| In 1478, after the death of St Alexis, Metropolitan of Moscow, the new Metropolitan, St Cyprian (September 16) arrived in Moscow. But Great Prince Demetrius of the Don wanted to establish his own priest and colleague Michael [Mitaya] as metropolitan, and he would not accept Metropolitan Cyprian. Instead, he expelled him from Moscow. St Cyprian was in a difficult position. But he found support and sympathy among the pillars of Russian monasticism, Sts Sergius of Radonezh and Athanasius of Vysotsk. From the very beginning, they saw the canonical legitimacy of the Metropolitan in his dispute with the Great Prince and they supported him in the prolonged struggle (1478-1490) for the restoration of canonical order and unity in the Russian Church. St Cyprian had to journey several times during these years to Constantinople to participate in council deliberations concerning the governace of the Russian Church. On one of these journeys, with the blessing of holy Abba Sergius, St Athanasius of Vysotsk went to Constantinople with his friend the Metropolitan, leaving his own disciple, St Athanasius the Younger as the igumen of the Vysotsk monastery. At Constantinople St Athanasius settled into the monastery of the holy Forerunner and Baptist John (Studion), where he found a cell for himself and for several disciples who had come with him. St Athanasius occupied himself with prayer and salvific theological books. The monk spent about twenty years in the capital of Church culture, working to translate books from the Greek language and copying Church books, which he then sent off to Rus. Thereby, he transmitted to the Russian Church not only a legacy of great Orthodox thought, but also the traditions of Constantinople’s masters of manuscript illumination, with their elegant penmanship and artistry of textual miniatures, achieving a harmony of content and form. A continuing creative connection was established between St Athanasius’s skillful copying of books at Constantinople and the calligraphic and iconographic school of the Vysotsk monastery at Serpukhov. |
| Metropolitan Gavriil noted the role of the All-Orthodox Council held in Sofia in 1998. It summoned the schismatics and demanded repentance. They understood their sinfulness and repented. Should the Ukrainian Orthodox Church receive the schismatics, the Local Churches would recognize them, he added. Metropolitan Nicolaos of Messogaia and Lavreotiki from the Orthodox Church of Greece said that recognition of the “Kievan Patriarchate” was out of the question, as the Local Orthodox Churches recognize only the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church. “The healing of the schism is her internal problem, and she must solve it without any pressure on the part of the other Orthodox Churches,” he said. Metropolitan Nicolaos underscored the impossibility of recognizing the sacraments administered by the schismatics and told the journalists about a similar situation in Greece. The Holy Synod of the Orthodox Church of Greece resolved not to recognize the baptism of the Greek Old Calendarists, but receive them back from the schism only through rebaptizing. Archbishop Abel of Lublin and Chelm, who represented the Orthodox Church of Poland at the festivities, emphasized that schism was a sin, and any sin can be healed only through repentance. The Church has its own structure, discipline and canon law, and one cannot manipulate her. There is a simple and definite canonical path in the Church. He added: “We live under rather difficult circumstances in Poland, because we do not have many Orthodox Christians in the country. We have signed a declaration on common recognition of the sacrament of baptism with the Roman Catholic Church as there are many mixed marriages. However, this is not a great problem, as both Churches have kept the apostolic succession… Schismatics would accuse us of receiving the Catholics and of not receiving our own, but I say that one should think on a deeper level. Archbishop Abel reminded the journalists that the head of the “Kievan Patriarchate” had been anathematized and that the structure he leads had no place among the canonical Churches. |
| This was the period marked by what is now called the «new deal» (novyi kurs), in the church-state relations. The sphere of legal activity for the Church was enlarged. Charity work was allowed; monasteries and churches were reopened. At the same time the new position of the Church was regulated by the government decree which was not supported by the existing laws. Stalin " s officials did not want to obligate themselves to any formal regulations. They continued to define the measure of legality of the Church in an arbitrary way. The policy towards the Church continued to be a sort of a vent which could be opened or closed when needed. At the same time, unlike the political leaders of the country, the Council of the affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church (and possibly, the State security service) tried to legalize the Church underground movement. Its existence was used as a powerful argument in the discussions with higher officials. Thus, the volatile, non-fixed by law measure of legitimacy played a considerable role in the state politics towards the Russian Church, while the existence of Church underground appeared to be a result of this tactic. During the 1920–1930 the underground existence appeared to be the main way of preserving the church life, as it could not exist legally. This is a reason for the great variety of forms church life took: numerous monastic communities and parishes, forms of higher Church education as well as lots of educational groups for children and youth. There existed charity activities and various forms of economic functioning. The 1940s became a new period in the history of the church underground, marked by the desire to legalize all forms of church life. Thus, during the Wartime, church charity work was legalized and began to flourish. For five years (before 1948) pilgrimages to the «non-official» holy places were proclaimed legal, as well as the traditional processions with icons. The economic church functioning became legal and gradually it occupied its place in the centralized distribution of the resources. |
| “I think that by developing cooperation in this sphere we can try to establish the foundation for joint projects aimed at rendering assistance to those affected by the tragic hostilities in the Middle East,” Patriarch Kirill said. As he noted, thanks to the working group established in 2017 by the Presidential Council for Cooperation with Religious Organizations, in Russia there has appeared an opportunity to carry out collaborative work to render aid to the population of Syria. His Holiness Patriarch Kirill and His Eminence Cardinal Parolin also discussed the situation in Ukraine. As Patriarch Kirill emphasized, the Church must become a factor of reconciliation and must not be involved in the conflict. “The Church ought to play no other role but peacemaking when there is a conflict between people,” he said and noted that it was a principled stand taken by the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate concerning the current situation in Ukraine. “Great many people deeply appreciate the peacemaking position of the Church. It is with satisfaction that we note similarity in our Churches’ positions on the role of the Church in the conflict in Ukraine,” His Holiness concluded. The Vatican’s Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, conveyed to the Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church greetings from Pope Francis and expressed his hope for further development of relationships between the two Churches. Cardinal Parolin agreed that the meeting in Havana had opened doors to a new stage in the history of the two Churches’ relations and emphasized that the bringing of St. Nicholas’s holy relics to Russia, which had become a result of the historic meeting in Havana in February 2016, had a great impact on their relationships. The Secretary of State noted the solidarity of the Vatican and the Russian Orthodox Church concerning the situation in the Middle East. As he pointed out, the plight of Christians and other religious minorities there must arouse conscience of the entire world community and urge the Churches to make their contribution to the improvement of the humanitarian situation in the region. |
| On February 7, 1922, Catholicos-Patriarch Ambrosi, the spiritual father and chief shepherd of his nation, sent a memorandum to participants in the Conference of Genoa in which he defended the rights of the Georgian Church and nation. Every word of his appeal was penetrated with distress for the fate not only of his motherland but of the entire human race. St. Ambrosi assured his audience that a nation and government deprived of Christian virtue would have no future and pleaded for help in this time of misfortune. The receipt of such a memorandum was unprecedented for the Bolshevik regime, and in response the officials had St. Ambrosi arrested. Nevertheless, he fearlessly criticized the government’s complaisance with acts of crime, injustice, and sacrilege. In response to one of the Bolshevik interrogations, the patriarch asserted, “Confession of Faith is a spiritual necessity for every nation — persecution increases its necessity. Faith deepens, being contracted and accumulated, and it bursts out with new energy. So it was in the past, and so it will be in our country. Georgia is no exception to this universal law.” St. Ambrosi spoke these remarkable last words to his persecutors: “My soul belongs to God, my heart to my motherland, and with my flesh you may do whatever you wish.” The court sentenced the Catholicos-Patriarch of All Georgia to seven years, nine months and twenty-eight days in prison. At the end of 1924 St. Ambrosi and the other members of the Synodal Council were granted amnesty, but their grave experience had already taken its toll. The Georgian flock lost its faithful shepherd in 1927. In 1995 the life of Catholicos-Patriarch of All Georgia Ambrosi (Khelaia) was discussed at an expanded council of the Holy Synod of the Georgian Church. In recognition of his great achievements on behalf of the Church and nation, Ambrosi was canonized as “St. Ambrosi the Confessor.” From thy lips, O God-fearing Hierarch Ambrosi, the Holy Spirit uttered sayings of grace. Pray for us, that the Holy Spirit may purify our souls! |
| In conclusion of his speech, Metropolitan Apostolos said, ‘The radiant celebration held to commemorate the great Prince Vladimir is a remarkable occasion for all of us to remember the inviolable fraternal bonds tying the two Churches and to come in touch again with our common and precious Byzantine heritage and to see how we should work for the unity so dear to us so that we may show all the beautiful and salvific world of the One Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and approach the forthcoming Holy and Great Council in the sincerity of our hearts’. In his response, Patriarch Kirill said, ‘It is important for us today to hear the voice of the Church of Constantinople, from which our people received baptism through the great Prince Vladimir. Thank you for remembering Patriarch Photius who sent Ss Cyril and Methodius to northern lands in which the Ross lived to preach the truth of Christ. We are aware how important was his presence in Crimea and northern Black See cost for sowing the seeds of Christian faith’. Stressing the world historical significance of the Baptism of Rus’, Patriarch Kirill said that ‘it is important in the first place for all the Slavic nations who lived and live in the vast lands of historical Rus’. His Holiness presented the guests with jubilee medals “In Memory of the Millennium of the Demise of Prince Vladimir Equal-to-the-Apostles’. DECR Communication Service Photos by Patriarchal Press Service Code for blog Since you are here… …we do have a small request. More and more people visit Orthodoxy and the World website. However, resources for editorial are scarce. In comparison to some mass media, we do not make paid subscription. It is our deepest belief that preaching Christ for money is wrong. Having said that, Pravmir provides daily articles from an autonomous news service, weekly wall newspaper for churches, lectorium, photos, videos, hosting and servers. Editors and translators work together towards one goal: to make our four websites possible - Pravmir.ru, Neinvalid.ru, Matrony.ru and Pravmir.com. Therefore our request for help is understandable. |
| The participants in the festivities attended the Divine Liturgy at the Cathedral of the Resurrection of Christ in Podgorica. That time, in spite of well-grounded fears as to his personal safety, His Holiness Patriarch Porfirije arrived to the Cetinje monastery in helicopter to administer the installation of His Eminence Joanikije at the place wh ere all the Metropolitans of Montenegro were installed. Not numerous but loud and aggressive, politically engaged opponents to the lawful and canonical enthronement of Metropolitan Joanikije were not ready to such a turn of the events. The Patriarch’s concelebrants included the elected Metropolitan Joanikije of Montenegro and the Littoral, Bishop David of Kruševac and an assembly of clergy. After the service, Bishop David read out the resolution of the Bishops’ Council of the Serbian Orthodox Church on the election of His Eminence Joanikije. Addressing Metropolitan Joanikije at the presentation of the crozier to him, Patriarch Porfirije reminded him of the difficulties and responsibility of the service he was accepting. ‘Your mission will lie in blunting edges, building bridges, not asking who is who, to which nation one belongs… but asking only the name one was given when baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit’, His Holiness stressed noting that ‘in the Church there are no borders, nor enmity, nor divisions’, ‘she gathers together everybody through Christ and in Christ’. Metropolitan Joanikije, in his turn, underlined, ‘By your coming, Your Holiness, and by your having shared with us the present concerns you have shown great love not only for me but also for the whole people of Montenegro. Coming with you, Your Holiness, are representatives of holy Churches of God who bear in their souls the pleroma of Universal Orthodoxy; they have gathered together to share their joy with us but they were prevented from coming to Cetinje. However, they are praying today in the church of the Resurrection of Christ next to the grave of Metropolitan Amfilohije of blessed memory… Together with you they have lifted up prayers for peace, reconciliation and love among brothers’. |
| 858: Photios’ consecration as Patriarch Very reluctantly, Photios accepted this completely unexpected summons by the Church and the Emperor to be the new patriarch. And because the Nativity of the Lord was fast approaching, and a patriarch would be needed to lead the services, Photios was elevated to the position of Patriarch through ceremonies of tonsuring, diaconal and priestly ordination, and consecration as bishop on five consecutive days (St. Ambrose of Milan had been elevated from layman to bishop in a similarly hasty fashion in 386, as had St. Tarasios in 784). His consecration as Patriarch was accomplished by Bp. “Gregory Asbestos, leader of the liberals, and by two Ignatian bishops.” Now the plot really thickens! According to Dvornik, About two months after Photios' ordination, the extreme followers of Ignatios, assembled in the church of St. Irene, refused obedience to the new patriarch and demanded the reestablishment of Ignatios. The reason for this action may have lain in differing interpretations of the nature of the guarantees given by Photios to the five leaders of the Ignatian party. Photios convoked a synod in the church of the Holy Apostles (859). The opposing party prevented their condemnation by provoking a riot (Zonnaras, PG 137:1004f ), which had a political background and which was suppressed with bloodshed by the imperial police. Photios protested against the cruelty of the police, and threatened Bardas with his abdication [certainly this is a clear indication of his lack of lust for the position, as Western critics have so often accused him of for centuries]. After peace had been established, the synod was reconvened in the church of the Blachernae palace. In order to deprive the opposition of any claim concerning the legitimacy of Ignatios' patriarchate, the synod declared, on the request of Bardas, that the whole patriarchate of Ignatios was illegitimate because he had not been elected by a synod, but had simply been appointed by Empress [St.] Theodora [back in 847]. During the riots Ignatios and some of his followers were imprisoned. Ignatios was interned in various places, finally to a monastery on the island of Terebinthus. Bardas must, however, have convinced himself that Ignatios had not been responsible for the riots, because he allowed him to stay (860) in the palace of Posis in Constantinople, which had been built by Ignatios' mother. |
| The symbolic leader of the world’s Eastern Orthodox Christians, the successor to the Apostle Andrew, had earlier invited Francis, the successor to the Apostle Peter, to join him in Jerusalem to mark the 50th anniversary of the breakthrough meeting between Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I. Their embrace ended 900-plus years of mutual excommunication in the wake of the Great Schism of 1054. So why wasn’t this gathering newsworthy? Why was it missing from the vast majority (kudos to the Associated Press for being a major exception) of the mainstream reports about this trip? Even in the fine AP report, the truly historic ecumenical prayer rite at the ancient Church of the Holy Sepulcher was referred to as the “spiritual” highlight of the pilgrimage. In the GetReligion post on that I asked: Ah, there we have it. This was the “spiritual” highlight of the pilgrimage. As opposed to? The political highlight? The real highlight? The news highlight? Yes, there we have it again, the same old, same old. When the pope travels it is a big news event. Big news is, by definition, primarily about politics. Thus, the most important events in a papal tour must, by their very nature, be political. The religion stuff? That’s nice for photographs, unless the pope stops at an Israeli security wall and there is (validly so in this case) a spectacular photo with political implications. Got that? Politics are real. Religion is not so real. At best it is “spiritual.” Now, in the case of yesterday’s bombshell/media blind spot, The Huffington Post did offer a short report that spotted the news hook: Pope Francis and Ecumenical Patriarch Barthlomew I prayed together in Jerusalem at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in a beautiful act of unity. Now, they’re taking a further step to heal the centuries-old schism between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches by holding a gathering together to commemorate the Council of Nicaea, which took place in 325. Seventeen centuries later, Francis and Bartholomew will come together in 2025 to celebrate the historic meeting, reports Vatican Insider. |
| When Archbishop Lazar became locum tenens of Kiev’s Metropolitan See in 1689, he appointed St Theodosius as his vicar in Kiev, while he remained at Chernigov. In his capacity as vicar of the locum tenens of the Kiev Metropolitan See, St Theodosius had an active role in many churchly events. In 1685 he participated with the right of a decisive vote in the election of Bishop Gideon (Chetverinsky) as Metropolitan of Kiev, and he was sent to Moscow with news of this event with Igumen Jerome (Dubin) of Pereyaslavl . In Moscow, both representatives were received with honor and esteem. Indeed, the result of this delegation was the reuniting of the Kiev Metropolitan See with the Russian Orthodox Church. In 1688 St Theodosius was appointed archimandrite of Chernigov’s Eletsy monastery, replacing the deceased Archimandrite Joannicius (Golyatovsky). In appointing St Theodosius, Archbishop Lazar told him to spare no effort in placing the Eletsy monastery in good order. This monastery had not yet been set aright after the expulsion of the Jesuits and Dominicans, and it was in great disorder. Through the efforts of St Theodosius, in his two or three years as igumen, the monastery’s revenues and properties increased, the church of the Dormition was repaired, and the Elets Icon (February 5) was enshrined there. In his new position, the saint also assisted Archbishop Lazar in many important matters. He participated in drafting a conciliar reply to Patriarch Joachim of Moscow in response to his questions about the attitude of the Kiev Metropolitan See to the Council of Florence, and its judgment on the question of the transformation of the Holy Gifts as accepted by this Florentine Council. When the Patriarch proved to be unsatisfied by these answers, the Baturino Igumen St Demetrius (the future Metropolitan of Rostov) was sent to him at the beginning of 1689. St Theodosius journeyed with him as the representative of Archbishop Lazar. He was entrusted with the delivery of a letter to the Patriarch, and to clear up the misunderstandings. |
|
|
