Therefore, my brethren, with much yearning, love, and awareness we must all run to be cleansed, to be made ready and when death follows, to depart in peace. Amen.
Εμφάνιση αναρτήσεων με ετικέτα ORTHODOX HOLY FATHER'S THEOLOGIE AND MORE.... Εμφάνιση όλων των αναρτήσεων
Εμφάνιση αναρτήσεων με ετικέτα ORTHODOX HOLY FATHER'S THEOLOGIE AND MORE.... Εμφάνιση όλων των αναρτήσεων
Τετάρτη 23 Απριλίου 2014
WATCHFULNESS, PRAYER AND CONFESSION A Homily by Elder Ephraim of Philotheou, translated from Greek by Fr. Seraphim Bell.
My beloved children:
Today we will say a few things about the great virtue
of watchfulness.
As you know, watchfulness is a patristic teaching, it
is the experience of the great neptic fathers of the Church and of the desert.
The word nepsis comes from nepho, which means to be sleepless, to guard, to
inspect, examine, watch over, and keep under surveillance. All these things the
fathers sum up in one continuous attention to the nous. Watchfulness is
described as the axe which shatters the large trees, hitting their roots. And
when the root is struck, it doesn’t spring up again. Thus also when the nous of
the man, of the Christian, has heed for the soul, it keeps watch over the heart
and the five senses of the soul, the bodily as well as the spiritual. When the
nous is awake, when it is attentive, when it keeps watch over the speculations,
the thoughts, when it controls the imagination, then the whole man, body and
soul, is kept pure. And when the man is rendered pure through watchfulness and
spiritual works, his prayers have boldness before God, they cross the sky, they
go beyond the stars, they pass through the heavens and draw near to the Divine
Throne of Grace, where the blessings of God are granted. And this being the
case, the man at prayer is enriched by the grace of God.
The neptic fathers tell us that one of our thoughts
may rise to heaven and another may descend to hell: By our thoughts we are
improved or defiled. In other words, a thought which may inattentively attack
us, may pollute us, may pleasure us, and is able to render us worthy of hell. A
heavenly thought, a thought of self-denial, a brave thought, a thought of
prayer and the vision of God, makes us worthy to draw near the Divine throne
and to taste of heavenly things. By the thoughts either we will become unclean
or we will become better. The beginning of sins starts with our thoughts.
The thoughts come from the five senses, the spiritual
as well as the physical. When we allow the sense of sight to be uncontrolled
and it carelessly sees anything, this carelessness will become no end of dirty
and sinful images. Since these images are placed in the imagination, afterwards
they drip the poison of sinful pleasure inside the heart of man. This pleasure
is the poison, by which the heart is polluted and then becomes unclean and
guilty before the un-sleeping eye of God.
Just like the sense of sight, so it is also of touch,
and also of taste and hearing and of smell. And so the five senses create
analogous sinful images, which render the man unclean before the face of God.
Here rests the entire philosophy of the spirit.
All sermons are beneficial, exactly because when a
tree which is diseased is pruned, it is cleansed, and thus the word of God
helps in the reduction of a passion. However, the teaching of the Fathers concerning
watchfulness radically effects the cleansing from the passions. When the axe
strikes the root, the entire tree falls down, it withers and is finished. So
also when watchfulness takes a place in the life of the Christian; a tree of
passion falls, it withers and thus in time, the old man, the man of sin and of
passion, the earthly Adam is freed and he becomes a new man. For this reason,
neptic work frees us radically from evil. Here then we must give heed to our
life. If we want to cleanse ourselves, we should make sure to enrich our nous
by the application of watchfulness.
A part of watchfulness is also noetic prayer. The
vision of God is another part of watchfulness. Spiritual warfare is also
another part. All these parts, when they are united in an effort of man, in
time bring about holiness.
Abba Paphnoutios, a great desert father, was going
along one day on his way and there he saw two men committing some sin. The
thought of his passion said: “Look what great evil they are doing!” The eye saw
them and immediately the thought flared up, trying thereby to attack the purity
of the Saint’s soul by judging the brother or also by his being tempted. Having
watchfulness, however, he was being vigilant, immediately his mind was
enlightened and he said to his thought, “They are sinning today, I will sin
tomorrow. They will repent, but I know myself to be a hard man, unrepentant,
egotistical, and thus, I won’t repent. I will be punished since I am worse than
these two. And what do I have to do about these careless sinners, since I am a
much greater sinner and more passionate?” And speaking in this manner and
putting a lock on the provocation of sin, he was saved and didn’t judge the
brothers who were sinning.
He didn’t go very far and an Angel of God appeared before
him having a double-edged cutless dripping blood; in other words, a knife which
had cut him from both sides, and he says to him:
—Paphnoutios, you see this knife? Do you see that it
is dripping blood?
—I see it, Angel of God.
—With this knife I kill by taking the heads of the
ones who judge their neighbors. And since you didn’t judge, you didn’t condemn
those who were in fact sinning—not imagining or guessing that they were
sinners, but seeing them sin with your own eyes—but you condemned yourself more,
for this reason your name has been written in the book of eternal life.
Success. His name is written in eternal life, because
he didn’t judge the sinners, he didn’t condemn the sin of his brother. He would
have judged if he hadn’t had watchfulness, if he
hadn’t been noetically vigilant in guarding his soul.
Do you see what his good attentiveness produced? And do you see what harm he
would have suffered, if he had been inatten-tive to the thought and allowed it
to work within him? His thought “informed” him that they were in fact sinning;
he even saw them commit the sin. In spite of his observations, however, even
though the thought had “spoken” to him, the correct thought triumphed and
thereby he escaped the shipwreck of his soul.
All of the passions have their own images, their own
fantasies and their own pleasures. Murder has one image and another pleasure,
gluttony has another and so many other sinful passions have others. All of the
pleasures are otherwise poisons which bring about the death of the soul. We
must take as our view that, if we want to clean the “inside of the cup,” the
interior of the soul, our heart, this center of man, we must strive to keep
watchful. We should take care to become better; that is, we should be vigilant
to always have our hand on the trigger. With the first appearance of the enemy,
we should shoot. As soon as an evil thought comes to us, immediately knock it
down. A dirty image comes, immediately spoil it. We shouldn’t allow it to
become more vivid in colors and in appearance, because it will lead us to
immediate difficulty.
When evil is struck at its root, it is impossible for
it to sprout and increase. When such spiritual struggle comes about with
diligence, we will cleanse our soul and thereby we will be found clean and with
boldness before God.
A pagan priest asked some monks:
—Does your God appear to you? Do you see Him? Does He
speak to you?
The fathers said:
—No.
The pagan says:
—If He doesn’t speak to you and doesn’t appear to you,
this means that you don’t have pure thoughts. When I pray, my God answers me.
Naturally, God didn’t answer the pagan, the demons answered
him, but nevertheless the fathers took it as an occasion of benefit and said:
—Indeed, the impure thoughts prevent us sinful men
from communicating with God.
Watchfulness does nothing less than cleanses the nous
and the heart from every impurity. For this reason, with a little ascetical
toil, watchfulness brings about the greatest spiritual results. When we strive
ascetically and aren’t mindful of our thoughts, we accomplish nothing.
The Sacred Chrysostom wrote many chapters about prayer
and about wakefulness. And in the midst of them he says something very
beautiful: Prayer, he says, is enlightenment of the soul, true consciousness of
God, a mediator between God and man, a physician of the passions, an antidote
against diseases, medicine against every illness, tranquility of the soul, a
guide which carries us to heaven, which doesn’t revolve around the earth, which
marches towards the apse of heaven. It passes over the buildings, it passes
mentally through the air, it walks above the air, it passes over the whole of
the stars, it opens the gates of heaven, it surpasses the angels, it transcends
the Thrones and Principalities, it passes over the Cherubim and when it has
passed through all of the foundation of nature, it comes near to the
unapproachable Trinity. There it worships the Divinity. There it is made worthy
to become an interlocutor in the Heavenly Kingdom. Through this (prayer), the
soul, which is lifted up in the air to the heavens, embraces the Lord in an inexpressible
manner, exactly as the baby embraces its mother and with tears cries loudly,
desiring the enjoyment of divine milk. But it seeks the things which are necessary
and receives a gift superior to all visible nature.
Prayer is our venerable representative. It gladdens
the heart. It gives rest to the soul. It creates within us the fear of the
punishment of hell, the desire for the Kingdom of Heaven. It teaches humility,
it grants awareness of sin and in general it adorns man with every good thing,
like a robe adorned with all the virtues which enfolds the soul. It brought a
gift to Anna, Samuel, and it made known that Prophet of the Lord. This prayer
also made Elias a zealot of the Lord.
And it became a guide for the descent of
the heavenly fire for the sacrifice. For while the priest of Baal was calling
all day long to the idol, he, after he lifted up his voice which came from his
pure heart and cried out through his mouth and his soul, the fire came down
from heaven as a sign of the righteousness of his prayer. Since he was standing
like an eagle over the altar with his fierce nature, he offered everything as a
sacrifice. But the great servant of God, the zealot Elias, did this, as all
that happened then, teaching us by the spirit, that we also crying loudly from
the depths of our soul to God, should move the ineffable fire of the
Holy
Spirit to come down to the altar of our heart and to offer ourselves fully as a
sacrifice to God.
All of the great fathers of the Church, especially the
desert fathers, succeeded in becoming worthy of great gifts exclusively
through watchfulness and vision of God theoria.
Keeping vigil all night and coming to the vision of the Light of God.
We have St. Gregory Palamas, the instructor of the
desert, the instructor of neptic activity, the teacher of noetic prayer. This
saint would remain enclosed in his cell for the entire week. He didn’t go
outside at all. There, on his knees and with hands upraised, he was vigilant
about his nous and his heart and he received heavenly theology [literally
“theology from above”—trans.] by the Holy Spirit. This is the theology which
made known to him the Uncreated Light of the Divine Glory, of the Divine
Nature.
The Uncreated Light is the glory of the Divine Nature.
There was the goal and the conclusion of asceticism and of prayer. When the
saints received this Light, they became all Light. And since the light floods
the nous and the heart, how could they know less than the mysteries of the
secrets which are known only to the angels? Through watchfulness the fathers
attained to the pinnacle of the virtues and of the graces. And we, if we are
watchful, if we pray, even if we are in the world, and even if we don’t attain
to similar states, no matter what, we will attain to a condition of purity.
When we succeed by watchfulness in not judging our brother, this is no small
achievement. We put into practice the commandment of our Christ, which is as
follows: Judge not, that ye be not judged.
For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged;
and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. (Mt 7:1-2).
This is the commandment of Christ. It is not the
commandment of some saint. It is God’s. And therefore, by not judging, we put
into practice a Divine commandment. When we do not judge, we will not be
judged. Judge, and we will be judged. Sin is widespread. Wherever we turn our
eyes and our imagination, we recognize the errors of men. Therefore, if we are
inattentive, without watchfulness, we will always be found in the error of
violation of this evangelical commandment of not judging our neighbor.
There was a monk in a monastery. The tempter had conquered
him in negligence. He didn’t do his canon, he didn’t go to church, he didn’t do
his rule of prayer, and thus the fathers, not knowing much about him other than
what they observed, regarded him negligent. The hour of death came and the
fathers drew near him to see something, which per-haps God would show, in order
that they may be benefited. Drawing near to the dying negligent monk, the
fathers saw that he was very joyful. They were perplexed and they said in their
thoughts:
—Look, why is he peaceful? The negligence which he had
in his life doesn’t worry him? What happened to the debts which have been
gathered because of sloth? Does his con-science not rebel? Does it not make him
worry? Why is it that he doesn’t despair?
He continued to be joyful. They compelled him to
answer their question:
—Forgive us, brother, we see you doing so-so. We know
and you know that you lived in negligence and sloth in monastic duties. Now you
are heading to the judgment of Christ, and you should be somewhat sorry, worried,
etc. But we see you otherwise, joyful, peaceful, with hope and we question:
What is it that supports this state of yours?
He answered them and said:
—You are right, my fathers, that’s how it is. I was
negligent and didn’t do what you did, but one thing I guarded in my life: Not
to judge my brother. I read in the Holy Gospel, where the Lord says that the
one who does not judge, will not be judged. Thus I tried, at least, not to
judge. And I hope in the mercy of God that I will not be judged. For this reason
I am departing with faith that God will apply His word to me, in spite of my
negligence and slothfulness.
The fathers looked at each other, thought about what
they heard and concluded that in fact, this brother was very intelligent and
that he masterfully gained his salvation.
If we are watchful, we will not criticize. For without
falling into the offense of judging, immediately watchfulness will set up a
barrier and the thought of judgment will be prevented from continuing.
Then we
will experience what Abba Paphnutios experienced. And so we will escape from
the sin of judging and of criticism of the tongue and our names will be written
in eternal life. A man who keeps his tongue pure, both inner and outer, that is
to say, the inner thought and the tongue, and does this in the knowledge of
God, this becomes his guarantee that he is saved. This spiritual attentiveness
becomes light and as light, illumines our path towards salvation.
Another illumined path of watchfulness is also our
path to sacred confession. The attention illumines it, which urges the man to
settle his account with God. And he is guided by the light of watchfulness to
this great mystery and there he deposits his entire debt, all the uncleanness
of sins. He enters into this mysterious bath and comes out entirely clean. And
I say that we must have much joy in our souls when we are accounted worthy to
come into this bath. We must celebrate and thank the Lord who allowed this bath
on earth, who allowed this authority of binding and loosening.
Whatever things
your spiritual father loosens, God also loosens. Whatever the representative of
God forgives, the Lord also forgives. And when the man has been judged here below, he is not judged above in the great and
fear-some judgment.
It is a great occasion when one arrives at this bath
of holy confession. For this reason, all those who have been accounted worthy
of this sacrament and continuously cleanse every soiling of the soul with this
spiritual holy mystery of God, should have very great joy; the door of Paradise
will always be open for them. And even if death follows, there is no anxiety.
He is prepared and not disturbed. When the man is prepared, he is not disturbed
at the approach of death. He knows that it is not possible for the word of God,
which gave this authority, to be wrong. We experience it as a mystery of the
Church and we see it in action and in application. When the man makes sacred
confession with ardent desire, with humility, and with awareness, he feels the
happiness within his soul, the lightness and the elation. A vivid proof that
his sins have been forgiven. And when sins are forgiven, then every anxious and
uncertain fear about the next life is removed.
Our thanks to God must be unceasing. Our thanksgiving
must never stop, because we are made worthy every time we want to receive this
cleansing, and every time we feel a sin, immediately turn the mind to God. I
have sinned Lord, forgive me. With this I have sinned Lord, forgive me, God
answers: My child, you are forgiven; the power of the law is remitted. Proceed
to the application of the law. And the application is beneath the petraheli
(stole). There, all the sinfulness of man is ended. Forgiveness is so easy!
It is very wrong for any man, when such a forgiveness
is so easy and so free, and his egotism prohibits him from receiving it; his
actions are those of a man who does not to want to open the doors of Paradise
and walk eternally in the glory of God!
Many men say: ‘Man should call upon God because of one
sin? But this thing is wrong. Where is the love of God? Isn’t God a Father?
"Yes, He is a Father, but when this opportunity comes for Him to forgive
you, why do you turn your back? Why do you not receive His mercy? Why do you
refuse His embrace and go far away? Why do you accept the embrace of the devil
and not of God? Perhaps your god seeks money or possessions or favors and you
don’t have all these things and for this reason you don’t come to let go of
your debt? But this is certainly not so; it is a deception!
God is very rich, as we see also in the parable of the
prodigal. The prodigal wanted to depart far away. He demanded that he assume
part of the possessions which belonged to him.
And God gave him what he was
owed as physical gifts. He didn’t deprive him of them. However, he squandered
these gifts, the spiritual possessions, living prodigally. And when he arrived
at the wretched end, he came to his senses; he came to himself; for he was not
himself when all the prodigality reigned. And when he came to himself he said:
How many serve my father and they enjoy the good things of
His possessions, and
I His child, par excellence His child, am in such misery that I graze pigs and
am allotted husks! I will return; He is a Father, He will receive me. I will
ask forgiveness and will say to him, do not receive me as Your child, neither
restore me to the first adoption, but I will ask Him to become one of His
servants. And this will be a great thing.
Once he thought these things and took on the journey
of return, the Father had already come outside of His house and waited with
open arms. He accepted him with all His heart and all His soul. He embraced
him, He kissed him, He wept from joy, because he was dead and he was restored
to life, he was lost and was found. He made him His child again with all of the
original wealth. He forgave everything. He cleansed him of every sin. He
clothed him in the original garments. In the end, he gave him everything...
Our Heavenly Father does exactly the same things to
anyone of us, who as sinners return to Him. He cleanses us, washes us, gives us
the original garments of baptism, gives us son-ship and makes us worthy of His
Kingdom. Everything is free. When the prodigal returned, He didn’t seek an
account, neither did He rebuke him nor did He seek to blame him. He begins at
the point of the prodigal son’s return; this was sufficient for the Father.
Only to say “sinner,” to leave his sins with humility, to understand his
mistakes and from then on everything is loosened. But the sinful man doesn’t do
this. He doesn’t return, he isn’t
humbled. He holds on to his egotism. The most important step is the one that
guides man to the confessional! And from then on the sinful ways of past life
are finished. However, the tears of egotism hold back the sinful man. And when
this comes to his hour of death and the reality of it hits him, then he will
repent and he will be remorseful, but he may be too late. In this, God
maintains little tolerance and has no respect for the person who refuses to
humble his spirit.
As for Lucifer, this great battalion commander, who
was once in the first place among all angelic hosts, what was the cause of his
fall? What was the cause of the collapse, of the transformation from angels to
demons? It was pride and egotism. The error came from these two passions. And
as with the angels, so was also with our forbearers. The fall of our forbearers
came about from pride and egotism. Because,
before God accomplished the verdict of guilt, he
approached the man, Adam, and said to him: Adam, why did you do this? Adam
didn’t seek forgiveness, he didn’t say: Godforbid this, I was wrong. If he had
done this, he wouldn’t have been evicted out of Paradise and neither would we
have all this banishment and suffering today. By not saying God forbid this, I
was wrong all this plethora of evil came about. And thus now man doesn’t say
God forbid this—I was wrong and remains in his evil. But all this same has to
do is to just say it: Godforbid this—I was wrong! And God will stretch out His
arms of forgiveness, and He takes him back in Paradise.
We, as Orthodox Christians, have been made worthy to
know this great mystery of sacred confession. We should thus have very great
joy; because whenever we fall down upon a sin, into something evil, we can run
immediately to correct it and to preserve the health of our souls. And when
death comes, we will go to meet the Lord, cleansed, repentant, and returned as
prodigal sons. And our Heavenly Father will accept us and will place us within
Paradise, the place of eternal bliss, where there is no end to Divine joy and
sees no conclusion to that spiritual bliss, which cannot be compared to
anything earthly.
And even the holy Apostle Paul, he that went up to the
third heaven and saw the eternal good things, in spite of his apostolic and
graceful tongue, he remained unable to express with human words the things of
Paradise and the life above! Indeed, such is the inexpressible gift of
happiness that is attained through sacred confession.
Therefore, my brethren, with much yearning, love, and awareness we must all run to be cleansed, to be made ready and when death follows, to depart in peace. Amen.
Τρίτη 21 Ιανουαρίου 2014
St. Mark of Ephesus and the False Union of Florence.Βy Archimandrite Amvrossy Pogodin
St. Mark of Ephesus and the False Union of Florence
Part III of His Life
VI. THE CONCLUSION OF THE UNION
TO THE OTHER afflictions which the Orthodox delegation
suffered in Florence was added the death of the Patriarch of Constantinople.
The Patriarch was found dead in his room.
On the table lay (supposedly) his testament, Extrema
Sententia, consisting in all of some lines in which he declared that he
accepted everything that the Church of Rome confesses. And then: "In like
manner I acknowledge the Holy Father of Fathers, the Supreme Pontiff and Vicar
of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Pope of Old Rome. Likewise, I acknowledge
purgatory. In affirmation of this, I affix my signature."
There is no doubt whatever that Patriarch Joseph did
not write this document. The German scholar Frommann, who made a detailed
investigation of the "Testament" of Patriarch Joseph, says:
"This document is so Latinized and corresponds so little to the opinion
expressed by the Patriarch several days before, that its spuriousness is
evident." [1] The ''Testament" appears in the history of the Council
of Florence quite late; contemporaries of the Council knew nothing of it.
And so the Greek delegation lost its Patriarch.
Although the Patriarch was no pillar of Orthodoxy, and though one may reproach
him in much, still one cannot deny that with his whole soul he grieved for
Orthodoxy and never allowed himself or anyone else to injure St. Mark. Being
already in deep old age [2], he lacked the energy to defend the Church of which
he was head, but history cannot reproach him for betraying the Church. Death
spared him from the many and grievous humiliations which the Orthodox Church
subsequently had to endure. And on the other hand the absence of his signature
on the Act of Union later gave occasion for the defenders of Orthodoxy to
contest the pretension of the Council of Florence to the significance and title
of ''Ecumenical Council," because the Act of every Ecumenical Council must
be signed first of all by the Patriarchs.
After the death of the Patriarch, as Syropoulos
informs us, Emperor John Paleologos took the direction of the Church into his
own hands. This anticanonical situation, although often encountered in
Byzantine history, as well in a positive as in a negative manifestation, was
strictly condemned by St. Mark in one of his epistles, where he says: ''Let no
one dominate in our faith: neither emperor, nor hierarch, nor false council,
nor anyone else, but only the one God, Who both Himself and through His
Disciples has handed it down to us." [3]
Let us set forth in brief the further history of the
negotiations between the Orthodox and the Latins—or, to speak more truly, the
history of the capitulation of the Orthodox. The Orthodox were obliged to
accept the Latin teaching of the filioque and acknowledge the Latin dogma of
the Procession of the Holy Spirit, in the sense of His Existence, from the Two
Hypostases. Then the Orthodox were obliged to declare that the filioque, as an
addition within the Symbol of Faith, hadalways been a canonical and blessed
act. By this alone there were reduced to naught all the objections of the
Greeks from the time of Patriarch Photios, as well as the works of St. Mark of
Ephesus and the interdictions for changing the Symbol of Faith which had been
made at the Third and Fourth Ecumenical Councils. One should also note that not
all the Roman Popes had approved of the filioque, and several had considered
its introduction into the Symbol of Faith completely uncanonical. But now all
this was forgotten. Everything was sacrificed to the demands of Pope Eugenius
and his cardinals.
Further, it was demanded of the Orthodox to accept the
Latin teaching concerning the consecration of the Holy Gifts and renounce their
own as expressed in the performance of the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern
Church. [4] Besides, this was expressed by the Latins in disdainful
declarations concerning the Liturgical practice of the Eastern Church.
Finally, the Orthodox were obliged to sign and
acknowledge a confession of Papism, expressed thus: "We decree that the
Holy Apostolic Throne and Roman Pontiff possess a primacy over the whole earth,
and that this Roman Pontiff is the Successor of the blessed Peter, Prince of
the Apostles, and is the true Vicar of Christ, the Head of the whole Church,
Pastor and Teacher of all Christians; and that our Lord Jesus Christ in the
person of St. Peter has given him full authority to shepherd, direct and rule
the whole Church, as is likewise contained in the acts of the Ecumenical
Councils and in the holy canons." [5] The Orthodox were likewise forced to
acknowledge purgatory.
And so Orthodoxy was to cease to exist. Something even
more painful was the fact that Orthodoxy had been sold, and not merely
betrayed. For when a majority of the Orthodox delegates had found that the
Vatican's demands were completely unacceptable, certain warm partisans of the
Union had asked the Pope to inform them openly what advantages Byzantium would
derive from the Union. The Pope grasped the "business" side of the
question and offered the following: (1) The Vatican would provide the means to
send the Greeks back to Constantinople. (2) 300 (!) soldiers would be
maintained at Papal expense in Constantinople for the defense of the capital
against the Turks (3) Two ships would be maintained on the Bosphorus for
defense of the city. (4) A crusade would go through Constantinople. (5) The Pope
would summon the Western sovereigns to the aid of Byzantium. The last two
promises were purely theoretical. However, when the negotiations came to a dead
end, and the Emperor himself was ready to break off further negotiations, the
whole affair was settled by four metropolitans, partisans of the Union; and the
affair was concluded with a lavish entertainment given by the Pope; theological
disputes concerning the privileges of the See of Rome were conducted over
wineglasses.
The end came at last. An Act of Union was drawn up in
which the Orthodox renounced their Orthodoxy and accepted all the Latin
formulas and innovations which had only just appeared in the bosom of the Latin
Church, such as the teaching on purgatory. They accepted also an extreme form of
Papism, by this act renouncing the ecclesiology that was the essence of the
Orthodox Church. All the Orthodox delegates accepted and signed the Union,
whether for themselves or, in the case of some, for the Eastern Patriarchs, by
whom they had been entrusted to represent them. The signing, on July 5, 1439,
was accompanied by a triumphant service, and after the solemn declaration of
the Union, read in Latin and Greek, the Greek delegates kissed the Pope's knee.
Administratively speaking, the whole Orthodox Church
signed: Emperor John, the metropolitans and representatives of the Eastern
Patriarchs, the Metropolitan of Kiev Isidore, and the Russian Bishop Abraham.
Only one hierarch did not sign. It would be superfluous to mention his name:
St. Mark of Ephesus. But no one paid the least attention to him. What was one
man, and he humiliated and fatally ill, in comparison with the all powerful
Vatican, headed by the mighty Pope Eugenius IV? What was this one Greek in
comparison with the whole multitude of Greek dignitaries headed by Emperor
John, and the Greek metropolitans? There is a Russian proverb: ''One alone on
the field is no warrior." However, in this one man was represented the
whole might of the Orthodox Church.
This one man represented in himself the
whole Orthodox Church. He was a giant of giants, bearing in himself all the
sanctity of Orthodoxy and all its might! And this is why, when Pope Eugenius
was solemnly shown by his cardinals the Act of Union, signed by all the Greek
delegates, he said, not finding on it the signature of St. Mark: "And so
we have accomplished nothing." All the success of the Vatican was illusory
and short-lived. The Pope attempted by every means to compel St. Mark to sign
the Union, a fact that is attested both by Andrew of Rhodes [6] and Syropoulos.
[7] The Pope demanded that St. Mark be deprived of his rank then and there for
his refusal to sign the Act of Union. But Emperor John did not allow him to be
harmed, because in the depths of his heart he respected St. Mark.
Syropoulos relates the final meeting of St. Mark with
the Pope. "The Pope asked of the Emperor that St. Mark appear before him.
The Emperor, having summoned him beforehand, persuaded him, saying:'When the
Pope asks you to appear before him already two and three times, you must go to
him; but have no fear, for I have spoken and requested and arranged with the
Pope so that you will be given no offense or injury. And so, go and listen to
everything he says, and reply openly in whatever manner will seem to you the most
suitable.' And so Mark went to appear before the Pope, and finding him sitting
informally in his own quarters with his cardinals and his bishops, he was
uncertain in what fashion he should express respect to the Pope. Seeing that
all who surrounded the Pope were sitting, he said: 'I have been suffering from
a kidney ailment and severe gout and have not the strength to stand,' and
proceeded to sit in his place.
The Pope spoke long with Mark; his aim was to
persuade him also to follow the decision of the Council and affirm the Union,
and if he refused to do this, then he should know that he would be subject to
the same interdictions which previous Ecumenical Councils laid upon the
obstinate, who, deprived of every gift of the Church, were case out as heretics.
To the Pope's words Mark gave an extensive, commanding reply. Concerning the
interdictions with which the Pope threatened him, he said:
'The Councils of the
Church have condemned as rebels those who have transgressed against some dogma
and have preached thus and fought for this, for which reason also they are
called ''heretics''; and from the beginning the Church has condemned the heresy
itself, and only then has it condemned the leaders of the heresy and its
defenders. But I have by no means preached my own teaching, nor have I
introduced anything new in the Church, nor defended any foreign and false
doctrine; but I have held only that teaching which the Church received in
perfect form from our Saviour, and in which it has steadfastly remained to this
day: the teaching which the Holy Church of Rome, before the schism that
occurred between us, possessed no less than our Eastern Church; the teaching
which, as holy, you formerly were wont to praise, and often at this very
Council you mentioned with respect and honor, and which no one could reproach
or dispute. And if I hold it and do not allow myself to depart from it, what
Council will subject me to the interdiction to which heretics are subject? What
sound and pious mind will act thus with me? For first of all one must condemn
the teaching which I hold; but if you acknowledge it as pious and Orthodox,
then why am I deserving of punishment?' Having said this and more of the like,
and listened to the Pope, he returned to his quarters." [8]
V. AFTER THE COUNCIL
St. Mark returned to Constantinople with Emperor John
on February 1,1440. What a sorrowful return it was! No sooner had the Emperor
managed to set foot on land than he was informed of the death of his beloved
wife; after this the Emperor out of sorrow did not leave his quarters for three
months. None of the hierarchs would agree to accept the post of Patriarch of
Constantinople, knowing that this post would oblige one to proceed with the
Union. The people who met them, as the Greek historian Doukas testifies, asked
the Orthodox delegates who had signed the Union: "How did the Council go?
Were we victorious?" To which the hierarchs replied: "No! We sold our
faith, we bartered piety for impiety (i.e., Orthodox doctrine for heresy) and
have become azymites." The people asked then: "Why did you
sign?" "From fear of the Latins," ''Did the Latins then beat you
or put you in prison?" ''No. But our right hand signed: let it be cut off!
Our tongue confessed: let it be torn out!" [9]
A painful silence set in. Despite the Great Lent, the
season most filled with prayer, churches were empty and there were no services:
no one wished to serve with those who had signed the Union. In Constantinople
revolution was ripening. St. Mark alone was pure in heart and had no reproach on
his conscience. But he too suffered immeasurably. Around him united all the
zealots for Orthodoxy, especially the monks of the Holy Mountain (Athos) and
the ordinary village priests. The whole episcopate, the whole court—all was in
the hands of the Uniates, in absolute submission to the representatives of the
Vatican, who came often to inspect how the Union was being carried out among
the people. The Church was in extreme danger; as St. Mark wrote: "the
night of Union encompassed the Church." [10]
St. Mark became weak in body, but in spirit he burned,
and because of this, as John Eugenikos writes, "by Divine Providence he
miraculously escaped danger, and the radiant one radiantly returned and was
preserved for the fatherland, being met by a universal enthusiasm and
respect." [11] The Byzantine people did not accept the Union: while all
the exhortations of the partisans of the Union were ignored, the flaming
sermons of St. Mark found an enthusiastic response, as Professor Ostrogorsky
notes. [12] Contemporaries of these events, passionate Uniates, note with
indignation and perplexity St. Mark's activity for the harm of the Union. Thus
Joseph, Bishop of Methonensis, writes: ''Having returned to Constantinople,
Ephesus disturbed and confused the Eastern Church by his writings and addresses
directed against the decrees of the Council of Florence." [13] Andrew of
Rhodes calls the letters of St. Mark, which he sent out for the strengthening
of Orthodoxy, ''most noxious" and ''seductive." [14] And present-day
Church historians, both Orthodox and Latin, acknowledge that the shattering of
the Union of Florence was due to the writings and activity of St. Mark. [15]
St. Mark did not remain long in Constantinople, but
soon, without informing the Emperor, left for Ephesus, his see, which it is
possible he had not yet visited, since immediately after his consecration in
Constantinople he had left for the Council in Italy. [16] Two reasons, it would
appear, impelled St. Mark to leave Constantinople for Ephesus: pastoral concern
for his flock, which found itself under the Turks in the most woeful
circumstances; and the desire to unite spiritually around himself those who
were zealous for Orthodoxy, in so far as in Constantinople he had actually been
under house arrest. It would appear that it is precisely from Ephesus that St.
Mark sent his letters, his confession of faith, and his account of his activity
at the Council of Florence. All these documents are to be found in my book in
Russian translation.
Concerning the activity of St. Mark in Ephesus, John
Eugenikos writes briefly thus: "Actively traveling everywhere throughout
the regions of the great Evangelist and Theologian John, and doing this over
long periods and with labor and difficulty, being sick in body; visiting the
suffering holy churches, and especially constructing the church of the
metropoly with the adjoining buildings; ordaining priests; helping those
suffering injustice, whether by reason of persecution, or of some trial from
the side of the unrighteous; defending widows and orphans; shaming,
interdicting, comforting, exhorting, appealing, strengthening: he was,
according to the divine Apostle, everything for everyone." [17] John
Eugenikos further declares that inasmuch as the Saint had sufficiently sacrificed
himself for his flock, while his constant desire had been monastic solitude and
seclusion, he finally desired to go to the Holy Mountain. But there was yet
another reason, a more weighty one, about which John Eugenikos was silent for
political reasons; St. Mark himself relates this in one of his letters: he had
no mandate from the authorities and for this reason his stay in Ephesus was as
it were illegal, and he was compelled to leave his flock, this time forever.
[18]
The ship on which St. Mark sailed to Athos put in at
the island of Limnos, one of the few islands that still belonged to Byzantium.
Here St. Mark was recognized by the police authorities and, by a directive
which they already possessed from Emperor John Paleologos, was arrested and
imprisoned. For the space of two years St. Mark suffered in confinement. John
Eugenikos thus informs us of this period in the Saint's life: "Here who
would not deservedly marvel, or would not acknowledge the greatness of soul and
enduring of misfortunes which he showed: suffering in the burning sun and
struggling with privations of the most necessary things and tormented by
diseases that came one upon the other, or enduring painful confinement while
the fleet of the impious Moslems surrounded the island and inflicted
destruction." [19] Once the island was threatened by imminent disaster
from a Turkish fleet which surrounded the island. But the danger unexpectedly
passed, and the saved inhabitants ascribed their salvation to the prayers of
St. Mark, imprisoned in the fortress. [20]
St. Mark never complained about his miserable
condition; only in one letter can we see how he suffered and how he was wanting
in support from people. He writes thus to the Pro-hegumenos of Vatoped
Monastery: "We have found great consolation from your brothers who are
here, the most honorable ecclesiarch and the great economos and others, whom we
have seen as inspired images of your love and piety; for they have shown us
love and have calmed and strengthened us. May the Lord grant you a worthy
reward for their labor and love!" [21]
Finding himself in such painful circumstances, St.
Mark continued his battle for the Church, as he writes in one of his letters:
"I have been arrested. But the word of God and the power of Truth cannot
be bound, but all the stronger flow and prosper, and many of the brethren,
encouraged by my exile, overthrow the reproaches of the lawless and the
violators of the Orthodox Faith and the customs of the fatherland." [22]
He knew that his confession was indispensable, because, as he wrote: "If
there had been no persecution, the martyrs would not have shone, nor would the
confessors have received the crown of victory from Christ and by their exploits
strengthened and gladdened the Orthodox Church." [23] In two years Emperor
John ordered St. Mark released and allowed to go where he wished. This
liberation occurred on the day when the Seven Martyr-youths of Ephesus are
commemorated, and St. Mark dedicated to them a poem of thanksgiving. [24] St.
Mark no longer had the physical strength for ascetic labors on the Holy
Mountain; he had become quite feeble, and so he left for his home in
Constantinople.
The last year and one-half or two years of his holy
life St. Mark spent in painful circumstances of disease and persecution by the
Uniate episcopate and Court. At this time he restored many to Orthodoxy by his
personal influence. [25] Especially beneficial for the Church was the return of
George Scholarios, who subsequently occupied the position of leader in the
battle for Orthodoxy; after the fall of Constantinople he was elected Patriarch
of Constantinople.
During this time, i.e., the last two years of St.
Mark's life, much happened. The Eastern Patriarchs condemned the Council of
Florence and named it "tyrannical and foul," and refused to recognize
the Union. When Metropolitan Isidore, one of the most unprincipled betrayers of
Orthodoxy, appeared in Moscow preceded by the Papal cross, he was arrested by
the Grand Prince of Moscow Vassily Vassilievich, and subsequently he was helped
to flee to Rome, where he received a cardinal's hat. A tradition is preserved
that St. Mark was much gladdened by the conduct of the Grand Prince of Moscow
and set him up as an example to the Byzantine authorities. [26]
In Constantinople itself, however, the Union was being
significantly strengthened. One may say that the Union not only became the
State Church of Byzantium, but also gradually took possession, through the
episcopate, of the whole of Church life. Only certain individuals, grouped
around St. Mark, represented at that time the Orthodox Church. Permanent
representatives of the Vatican, including Cardinal Isidore, saw to the official
loyalty to the Union of the Byzantine Church and Court, placing in connection
with this the fulfillment also of the Papal promises to Byzantium. The danger
to the Church was immense, and St. Mark was aware of this. He was aware that
before everything else should be placed the battle for Orthodoxy, for, as he
said, ''murdered souls which have been tempted concerning the sacrament of
Faith." [27] And he, the leader of the battle, marching at the head of the
army, was scarcely able to walk, exhausted by disease and harassed by the wiles
of men. But the power of God is accomplished in weakness!
VIII. THE DEATH OF ST. MARK
St. Mark died on June 23, 1444, [28] at the age of 52.
George Scholarios writes thus of St. Mark's death: ''But our sorrow was
increased yet more by the fact that he was taken away from our embrace before
he had grown old in the virtues which he had acquired, before we could
sufficiently enjoy his presence, in the full power of this passing life! No
defect nor cunning had the power to shake his mind, nor to lead astray his
soul, so strongly was it nourished and tempered by virtue! Even if the vault of
heaven should fall, even then the righteousness of this man would not be
shaken, his strength would not fail, his soul would not be moved, and his
thought would not be impaired by such difficult trials." [29]
He suffered terribly for fourteen days before his
death. Of St. Mark's death itself there has been preserved the account of his
brother, the Nomophilax John, who relates: "Thus, having lived with love
of God and in everything excelled in his sojourn from his youth to the divine
Skhema: in the most holy Skhema, in the degrees of priestly service, in the
hierarchal dignity, in arguments concerning the Orthodox Faith and in devout
and passionless confession,—having attained fifty-two years of bodily age, in
the month of June on the twenty-third day he departed rejoicing to Him to Whom
he wished, according to Paul, to be dissolved to be with Him, Whom he glorified
by good works, Whom he theologized in Orthodox fashion, Whom he pleased his
whole life long. He was sick for fourteen days, and the disease itself, as he
himself said, had upon him the same effect as those iron instruments of torture
applied by executioners to the holy martyrs, and which as it were girdled his
ribs and internal organs, pressed upon them and remained attached in such a
state and caused absolutely unbearable pain; so that it happened that what men
could not do with his sacred martyr's body was fulfilled by disease, according
to the unutterable judgment of Providence, in order that this Confessor of
Truth and Martyr and Conqueror of all possible sufferings and Victor should
appear before God after going through every misery, and that even to his last
breath, as gold tried in the furnace, and in order that thanks to this he might
receive yet greater honor and rewards eternally from the just judge." [30]
Although his agony was painful in the extreme, death
itself came easily, and the Saint joyfully gave to God his blessed and radiant
spirit. John Eugenikos tells us this: "Long before his death he gave
instructions and like a father gave commands to those present concerning the
correction of the Church and our piety and open preservation of the true dogmas
of the Church, and concerning turning away from innovation; and adding his
final words: 'Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the Living God, into Thy hands I commit
my spirit,' he thus departed to God." [31] Before the end, on the very day
of his death, St Mark gave over to his former student and spiritual son the
leadership of the Orthodox Church, although George Scholarios was at that time
still a secular prince. St. Mark was buried in the Mangana Monastery in
Constantinople. "Amidst a throng of people and guards with numerous marks
of respect, there was placed in the sacred monastery of Mangana dedicated to
the divine Martyr George, with honor, as a treasure, the sacred and greatly
honored vessel of a sanctified soul and a temple to the glory of God, Who is
glorified and wondrous in His Saints." [32]
From the funeral address of George Scholarios we may
see the depth of the sorrow that overcame Orthodox people with the loss of such
a great pillar of the Church and such a good and noble man, such a meek and
approachable and such a learned man, who, in the expression of John Eugenikos,
drew all to himself as a magnet attracts iron. [33] But the triumph of
Orthodoxy was accomplished only after the death of St. Mark.
The successor of
Emperor John, his brother Constantine, openly announced his desire to preserve
Orthodoxy in its purity. [34] Not long before the Fall of Constantinople a
Council was convoked at which the Union and its promoters were triumphantly
condemned and the Union itself overthrown, and the memory of St. Mark honored
by all. This Council was more nominal than actual, and was composed of a quite
small number of participants; historically it did not present itself as much,
but as an expression of the Orthodox Church it has a great significance as the
triumphant conclusion of the battle that St. Mark waged, as a Council of the
Orthodox Church, however small she may have been at that time. [35]
IX. COMMEMORATION AND MIRACLES OF ST. MARK
The solemn commemoration of St. Mark of Ephesus
belonged at first to the family Eugenikos. Every year, probably on the day of
the Saint's death, the Eugenikos family celebrated a "Service"
(Akolouthia) and a synaxarion was read consisting of a short Life of the Saint.
It should be noted that in Byzantium the Akolouthia was not necessarily
connected with a canonization of the dead; it was simply a eulogy of the dead.
Akolouthii were written by students to their teachers, to their benefactors and
to people close to them, who were of righteous life. These Akolouthii were for
domestic use, and they exist for many who were never canonized by the Church;
there is one dedicated to Emperor Manuel II Paleologos that was probably
written by St Mark himself. [36]
And so the solemn commemoration of St Mark of Ephesus
was celebrated at first in the Eugenikos family circle. A wider glorification
of St. Mark was aided by George Scholarios in his capacity of Patriarch of
Constantinople Decades passed, and then centuries, and the memory of St. Mark
ever more broadly became glorified among devout people, in holy monasteries and
churches; and finally, nearly 300 years after the death of the Saint, in 1734,
the Holy Synod of the Church of Constantinople, under the presidency of
Patriarch Seraphim, brought out a decree of canonization of St Mark of Ephesus
January 19 was instituted as the date of the Saint's commemoration. [37] As a
result, to the two ancient services that already existed (translated in our
book into Church Slavonic for use in Church services), [38] were added six more
services, but they are inferior to the ancient services to the Saint.
In the book of Doukake, Iaspis Tou Noetou Paradeisou
for the month of January there is found the following miracle performed by St.
Mark many years after his death. "A very honorable man named Demetrios
Zourbaios had a sister who became grievously ill. Wherefore he called in all
the doctors of Mesolongion and spent much money on them. They, however, brought
no benefit to his sister, but rather she became worse. For three days she lose
all speech and movement, being totally unconscious, so that even the doctors
decided that she was going to die. Then he and the rest of her relatives began
preparing the necessities for the funeral.
But, most unexpectedly, they heard a
voice and a great groan coming from her, and turning towards them she said,
'Why don t you change my clothes, since I have been drenched?' Her brother
became overjoyed upon hearing her speak, and running to her he asked what was
the matter and how she became so wet. She answered, 'A certain bishop came
here, took me by my hand, and led me to a fountain and put me inside a cistern.
After he had washed me, he said to me, "Return now; you no longer have any
illness."' But her brother again asked her, 'Why didn't you ask him that
granted you your health who he was?' And she said, 'I asked him, ' Who are you,
your holiness? and he told me, "I am the Metropolitan of Ephesus, Mark
Eugenikos."' And having said these things, she arose immediately from the
bed without any remnant of illness. When they took her to change her clothes,
they were all amazed—O, the wonder!—seeing that not only were her clothes
soaked, but even the bed and the other blankets upon which she had lain. After
this miracle, the above-mentioned woman made an icon of St. Mark for a memorial
of the miracle, and having lived piously for fifteen more years, she departed
to the Lord. [39]
To this article is appended an extremely valuable
document: the appeal of St. Mark to those present on the very day of his death,
his special exhortation to George Scholarios, in which he begs him to take upon
himself the leadership of the Orthodox Church, and the reply of George
Scholarios to St Mark. [40]
We shall conclude our short sketch of the life and
activity of St. Mark of Ephesus with the invocation with which the ancient
biographer of the Saint ends his Synaxarion:
By thy prayers of St Mark, Christ our God, and all Thy
holy Fathers, Teachers and Theologians, preserve Thy Church in Orthodox
confession unto the ages!
Endnotes
* "our book" refers to St. Mark of Ephesus
and the Union of Florence, by Archimandrite Amvrossy Pogodin (Jordanville: Holy
Trinity Monastery, 1963). In Russian.
After Hefele, Histoire des Conciles, vol. VII, pt. II,
pp. 1015sq.
See the address of St. Mark to Pope Eugenius, pt. I;
in our book, p. 40.
Epistle of St. Mark to the abbot of Vataped Monastery,
pt. 2; in our book, p 354
Although this was not included in the Act of Union
itself, nonetheless the Orthodox were required to sign a special document
concerning this St. Mark wrote a special tractate (Rust tr. in our book, pp.
295-301), in which he demonstrates the correctness of the Orthodox tradition,
founded on Apostolic and Patristic tradition.
The Act of Union; Rus. tr. in our book, p. 306.
The Testimony of Archbp. Andrew of Rhodes concerning
St. Mark of Ephesus; Rus tr. of the Latin text in our book, pp 109-110.
See the narrative included below from the book of
Syropoulos, True History, sec X, ch. 12, ed. Creighton, pp, 299-300; Rus. tr.
in our book, pp 312-3.
See preceding note.
In our book, p. 300.
Epistle of St. Mark to George Scholarios, pt. 2; Rus.
tr. in our book, p. 341.
From the Synaxarion to St. Mark, p. 322 in our book.
Ostrogorsky, History of the Byzantine State, Oxford,
1956, p. 500.
Josephi Methonensis Episcopi Synaxarium Concil.
Florentini. Migne, Patrologia Graeca, vol. 159, col. 1105.
See note 6.
Vogt, Dictionnaire de la Theologie Catholique, vol. 6,
p 37. Buzzone in Dizionario Ecclesiastico, 1955, p. 821. Meyer in
Realencyclopaedie fuer Protestant Theologie und Kirche, vol. 12, pp. 287-8.
Pandelakis inMegale Ellenike Egkuklopaideia, Athens, vol. 11, p 105-6; etc.
I maintain this opinion in my book, pp 28-9.
Rus. tr. of the Synaxarion to St. Mark in our book, p.
325.
Epistle of St. Mark to Hieromonk Theophan on Euboia
Island, pt. 1; Rus. tr. in our book, p. 356.
Rus. tr. in our book, p. 326.
Ibid
Pt. 1; p. 354 in our book
See note 18.
Epistle of St Mark to the Ecumenical Patriarch; Rus.
tr in our book, p. 352.
Published by Papadopoulos-Kerameus in Anekdota
Ellenika, Constantinople, 1884, pp. 102-3; later by Mgr. L. Petit in Revue de
l’Orient chretien, Paris, 1923, pp. 414-5; Rus. tr. in our book, pp. 227-8.
Of this the Great Orator Manuel testifies in his
Synaxarion to Saint Mark; see in our book, p 354.
According to A. Norov, Journey to the Seven Churches
Mentioned in the Apocalypse, St Petersburg, 1847, p. 286.
Epistle of St Mark to George Scholarios, pt. 3; see
our book, p. 341.
On the date of St Mark’s death there have been many
suppositions and much scholarly debate; we hold to the opinion of Mgr. L.
Petit.
From the Funeral Oration of George Scholarios to St.
Mark, pt. 10; Rus. tr. publ. by A. Norov in Unpublished Works of Mark of
Ephesus and George Scholarios, Paris, 1859.
From our translation of the Synaxarion to St. Mark, p.
366.
Ibid
From the Synaxarion of John Eugenikos.
From the Service to St Mark, Canon, Song 7.
Prof A. Kartashev, Outline of the History of the
Russian Church, vol. 1, p. 360.
The question of the Council of Constantinople of 1450
has been a subject of scholarly debate.
See our essay (in Russian) in Orthodox Path for 1966:
"From the Writings of the Most Pious Emperor Manuel I Paleologos,"
pp. 47ff.
Information on the canonization of St. Mark was taken
from the essay of Papadopoulos-Kerameus , "Mark os o Eugenikos os Pater
Agios tes Orthodoxou Katholikes Ekklesias," in Byzantinische Zeitschrift,
1902, vol. 11, pp. 50-69.
pp. 385-400 in our book; the Rev. Abbot Alypy of Holy
Trinity Monastery, Jordanville, N.Y., helped us in this translation.
K. Doukske, op. cit., Athens, 1889, pp. 397-429; Rus.
tr. in our book, pp. 414-5. (The present translation is direct from the Greek,
courtesy of Holy Transfiguration Monastery, Boston, Mass.)
For manuscripts and editions of this document, see our
book, p. 368, where will be found also the Russian translation from which the
following English translation was taken.
ADDRESS OF ST. MARK OF EPHESUS ON THE DAY OF HIS DEATH
On the final day of his earthly life, the last
thoughts of St. Mark were not for himself, but for Orthodoxy, to which he had
devoted his whole life. Appealing to his followers to stand firm in the battle
for Orthodoxy, he turned especially to one man in whom he hoped to find a
successor to himself as leader in this battle. This hope was richly fulfilled
in the person of George Scholarios, who became an ardent champion of Orthodox
and, as first Patriarch of Constantinople after the fall of Byzantium, was instrumental
in freeing the Church from the yoke of the false Union. He was subsequently
canonized under his monastic name of Gennadios and is commemorated on August
31.
I WISH TO EXPRESS MY OPINION in more detail,
especially now that my death is approaching, so as to be consistent with myself
from beginning to end, and lest anyone should think that I have said one thing
and concealed another in my thoughts, foe which it would be just to shame me in
this hour of my death.
Concerning the Patriarch I shall say this, lest it
should perhaps occur to him to show me a certain respect at the burial of this
my humble body, or to send to my grave any of his hierarchs or clergy or in
general any of those in communion with him in order to take part in prayer or
to join the priests invited to it from amongst us, thinking that at some time,
or perhaps secretly, I had allowed communion with him. And lest my silence give
occasion to those who do not know my views well and fully to suspect some kind
of conciliation, I hereby state and testify before the many worthy men here
present that I do not desire, in any manner and absolutely, and do not accept
communion with him or with those who are with him, not in this life nor after
my death, just as (I accept) neither the Union nor Latin dogmas, which he and
his adherents have accepted, and for the enforcement of which he has occupies
this presiding place, with the aim of overturning the true dogmas of the
Church. I am absolutely convinced that the farther I stand from him and those
like him, the nearer I am to God and all the saints; and to the degree that I
separate myself from them am I in union with the Truth and with the Holy
Fathers, the Theologians of the Church; and I am likewise convinced that those
who count themselves with them stand far away from the Truth and from the
blessed Teachers of the Church. And for this reason I say: just as in the
course of my whole life I was separated from them, so at the time of my
departure, yea and after my death, I turn away from intercourse and communion
with them and vow and command that none (of them) shall approach either my
burial or my grave, and likewise anyone else from our side, with the aim of
attempting to join and concelebrate in our Divine services; for this would be
to mix what cannot be mixed. But it befits them to be absolutely separated from
us until such time as God shall grant correction and peace to His Church.
THEN, TURNING TO THE DIGNITARY SCHOLARIOS, HE SAID:
I speak now of the dignitary Scholarios, whom I knew
from his early youth, to whom I am well-disposed, and for whom I have great
love, as for my own son and friend... In my intercourse and conversation with
him even to the present time, I have conceived a clear picture of his
exceptional prudence and wisdom and power with words, and therefore I believe
that he is the only one to be found at the present time who is able to extend a
helping hand to the Orthodox Church, which is agitated by the attacks of those
who would destroy the perfection of the dogmas, and likewise, with the help of
God, to correct the Church and affirm Orthodoxy, if only he will not wish
himself to retreat from the deed and hide his candlestick under a bushel. But I
am thoroughly convinced that he will not act thus and, seeing the Church in distress
from the waves and the Faith in dependence upon infirm man (I speak according
to human standards), and knowing that it is possible for him to help her, he
will not to such a degree disobey his conscience as not to haste with all speed
and readiness to enter the battle; for being wise, he is not at all unaware
that the destruction of the Orthodox Faith would be the general perdition.
It is true that in the past, considering that the
battle which was being conducted by others, especially by me, was sufficient,
he did not reveal himself as an open champion of the Truth, being compelled, it
may be, by counsels or by individuals. But I too at an earlier time carried
nothing or quite little into the battle, having sufficiency neither of strength
nor of zeal; and now I have already become nothing: and is there anything less
than nothing? And so if then he likewise supposed that we ourselves could set
something right, and he considered it superfluous for himself to do what others
could do, as well as what, with his completely insignificant help, would be
harmful to others, as he often explained to me, asking pardon—then at the
present time, when I am departing from hence, I see no other equal to him who
could take my place in the Church and the Faith and in the dogmas of Orthodoxy.
Therefore I consider him worthy, being called or rather compelled by the times,
to reveal the spark of piety hidden in him and fight for the Church and sound
doctrine; so that what I could not accomplish, he might set right, with the help
of God. For by the grace of God he can do this, with the mind he has been given
and his power of words, if he will only desire to use these at the propitious
time.
And he is equally obliged in his relation to God and
Faith and Church to fight faithfully and purely for the Faith. And I myself lay
upon him this battle, so that he would be defender of the Church and leader of
sound teaching and champion of right doctrines and the Truth in my place,
having support in God and in the Truth itself, about which the very battle is
being waged; so that being a participant in this with the Holy Teachers and
God.bearing Fathers, the great theologians, he would receive his reward from
the Just Judge when He declares victorious all those who fought for Piety. But he
himself must with all his strength exert zeal for the well-being of the right
doctrines of the Church, as being obliged to give an answer for this on the
Judgment Day to God and to me, who have entrusted this to him and have likewise
reckoned upon bringing into the Good Land these words with over a hundredfold
fruits to come from them. Let him answer me concerning this, so that departing
the present life I might have perfect confidence, and that I might not die in
sorrow, despairing over the correction of the Church.
THE REPLY OF LORD SCHOLARIOS:
I, your Holy Eminence, first of all thank your great
holiness for the praises which you have spoken of me; for, having desired to
show me favor, you have testified of me such great things as I do not possess,
and I am convinced that this is not even near to me. But this proceeds from the
height of goodness and virtue and wisdom of your great holiness, in which I
myself, seeing it from the beginning, have not ceased to delight even to the
present time, as is indeed owing in relation to your great holiness, as a
father and teacher and preceptor; and being directed, as by a rule, by your
perfect understanding of the dogmas and the justness of the judgments which you
have accepted and with which I am in accord, and likewise rejecting without
doubt what is not in accord with your judgment, I have never refused to fulfill
my duty as a son and disciple in relation to your great holiness. You, your
great holiness, are yourself a witness to this. You know that I have always acted
thus toward you, and revealing the deeper feelings of my convictions, I have
given you these vows.
Concerning the fact that earlier I did not step out
openly into the battle which your great holiness was waging, but kept silent,
no one knows better the reason for this than your great holiness, for I often
confided my arguments to you and sincerely opened my heart concerning this and
begged forgiveness, and I was not deprived of it. But now, with God's help, I
have come to despise this, and have made myself a sincere and open defender of
the Truth, in order fearlessly to proclaim the dogmas of my Fathers and the
perfection of Orthodoxy, in accordance with the view of your greatest holiness.
I say this not because I see you already taken from hence, for we have not
abandoned our last hopes, but we hope in God that you will recover from your
infirmity and will be with us and will labor together in this. If, however, by
the judgments known to God, you will depart from hence to that place of rest
which you have prepared for yourself, and if by reason also of our unworthiness
you will go there where you are worthy to dwell,—then, affirming absolutely, I
say to you before God and the Holy Angels who now stand invisibly before us,
and before the many and worthy men here present, that in everything I shall be
in place of you and in place of your tongue, and of that with which you burned
and which you handed down with love, I myself, both defending and offering to
all, will betray absolutely nothing, but will fight for it to the end, at the
risk of blood and death. And although my experience and strength are small, I
am nonetheless convinced that your great holiness will fill in my insufficiency
with the God-pleasing prayers characteristic of you, both now when you are here
with us, and when you shall have departed.
+ + +
From Orthodox Word, vol III, pp. 89-106. For further
reading on St. Mark see:
The Lives of the Pillars of Orthodoxy (Buena Vista,
CO: Holy Apostles Convent and the Dormition Skete, 1990). Contains the lives of
St. Photios, St. Mark of Ephesus, and St. Gregory Palamas. Over 600 pages.
Ostroumoff, Ivan, The History of the Council of
Florence (Boston, MA: Holy Transfiguration Monastery, 1971).
Your servant in Christ,
Fr Thomas Mooreapantaortodoxias
Εγγραφή σε:
Αναρτήσεις (Atom)





