6. It is true that, in the points you make, speaking about the papal
      errors and deviations, you are speaking with the mouth of truth.
      These and many more, unfortunately, could be mentioned by every
      faithful concerning the fall and the degeneration of the Papacy. What
      cannot be understood is this: How it can be justified the
      cohabitation of the Orthodox with the Papists at the ecclesiastical
      and liturgical level, and the walking together with the decadent and
      apostates of the body of Christ? The words of St. John Chrisistomos
      are characteristic concerning this matter: "He who befriends the
      enemies of the king, cannot be friend of the king, and even more he
      is not worthy of being allowed to live but should be driven away
      along with the enemies.
      At this point we must draw the attention, with great sorrow, to the
      words of the Administration of the Holy Community which, we think,
      reveal the whole purpose of the composed declaration : "Furthermore,
      (they mean what the Patriarch and the Archbishop did), (there is a
      fear), that these may drive some of the faithful members of the
      Orthodox Church, who are troubled by what is done at the wrong time
      and contrary to the holy canons, to cut themselves away from the body
      of the Church and (encourage), the creation of new schisms".
      Why, really, fathers, you consider the distancing of oneself from the
      heretically thinking Bishop or Metropolitan or Patriarch, as breaking
      off from the body of the Church, and creation of new schism? Because,
      if you thus consider the distancing of oneself, then we must tell you
      that, your dogmatic conscience suffers from the papal sickness. In
      that case, if you so believe, you must renounce numerous saints and
      confessors who distanced themselves from heretical Bishops and
      Patriarchs, and especially to renounce the martyrs of the holy
      mountain who cut themselves off the Latin-lover Patriarch John
      Vekkos. Those, that is, whom you confess in your Declaration that you
      honor and respect. And, of course, to renounce, all those who stopped
      the commemoration of the name of Patriarch Athenagoras, because of
      the known lifting of the anathemas. You must also erase from the book
      of "Pedalion" the two Holy Canons, the 31st of the Apostles and the
      15th of the First-second Synod at the time of St. Photios.
      So, according to the theology of the new-age which, of course, is not
      different from the papal one, in order that we may not be cut off
      from the Church and create schisms, we must obey the heretics and
      John Vekkos, Athenagoras, Bartholomew, Christodoulos, and… and..
      and..
      If, fathers, this was a teaching of the Church then the Church would
      have been anthropocentric and its criteria wouldn't have been the
      truth but the opinion of the Bishop, something which happens in the
      Papacy. Then the efforts even till death of the Fathers for the Faith
      wouldn't be necessary, because it would have been expressed by the
      mouth of the First, to whom everybody should submit themselves.
      Finally, if there existed such a theology, then from long ago there
      would be no Orthodoxy, because it would have been driven away be the
      errors of the Bishops and the indifference of the Orthodox.
      It is obvious that, with what you say in your declaration, you
      justify completely the position of the Administration of the Holy
      Community towards the persecuted fathers of the Holy Monastery of
      Esfigmenou. How does really your dogmatic conscience allow you to
      side with the persecutors, when you know that these fathers, for
      maters of faith they cut their ecclesiastical allegiance and stopped
      the commemoration of the heretically thinking Patriarch?
      Of course it is a fact that since the Holy Mountain was included in
      the European programs and you absorb the economic packages of Europe
      and you have European orientations, it is impossible to utter one
      word of Orthodox protest and objection, but you will always be pulled
      by and be subjugated to your sponsors. It is sad that, in order to
      repair and reconstruct our monasteries, we left our protector All Holy
      (Virgin Mary), and run after the sinful and easy money of Europe,
      destroying the limits that our Holy Fathers have set. However, we all
      know that no body gives anything without an expectation to receive
      something back in return. And already the Holy Mountain is paying the
      lack of faith to God and its submission to the European plans.
      7. At the end of your declaration, amongst other things, you declare
      the following: "the dialogue with the non-Orthodox, if it is meant to
      inform them about the Orthodox Faith, so that when they will become
      worthy to receive the divine inspiration and their eyes will be
      opened so that they may return to the Orthodox Faith, then this
      dialogue is not to be condemned.
      It is also sad, fathers, that, while the dialogue with the heretics
      is going on for about 40 years now, you did not understand its
      purpose. And if you did not understand it, what can we expect by the
      simple civilian Christians? Did you not realize that all these years
      the Papists did not move from their errors not even one foot, while
      on the other hand we, everyday are giving in, and are suffocating by
      the powerful embrace of the papal beast? Did you not understand that
      the only thing that the dialogues with the heretics have achieved is
      to divide the Orthodox, as happened in the past in Florence and
      Ferrara, into those in favor of the union, (with the heretics), and
      those against it, or even better, into orthodox and latin-lovers?
      You also mention in the end that… "it is possible that they may give
      the impression that our Orthodox Church accepts the Roman Catholics
      as a complete Church and the Pope as the legitimate Bishop of Rome".
      But what do you really mean by the term "complete church"? Maybe ,
      that is , we accept the Papists as a Church but not complete? We know
      that Rome was a Church before the schism but after the schism it
      deviated from the faith and is no more a Church. Your
      expressions "complete Church" and "legitimate Bishop of Rome", we
      think, introduce here new demons.
      8. Closing up, you mention that: "The Holy Mountain, with the grace
      of God, remains faithful to the Faith of the Holy Apostles and the
      Holy Fathers". We believe that, after all that was said, in order
      that the Holy Mountain may remain faithful to the Holy Apostles and
      the Holy Fathers, it must distance itself from the heretically
      thinking and acting present Patriarch. The way that the Fathers
      proposed, in this case is to stop the commemoration (of the name of
      the Patriarch). If on the contrary you remain united through the
      commemoration of the present Patriarch, then it is a joke to claim
      that you are struggling for the Faith of the Holy Apostles and the
      Holy Fathers.
      Further more we would like to mention the proper measures the
      Administration of the Holy Community should have taken, in order that
      its stand should be similar with that of the confessors and in
      agreement with the Tradition of the fathers.
      a). Severe criticism should have been enacted from the part of the
      Administration of the Holy Community against the faltering Patriarch,
      concerning the faith, at a time when we all are, through the
      ecclesiastical unity, co responsible for his acts. Because, according
      to the preaching of the Saints, whom you respect and whom you mention
      in your letter, the Martyrs of the Holy Mountain, who died at the
      time of Vekkos, "this is why we face bigger mistakes because we did
      not pay attention to the smaller ones, and as in the bodily health,
      those who did not pay attention to minor wounds, suffered fevers, and
      infections and even death, likewise with the souls; those who bypass
      the small, suffer the greater; because if those who attempted to
      bypass even the minor commandments were criticized properly, there
      would be no room for the birth of the present plague and there
      wouldn't befall the Church this severe winter; because he who
      overturns even the smallest part of the healthy faith, he infests all
      of it".
      The problem started with the heretical Encyclical of the Ecumenical
      Patriarchate of the year 1920; it was continued with the change of
      the calendar and further deteriorated with the participation in the
      Babel of the World Council of Churches; it became a cancerous tumor
      with the lifting of the anathemas; it developed into a theatre of
      images with the theological dialogues; it ended up as a gangrene
      through the recognition of the sacraments of the Monophysites at
      Sampezy in 1990, the Papal at Balamant 1993, and recently of the
      Lutherans in Constantinople, and ended up in grandiose liturgical
      gatherings of heretical leaders, so that the subjugation of Orthodoxy
      to the rules of the New Age may be proven everywhere. This is how the
      spiritual death becomes a reality, that is, through the breaking off
      from the everlasting body of the Church, of those who participate,
      actively or passively, in the methodically organized antichrist
      apostasy.
      b). Further more, the Administration of the Holy Community, should
      the Ecumenical Patriarchate continue it spiritual descent, should
      since long ago, distance itself ecclesiastically through the stoppage
      of the commemoration, so that it may be in a safe and continuous
      communion with the eternal Church, as did the Fathers of the Holy
      Mountain at the time of Vekkos and recently at the time of
      Athenagoras, who stopped the commemoration, due to the lifting of the
      anathemas.
      c). The Holy Mountain should have not fallen pray to the trap of the
      European financial support, so that, on the one hand the monks may
      live in poverty and simplicity and on the other hand, to speak freely
      criticizing openly everything that is wrong within or outside the
      Church. The financial dependence of the Holy Mountain is the last
      straw in the dogmatic faltering.
      d). The Holy Mountain should present a united front against the
      heresy so that it will not become a laughing stock and a scandal in
      the eyes of the world, through its divisions and the tearing apart
      between the monks.
      e). We, the cosignatories, thought that the Administration of the
      Holy Community was given a chance to wake up and reenergize itself,
      through the offensive theatrical play that took place during the last
      celebration of the feast of the throne in Fanar. But we were proven
      wrong once again when we read the, without nerve and essence,
      declarations, which obviously were meant to calm down the Monks of
      the Holy Mountain who were worried about its direction. We made it
      clear to you, even with our first letter to you that, if you will
      fail to follow the path of the Holy Apostles and the Ecumenical
      Synods, we are going to do what is pleasing to God and not to the
      ears. We warn you that if you will not give the proper Orthodox
      response to the going astray and destroying the Holy Canons
      Patriarch, we will think if we must maintain our ecclesiastical
      communion with the Holy Community and the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
      In the hope that the present letter will help you to reconsider your
      ecclesiastical and dogmatic stand against the ecumenists and
      ultimately your compliance with the line of the Holy Fathers, we
      remain in anticipation.
      Because the collection of signatures from all over the Holy Mountain
      is not possible, the first indicative signatures follow. We believe
      that those who confess Orthodoxy are cosigning the present.
      The cosignatories :
      Elder Hillarion, Monk, Xerokalyvo Platani, Holy Monastery of
      Dochiariou; Gabriel Monk, H.M. Koutloumousiou, cell of St.
      Christodoulos; Elder Meletios, cell of the Birth of the Theotokos;
      Elder Nikodemos, Monk, cell of St. Nectarios, Kapsala, H.M.
      Stavronikita; Monk Dositheos, cell Livadi of H.M. Koutloumousiou;
      Elder Savvas, H.Cell of the Archangels of Savvaion, H. M. Hilandario;
      Elder Isaac, H.Cell of the Birth of the Theotokos, H. M.
      Stavronikita; Elder Vlasios, Monk, Xerokalyvo Viglas, H. M. Great
      Lavra; Elder Isaiah, Monk, H. Cell of the Birth of the Theotokos, H.
      M. G.Lavra; Elder George, Monk, H.Cell of the Theotokos; Elder
      Kosmas, Monk, H. Cell of St. Demetrious, H. Skete of St. Anna, H. M.
      G. Lavra; Monk Markellos, H. Cell of St. Demetrious, H. Skete of St.
      Anna, H. M. G. Lavra; Monk Athanasios, H. Cell of St. Demetrious, H.
      Skete of St. Anna, H. M. G. Lavra; Elder Spyridon, Monk, H. Cell of
      St. Nicholas, H. M. Koutloumousiou; Elder Onoufrios, Monk, H. Cell of
      the Dormition, Karyes; Monk Parthenios, H. Cell of St. Anthony, H.
      Skete of St. Anna, H. M. G. Lavra; Elder Nicholas, Monk, H. Cell of
      St. Nicholas, Karyes; Elder Antonios, Monk, H. Cell of the Dormition,
      H. M. of Pantokratoros; Elder Pavlos, Monk, H. Cell of the Holy
      Apostles, Skete of H. M. of Xenofontos; Christophoros, Monk, H. Cell
      of the Holy Apostles, Skete of H. M. Xenofontos; Archimandrite Cyril,
      Superior, H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion; Monk Efstratios,
      H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Arsenios,
      Monk, , H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica;
      Nektarios, Monk, , H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion,
      Thessalonica; Ignatios, Monk, , H. Cell of Pantokratoros,
      Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Rafael, Monk, , H. Cell of
      Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Michael, Monk, , H. Cell
      of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Mardarios, Monk, , H.
      Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Antonios, Monk, ,
      H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Tychon, Monk,
      H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Pachomios,
      Monk, H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Lukas,
      Monk, H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica;
      Archimandrite Efthemios, Ampelakia, Larissa; Archimandrite Emmanuel
      Kalyvas, Preacher of the Archdiocese of Athens; Nicholas
      Soteripoulos, Theologian; John Kornarakis, Professor of the
      University of Athens
    • frvictor@comcast.net
      Should the subject read 2nd Letter to the Holy Kinot of Mt. Athos and not of? Priest Victor Boldewskul ... From: Reader Timothy Tadros
      Message 2 of 4 , May 1 7:24 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Should the subject read "2nd Letter "to" the Holy Kinot of Mt. Athos" and not "of?"
        Priest Victor Boldewskul

        -------------- Original message --------------
        From: "Reader Timothy Tadros" <pravoslavney@...>

        Second open letter to the holy Superiors and the holy
        representatives of the twenty Monasteries of the Holy Community of
        the Holy Mount Athos. Locally.

        Communication: Ecumenical Patriarchate

        Holy Superiors and Holy Fathers, Bless

        We feel the urge to respond for a second time with this letter of
        ours and to express our deepest sorrow for the two recent
        Declarations of the Administration of the Holy Community, which were
        addressed, on the one hand, to the ecclesiastical and on the other
        hand to the daily press and the Mass Media. In advance we consider
        that both these Declarations were made in order to calm down us and
        to deceive us, those who are worried and reacting negatively towards
        the happenings in our days, the unorthodox and heretical actions of
        the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew.
        First of all, the Declaration of the Holy Community Administration is
        suspicious and tasteless. Suspicious because, while it should be
        addressed to the two chief instigators of the great heresy of
        Ecumenism, that is, Patriarch Bartholomew and Archbishop
        Christodoulos, it was addressed to the Mass Media, as if the Mass
        Media committed the improprieties we are talking about. Furthermore,
        here it is clearly detected the cowardice of the Holy Community
        Administration in censuring the perpetrators of the crime, those who,
        as evil representatives of the Church are betraying the Faith; but
        instead it turned to the Mass Media, declaring theoretically and
        without any cost to them their orthodoxy, something that can be
        disputed from an orthodox point of view, for the reasons we are going
        to mention further down. It may also be noted that we, who also sent
        the first letter, did not receive any answer.
        This declaration is also tasteless because the Holy Community
        Administration made similar declarations and confessions in the past,
        such as the one of April 9/22, 1980, which you mention in your
        declaration to the ecclesiastical press, however without any concrete
        result. Thus we do not understand what other purpose the declarations
        we talk about may be serving, except to calm us down and to create
        impressions.
        Therefore, we wish to tell you, as in a confession, what did not let
        us rest from the two declarations, and which actions of the Holy
        Community Administration, according to our opinion, would be
        appropriate at the present situation.

        1. In order to praise the Ecumenical Patriarch, and because you did
        not find any achievements of his in favor of the Faith, or a public
        declaration in favor of the Faith which would have any concrete
        results, or at least some actions which would indicate that he walked
        in the path of the Holy Fathers, you mention his efforts to protect
        the interests of the Patriarchate, his support to the Orthodox
        Churches and the proclamation of the message of the Orthodox Church
        to the World. All these, forgive us for saying that, are pious
        babbling. As far as the proclamation of the message of the Orthodox
        Church to the World, what you mention, we think, is a deception and a
        lie. Except, of course, if you consider as a proclamation of the
        Orthodox message, the common prayers and the common declarations with
        the heretics, the recognition of the sacraments of the heretics, or
        even the environmental interest and concerns.
        2. You mention, furthermore, that you live the mystery of the Church
        and that you guard, as good as you would the bud of your eyes, your
        dogmatic conscience. Here you mention the efforts of Holy Fathers and
        especially St. Gregory Palamas and the Martyrs of the Holy Mountain,
        who died at the hands of the Latin-lover Patriarch John Vekkos. At
        this point it is strange, holy fathers, how you can say that you live
        the mystery of the Church, while you commemorate the name of a
        heretic Patriarch, and how can you mention the holy Fathers who died
        as martyrs at the time of Vekkos, who died exactly for this reason,
        because they did not commemorate the name and did not accept as
        Patriarch the follower of the Papacy Patriarch John Vekkos.
        The Great St. Gregory Palamas, an Athonite Monk himself, considers
        that does not belong to the Church of Christ, he who does not have
        the truth and does not confess it with his words and his actions,
        even if he is a monk, a superior, Bishop or Patriarch. "Those who are
        members of the Church of Christ they also have the truth and those
        who do not have the truth, they are neither members of the Church of
        Christ, especially and even if they themselves are lying, calling
        themselves pastors and chief pastors and by calling and being called
        the same by each other, because we have learned that we must not
        characterize something Christian because of the respect for
        individuals but because of the truth and the correctness of the
        faith. ( E.�.�. 3, Page 608).
        How then is it possible to belong to the true Orthodox Church the
        Patriarch who performed this theater recently, during the feast of
        St. Andrew, in Constantinople, who considers that our forefathers
        were misguided, those who created the schism with the Roman
        Catholics? Because the Patriarch declared that : "�.those who
        bequeathed to us the schism, our forefathers, were unfortunate
        victims of the evil serpent and are already in the hands of the
        equitable judge, our God. We ask for them the mercy of God, but we
        are compelled in front of Him, to correct their mistakes" (
        Periodical Episkepsis(of the Ecumenical Patriarchate), No. 563,
        30/11/98, page 6. ).
        How can he be an Orthodox, who participates in the World Council of
        Churches and who, simply, is an ardent supporter and pioneer in the
        heresies of Ecumenism? Here we must note that your expression "we
        guard as the bud of our eyes our dogmatic conscience" is not correct,
        because the dogmatic conscience of each individual or the collective
        conscience of a group of people may deviate from the truth, even if,
        as you say, they study the writings of the Orthodox Fathers,
        something that happens oftentimes. You should say that we "guard like
        the bud of our eyes the dogmatic conscience of the Orthodox Church"
        which, of course, is expressed by the Holy Scriptures, the Holy
        Synods and the Holy Fathers.
        3. You say that "we are afraid to keep silent, whenever problems
        appear concerning the inheritance of the Holy Fathers". Here we must
        again express our objection. At least during the last few years,
        whenever the Administration of the Holy Community, whether it talks
        or keeps silent, it the same thing, because, whenever it speaks, it
        speaks from a safe distance, without nerve and in an impersonal
        manner, with servile submission to persons rather than with respect
        to the institutions. It mainly and primarily speaks taking extreme
        care not to offend the conscience of the religious and political
        authorities and the powerful of the earth, so that hey will not
        suffer the consequences of their talks. In a way it shoots with blank
        bullets like the ones we hear during the New Year's celebrations,
        which create impressions but no one is afraid of them. There is no
        sense mentioning here that the Holy Fathers did not speak nor did
        they protect the truths of the Faith in a similar manner.
        4. You also mention that: "the welcoming of the Pope took place in a
        way as if he was the canonical Bishop of Rome". We think that
        Patriarch Bartholomew, at this point, is more sincere than the
        Administration of the Holy Community because, he acted in a manner
        depicting how he sees the Pope, during the most formal Divine Liturgy
        and in front of the eyes of the whole world. He addresses the Pope as
        Beloved brother in Christ, accepts his sacraments, considers as
        unfortunate victims of the Devil, those who protected us from the
        heresy of the papacy, elevated him on a high pedestal during the
        Divine Liturgy of the feast of the throne etc. What else, holy
        fathers, should he do, in order to accept him as the canonical Bishop
        of Rome?
        However, the problem here is of a different kind and here can be seen
        the lack of sincerity from the part of the Administration of the Holy
        Community. In essence, all those who commemorate the name of the
        Patriarch, express the same faith with him, according to the
        teachings of the Holy Fathers and the Tradition of the Church. We do
        remind you here of the words of the Martyrs of the Holy Mountain,
        whom you say that you deeply respect and honor, to the latin-lover
        emperor Michael the 8th : "The Orthodox Church is from above; the
        commemoration of the name of the High Priest in the altar indicates
        complete agreement with him. Because it is mentioned in the comments
        about the Divine Liturgy that the priest commemorates the name of the
        high priest, indicating thus his obedience to the higher authority,
        that he is in complete communion with him and that he considers
        himself his successor in the Faith and in the holy Sacraments".
        From the above confession of the Martyrs of the Holy Mountain and
        from the liturgical tradition of the Church it is perceived that the
        Administration of the Holy Community, as far as its faith is
        concerned, is in full agreement with the Patriarch, as far as it
        concerns the Pope, the World Council of Churches, the Ecumenical
        Movement etc. Accordingly, protesting in this lukewarm manner in the
        Mass Media, fathers, you are trying to put off the fire of the heresy
        with the watering pot of the garden.
        5. Further down in your Declaration you mention that the hymns sang
        to the Pope, were not composed by a monk of the holy mountain. You,
        definitely, claim this in order to declare false the information
        given by the Mass Media. Here we must note the following: We all
        watched in the TV that during the broadcasting of the happenings
        there was a representative of the Patriarchate, the Great
        Protopresbyter Dr. George Tsetsis, who did explain and made comments
        on the happenings. If then, there was a misinformation by the Mass
        Media, the above mentioned priest should put it straight and he
        should be the first to declare the information false, especially
        because he is considered as someone who is very well informed about
        everything that is happening in the Patriarchate.
        Furthermore, how can the Administration of the Holy Community be so
        sure that the hymns were not composed by a monk of the holy mountain
        since, according to what it writes, it only presumes that. "We take
        this opportunity to officially inform the pious Christians that their
        composer( of the hymns), is not and could not be a monk of the holy
        mountain". Here it can be seen the cowardice of the Administration of
        the Holy Community to criticize its superiors, in order that the
        truth may come out, that is, that the name of the real composer may
        be made public and then there will be no need to disclaim the rumors.
        But, fathers, it is really strange the fact that you were offended by
        the rumors that the composer is a monk of the holy mountain,
        considering it an affront for the Holy Mountain, that the composer
        could be a monk of the holy mountain, and you were not offended by
        the contents of the hymns and that they honored the Pope as a saint?
        Because, it is known that, hymns are sang only to saints and not to
        living people, even if they are considered as pure Orthodox and
        saints.
        How then do you explain the "blessed is he who comes in the name of
        the Lord" addressed by the Patriarch to the Pope, something that is
        used only for Christ, and how do you justify the hymns sang to the
        Pope: "The city of Constantine and the lantern of the First called
        celebrate gloriously the reception of the Leader of the respected
        Church of the Romans, the See of the Leading Disciple, and so, with
        brotherly feelings of the soul, let us pray with joy : Stay,
        Comforter, with us, leading us to Thy truth, so that we, with one
        voice and one heart, may glorify Thee", and "The honorable boat of
        Orthodoxy is brightened receiving from the West respected Shepherd
        and Leader, and with great love rejoices openly, praying to Jesus
        with piety: Protect the world with Thy power, keeping it in concord,
        for Thou art the Supreme Good one".
        Do we have to do here with simple speech irregularities or do they
        indicate the extent of the erosion of the Patriarchate and the
        leveling of everything in Orthodoxy as if with a bulldozer? We, the
        cosignatories of this letter, personally believe that the second is
        true. And this opinion of ours is strengthened by the fact that all
        these things were addressed at a very solemn and holy moment, in
        front of the eyes of the whole world, to the greatest enemy of
        Orthodoxy through the ages. To him who for ten centuries is fighting
        Orthodoxy. To him who, through the Uniat, converted to Catholicism
        countless numbers of Orthodox people. To him who aspired to become
        God on earth.
        The Administration of the Holy Community is content with a simple
        denial concerning the composer of the hymns, without to realize, when
        you say that you live the sacrament of the Church, that we, all the
        Orthodox, sang with one heart these hymns to the Pope, and through
        the Patriarch we sang the hymn "blessed is he who comes in the name
        of the Lord", and we embraced him during the Liturgy, the embrace of
        peace, him whom St. Kosmas, the Aitolos, said that we must curse as
        antichrist and the cause of all our evils, and we sang to him and
        wished him "Many Years" , so that he may live for many years in order
        to achieve his plans for world domination and finally we asked him to
        bless the crowds in our Church, so that he may confirm his authority
        over them and our complete obedience to him, who comes "in his own
        name". Let us note here, that the above hymns were published in the
        press before they were sang during the feast of the throne, ( See TO
        VEMA, Sunday, Nov. 26, 2006), something which indicates, on the one
        hand, the eagerness and the zeal of the Patriarchate to walk the path
        of the apostasy, and on the other hand, that all shame and modesty
        have disappeared completely so that even the most illegal and
        antichristian we advertise with the greatest ease.
        Finally, something else, to put an end to the hymnological
        achievements and the verbal amiabilities. The Administration of the
        Holy Community definitely is aware that during the visit of the
        Patriarch to the Monastery of Karakalou, just a few days before the
        theatre played in Constantinople during its throne feast, ( Nov. 30,
        St. Andrews day), the fathers of the Monastery sang to their big
        visitor hymns of glorification especially written for him, obviously
        by a monk of the Holy Mountain. We would like to know how your
        dogmatic conscience which, as you say, you guard as the bud of your
        eyes, approves of this fact.
        6. It is true that, in the points you make, speaking about the papal
        errors and deviations, you are speaking with the mouth of truth.
        These and many more, unfortunately, could be mentioned by every
        faithful concerning the fall and the degeneration of the Papacy. What
        cannot be understood is this: How it can be justified the
        cohabitation of the Orthodox with the Papists at the ecclesiastical
        and liturgical level, and the walking together with the decadent and
        apostates of the body of Christ? The words of St. John Chrisistomos
        are characteristic concerning this matter: "He who befriends the
        enemies of the king, cannot be friend of the king, and even more he
        is not worthy of being allowed to live but should be driven away
        along with the enemies.
        At this point we must draw the attention, with great sorrow, to the
        words of the Administration of the Holy Community which, we think,
        reveal the whole purpose of the composed declaration : "Furthermore,
        (they mean what the Patriarch and the Archbishop did), (there is a
        fear), that these may drive some of the faithful members of the
        Orthodox Church, who are troubled by what is done at the wrong time
        and contrary to the holy canons, to cut themselves away from the body
        of the Church and (encourage), the creation of new schisms".
        Why, really, fathers, you consider the distancing of oneself from the
        heretically thinking Bishop or Metropolitan or Patriarch, as breaking
        off from the body of the Church, and creation of new schism? Because,
        if you thus consider the distancing of oneself, then we must tell you
        that, your dogmatic conscience suffers from the papal sickness. In
        that case, if you so believe, you must renounce numerous saints and
        confessors who distanced themselves from heretical Bishops and
        Patriarchs, and especially to renounce the martyrs of the holy
        mountain who cut themselves off the Latin-lover Patriarch John
        Vekkos. Those, that is, whom you confess in your Declaration that you
        honor and respect. And, of course, to renounce, all those who stopped
        the commemoration of the name of Patriarch Athenagoras, because of
        the known lifting of the anathemas. You must also erase from the book
        of "Pedalion" the two Holy Canons, the 31st of the Apostles and the
        15th of the First-second Synod at the time of St. Photios.
        So, according to the theology of the new-age which, of course, is not
        different from the papal one, in order that we may not be cut off
        from the Church and create schisms, we must obey the heretics and
        John Vekkos, Athenagoras, Bartholomew, Christodoulos, and� and..
        and..
        If, fathers, this was a teaching of the Church then the Church would
        have been anthropocentric and its criteria wouldn't have been the
        truth but the opinion of the Bishop, something which happens in the
        Papacy. Then the efforts even till death of the Fathers for the Faith
        wouldn't be necessary, because it would have been expressed by the
        mouth of the First, to whom everybody should submit themselves.
        Finally, if there existed such a theology, then from long ago there
        would be no Orthodoxy, because it would have been driven away be the
        errors of the Bishops and the indifference of the Orthodox.
        It is obvious that, with what you say in your declaration, you
        justify completely the position of the Administration of the Holy
        Community towards the persecuted fathers of the Holy Monastery of
        Esfigmenou. How does really your dogmatic conscience allow you to
        side with the persecutors, when you know that these fathers, for
        maters of faith they cut their ecclesiastical allegiance and stopped
        the commemoration of the heretically thinking Patriarch?
        Of course it is a fact that since the Holy Mountain was included in
        the European programs and you absorb the economic packages of Europe
        and you have European orientations, it is impossible to utter one
        word of Orthodox protest and objection, but you will always be pulled
        by and be subjugated to your sponsors. It is sad that, in order to
        repair and reconstruct our monasteries, we left our protector All Holy
        (Virgin Mary), and run after the sinful and easy money of Europe,
        destroying the limits that our Holy Fathers have set. However, we all
        know that no body gives anything without an expectation to receive
        something back in return. And already the Holy Mountain is paying the
        lack of faith to God and its submission to the European plans.
        7. At the end of your declaration, amongst other things, you declare
        the following: "the dialogue with the non-Orthodox, if it is meant to
        inform them about the Orthodox Faith, so that when they will become
        worthy to receive the divine inspiration and their eyes will be
        opened so that they may return to the Orthodox Faith, then this
        dialogue is not to be condemned.
        It is also sad, fathers, that, while the dialogue with the heretics
        is going on for about 40 years now, you did not understand its
        purpose. And if you did not understand it, what can we expect by the
        simple civilian Christians? Did you not realize that all these years
        the Papists did not move from their errors not even one foot, while
        on the other hand we, everyday are giving in, and are suffocating by
        the powerful embrace of the papal beast? Did you not understand that
        the only thing that the dialogues with the heretics have achieved is
        to divide the Orthodox, as happened in the past in Florence and
        Ferrara, into those in favor of the union, (with the heretics), and
        those against it, or even better, into orthodox and latin-lovers?
        You also mention in the end that� "it is possible that they may give
        the impression that our Orthodox Church accepts the Roman Catholics
        as a complete Church and the Pope as the legitimate Bishop of Rome".
        But what do you really mean by the term "complete church"? Maybe ,
        that is , we accept the Papists as a Church but not complete? We know
        that Rome was a Church before the schism but after the schism it
        deviated from the faith and is no more a Church. Your
        expressions "complete Church" and "legitimate Bishop of Rome", we
        think, introduce here new demons.
        8. Closing up, you mention that: "The Holy Mountain, with the grace
        of God, remains faithful to the Faith of the Holy Apostles and the
        Holy Fathers". We believe that, after all that was said, in order
        that the Holy Mountain may remain faithful to the Holy Apostles and
        the Holy Fathers, it must distance itself from the heretically
        thinking and acting present Patriarch. The way that the Fathers
        proposed, in this case is to stop the commemoration (of the name of
        the Patriarch). If on the contrary you remain united through the
        commemoration of the present Patriarch, then it is a joke to claim
        that you are struggling for the Faith of the Holy Apostles and the
        Holy Fathers.
        Further more we would like to mention the proper measures the
        Administration of the Holy Community should have taken, in order that
        its stand should be similar with that of the confessors and in
        agreement with the Tradition of the fathers.
        a). Severe criticism should have been enacted from the part of the
        Administration of the Holy Community against the faltering Patriarch,
        concerning the faith, at a time when we all are, through the
        ecclesiastical unity, co responsible for his acts. Because, according
        to the preaching of the Saints, whom you respect and whom you mention
        in your letter, the Martyrs of the Holy Mountain, who died at the
        time of Vekkos, "this is why we face bigger mistakes because we did
        not pay attention to the smaller ones, and as in the bodily health,
        those who did not pay attention to minor wounds, suffered fevers, and
        infections and even death, likewise with the souls; those who bypass
        the small, suffer the greater; because if those who attempted to
        bypass even the minor commandments were criticized properly, there
        would be no room for the birth of the present plague and there
        wouldn't befall the Church this severe winter; because he who
        overturns even the smallest part of the healthy faith, he infests all
        of it".
        The problem started with the heretical Encyclical of the Ecumenical
        Patriarchate of the year 1920; it was continued with the change of
        the calendar and further deteriorated with the participation in the
        Babel of the World Council of Churches; it became a cancerous tumor
        with the lifting of the anathemas; it developed into a theatre of
        images with the theological dialogues; it ended up as a gangrene
        through the recognition of the sacraments of the Monophysites at
        Sampezy in 1990, the Papal at Balamant 1993, and recently of the
        Lutherans in Constantinople, and ended up in grandiose liturgical
        gatherings of heretical leaders, so that the subjugation of Orthodoxy
        to the rules of the New Age may be proven everywhere. This is how the
        spiritual death becomes a reality, that is, through the breaking off
        from the everlasting body of the Church, of those who participate,
        actively or passively, in the methodically organized antichrist
        apostasy.
        b). Further more, the Administration of the Holy Community, should
        the Ecumenical Patriarchate continue it spiritual descent, should
        since long ago, distance itself ecclesiastically through the stoppage
        of the commemoration, so that it may be in a safe and continuous
        communion with the eternal Church, as did the Fathers of the Holy
        Mountain at the time of Vekkos and recently at the time of
        Athenagoras, who stopped the commemoration, due to the lifting of the
        anathemas.
        c). The Holy Mountain should have not fallen pray to the trap of the
        European financial support, so that, on the one hand the monks may
        live in poverty and simplicity and on the other hand, to speak freely
        criticizing openly everything that is wrong within or outside the
        Church. The financial dependence of the Holy Mountain is the last
        straw in the dogmatic faltering.
        d). The Holy Mountain should present a united front against the
        heresy so that it will not become a laughing stock and a scandal in
        the eyes of the world, through its divisions and the tearing apart
        between the monks.
        e). We, the cosignatories, thought that the Administration of the
        Holy Community was given a chance to wake up and reenergize itself,
        through the offensive theatrical play that took place during the last
        celebration of the feast of the throne in Fanar. But we were proven
        wrong once again when we read the, without nerve and essence,
        declarations, which obviously were meant to calm down the Monks of
        the Holy Mountain who were worried about its direction. We made it
        clear to you, even with our first letter to you that, if you will
        fail to follow the path of the Holy Apostles and the Ecumenical
        Synods, we are going to do what is pleasing to God and not to the
        ears. We warn you that if you will not give the proper Orthodox
        response to the going astray and destroying the Holy Canons
        Patriarch, we will think if we must maintain our ecclesiastical
        communion with the Holy Community and the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
        In the hope that the present letter will help you to reconsider your
        ecclesiastical and dogmatic stand against the ecumenists and
        ultimately your compliance with the line of the Holy Fathers, we
        remain in anticipation.
        Because the collection of signatures from all over the Holy Mountain
        is not possible, the first indicative signatures follow. We believe
        that those who confess Orthodoxy are cosigning the present.
        The cosignatories :
        Elder Hillarion, Monk, Xerokalyvo Platani, Holy Monastery of
        Dochiariou; Gabriel Monk, H.M. Koutloumousiou, cell of St.
        Christodoulos; Elder Meletios, cell of the Birth of the Theotokos;
        Elder Nikodemos, Monk, cell of St. Nectarios, Kapsala, H.M.
        Stavronikita; Monk Dositheos, cell Livadi of H.M. Koutloumousiou;
        Elder Savvas, H.Cell of the Archangels of Savvaion, H. M. Hilandario;
        Elder Isaac, H.Cell of the Birth of the Theotokos, H. M.
        Stavronikita; Elder Vlasios, Monk, Xerokalyvo Viglas, H. M. Great
        Lavra; Elder Isaiah, Monk, H. Cell of the Birth of the Theotokos, H.
        M. G.Lavra; Elder George, Monk, H.Cell of the Theotokos; Elder
        Kosmas, Monk, H. Cell of St. Demetrious, H. Skete of St. Anna, H. M.
        G. Lavra; Monk Markellos, H. Cell of St. Demetrious, H. Skete of St.
        Anna, H. M. G. Lavra; Monk Athanasios, H. Cell of St. Demetrious, H.
        Skete of St. Anna, H. M. G. Lavra; Elder Spyridon, Monk, H. Cell of
        St. Nicholas, H. M. Koutloumousiou; Elder Onoufrios, Monk, H. Cell of
        the Dormition, Karyes; Monk Parthenios, H. Cell of St. Anthony, H.
        Skete of St. Anna, H. M. G. Lavra; Elder Nicholas, Monk, H. Cell of
        St. Nicholas, Karyes; Elder Antonios, Monk, H. Cell of the Dormition,
        H. M. of Pantokratoros; Elder Pavlos, Monk, H. Cell of the Holy
        Apostles, Skete of H. M. of Xenofontos; Christophoros, Monk, H. Cell
        of the Holy Apostles, Skete of H. M. Xenofontos; Archimandrite Cyril,
        Superior, H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion; Monk Efstratios,
        H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Arsenios,
        Monk, , H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica;
        Nektarios, Monk, , H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion,
        Thessalonica; Ignatios, Monk, , H. Cell of Pantokratoros,
        Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Rafael, Monk, , H. Cell of
        Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Michael, Monk, , H. Cell
        of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Mardarios, Monk, , H.
        Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Antonios, Monk, ,
        H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Tychon, Monk,
        H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Pachomios,
        Monk, H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica; Lukas,
        Monk, H. Cell of Pantokratoros, Melissohorion, Thessalonica;
        Archimandrite Efthemios, Ampelakia, Larissa; Archimandrite Emmanuel
        Kalyvas, Preacher of the Archdiocese of Athens; Nicholas
        Soteripoulos, Theologian; John Kornarakis, Professor of the
        University of Athens




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • antiquariu@aol.com
        In a message dated 5/1/2007 10:17:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pravoslavney@yahoo.com writes: Second open letter to the holy Superiors and the holy
        Message 3 of 4 , May 1 9:13 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          In a message dated 5/1/2007 10:17:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
          pravoslavney@... writes:

          Second open letter to the holy Superiors and the holy
          representatives of the twenty Monasteries of the Holy Community of
          the Holy Mount Athos. Locally.

          Communication: Ecumenical Patriarchate

          Holy Superiors and Holy Fathers, Bless





          Okay, I'll bite! From the title one gets the impression that this is a
          letter from the Holy Kinot of Mt Athos. I only assume this because this is what
          it says. But then, it immediately becomes a letter TO the Holy Kinot of Mt
          Athos (. . . that's how you say Community. . .). The long series of seemingly
          disconnected 50 cent words, poor English structure, and even worse logic and
          theology cause me to suspect our true and genuine orthofriends in New York
          reporting on the latest crimes against nature being committed against those
          wild and crazy monks at Esphigmenou, whom we last heard from when under siege
          by Greek Special Forces operating at the behest of the EP. In case you
          wondered what happened there, the answer is "nothing." Come-on guys, Rule No.1 =
          you belong to the EP by Charter; Rule No. 2 = the Greek Constituion forbids
          the presence of schismatics on Athos; Rule No.3, and I realize this is rarely
          observed here in America, it takes a council to mark a heretic. Not a bunch
          of monks.

          It would probably serve Orthodoxy well if the theology for this regular
          assaults were to come from someplace other than the True and Genuine set that
          hovers between New York and Boston. It's amusing that they can't even update
          their own web site.

          Moreover, please stop the Soviet-style polemics. Hasn't anyone at
          Esphigmenou or, for that matter in the New York - Boston True and Genuine propaganda
          machine, noticed that despite claims to the contrary, no one cares? Saying
          the UN, the Council of Europe and the State Department care does not make it so.

          Lastly, the letter criticizes the Press Release manner in which previous
          actions were dealt with. But I guess such criticisms only go one way. What do
          you think a false-flag "open letter" is? Just another press release, but
          from unofficial offices.

          Seriously, get a life, and pray for guidance,

          Vova H.



          ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Fr. Basil Grisel
          Here is the actual link to this article and ones related to it. Click onto the little British flag on the far right side and all the text will come up in
          Message 4 of 4 , May 2 7:48 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Here is the actual link to this article and ones related to it.
            Click onto the little British flag on the far right side and all the text will come up in English.

            Shortcut to: http://www.orthodoxia.gr/show.cfm?id=1052&obcatid=5 <http://www.orthodoxia.gr/show.cfm?id=1052&obcatid=5>


            ----- Original Message -----
            From: antiquariu@...<mailto:antiquariu@...>
            To: orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com<mailto:orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 12:13 AM
            Subject: Re: [orthodox-synod] 2nd Letter of the Holy Kinot of Mt Athos 4/17/2007



            In a message dated 5/1/2007 10:17:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
            pravoslavney@...<mailto:pravoslavney@...> writes:

            Second open letter to the holy Superiors and the holy
            representatives of the twenty Monasteries of the Holy Community of
            the Holy Mount Athos. Locally.

            Communication: Ecumenical Patriarchate

            Holy Superiors and Holy Fathers, Bless

            Okay, I'll bite! From the title one gets the impression that this is a
            letter from the Holy Kinot of Mt Athos. I only assume this because this is what
            it says. But then, it immediately becomes a letter TO the Holy Kinot of Mt
            Athos (. . . that's how you say Community. . .). The long series of seemingly
            disconnected 50 cent words, poor English structure, and even worse logic and
            theology cause me to suspect our true and genuine orthofriends in New York
            reporting on the latest crimes against nature being committed against those
            wild and crazy monks at Esphigmenou, whom we last heard from when under siege
            by Greek Special Forces operating at the behest of the EP. In case you
            wondered what happened there, the answer is "nothing." Come-on guys, Rule No.1 =
            you belong to the EP by Charter; Rule No. 2 = the Greek Constituion forbids
            the presence of schismatics on Athos; Rule No.3, and I realize this is rarely
            observed here in America, it takes a council to mark a heretic. Not a bunch
            of monks.

            It would probably serve Orthodoxy well if the theology for this regular
            assaults were to come from someplace other than the True and Genuine set that
            hovers between New York and Boston. It's amusing that they can't even update
            their own web site.

            Moreover, please stop the Soviet-style polemics. Hasn't anyone at
            Esphigmenou or, for that matter in the New York - Boston True and Genuine propaganda
            machine, noticed that despite claims to the contrary, no one cares? Saying
            the UN, the Council of Europe and the State Department care does not make it so.

            Lastly, the letter criticizes the Press Release manner in which previous
            actions were dealt with. But I guess such criticisms only go one way. What do
            you think a false-flag "open letter" is? Just another press release, but
            from unofficial offices.

            Seriously, get a life, and pray for guidance,

            Vova H.

            ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.<http://www.aol.com./>

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.