TOWARDS AN ECUMENICAL SYNOD? (Πρoς Οικουμενικη Συνοδο;)

“It seemed good to the apostles and to the presbyters together with the whole Church” (Acts 15:22).

«Τότε ἔδοξε τοῖς ἀποστόλοις καὶ τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις σὺν ὅλῃ τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ…» (Πράξ. 15,22)

Στὰ Ελληνικά
http://www.augoustinos-kantiotis.gr/?p=53237#more-53237.
344/1971 page of the periodical “Christian Spark”

Church = Christ

The Church is, according to the ingenious observation of sacred Augustine, Christ extended unto the ages. What does this mean? This means, that the teaching of Christ, the miraculous power, the holiness, the crucifixional sacrifice, the divine grace flowing from it will continue unceasingly by means of the Church, this mystical body of Christ, unto all the ages. But also the reactions, which Jesus Christ encountered during the three-year period of his divine activity in the world, won’t cease: these too shall continue unceasingly. Christ himself, a short while before his crucifixional sacrifice, said to his disciples: “If they persecuted me, they shall also persecute you: if they kept my word, they will keep your word too” (John 15:20).
Christ was a sign spoken against and a rock of scandal for the unbelievers? His Church also is a sign spoken against and a rock of scandal for the unbelievers of all ages. Only if the Church ceases to preach whatever Christ preached and to enact whatever Christ enacted, only then will the reactions of the world against Her will cease. The Holy Spirit indeed forewarned that as the centuries go by and the drama of global history journeys towards the end, that much also will the reactions of the world against the teaching of Christ and the trials of the faithful will increase. Frightful will be the conflict of truth against falsehood, which, constantly being armed, by all the means and attainments of an atheist philosophy and science, in the person of many antichrists, and particularly one, the great Antichrist, will muster all his powers to take out Christ, that is to say, his Church. The faithful will become few as never before. The small flock will be tested a lot. But the Church, vibrant and free, Orthodoxy, will gather together her children under the all-powerful wings of the Eagle and will go forth into the desert, not only modally, but also regionally, until days of refreshment come again for the greatly pained people of God.

The Maniacal War Against The Church

A witness to what has been said is History. During the first centuries the Church was fought against rabidly. It was fought against by the Jews and the idolaters. The persecutions the strongest empire of the world raised against Christians, iron Rome, was of indescribable dreadfulness. The amphitheater of Rome, which is preserved until today, echoes still from the shouts of the idolaters and the roars of the beasts. Blood, the blood of the choicest children of humanity, of Christians, was shed abundantly. And if it were possible for one to gather together this blood, he would form a huge red lake, on the shore of which the epigraph would have to be set: This is the blood of the martyrs of the New Testament.
The persecutions of the Church lasted three centuries. But God decided for the persecutions to cease and for the Church to enjoy peace. She came forth from the holes of the earth and the caves and the catacombs, and during the reign of pious kings and emperors She raised up grandiose temples, in which She freely worshipped the God in Trinity.
But the tranquility was not late to be succeeded by a most harsh storm, a tempest great and frightful, originating no longer from without, but from within. The Christians were not in danger now as bodies. They were in danger as spirits. They were not in danger of being devoured by wild and hungry beasts of the amphitheater under the shouts of a maniacal multitude. They were in danger of being devoured by other beasts, the intelligible lions and the intelligible wolves, the heretics. The first enemies used as a weapon the knife. The second used the tongue. Through it they spoke distorted things, teachings foreign and contrary to the correct and pure precepts of Christian teaching. Their teachings at first glance did not appear to present something different from the teaching of the Church. Just as the weed externally has an amazing likeness with the wheat and deceives those who do not discern the difference, thus also the heretics. As weeds they were sown by the Devil in the midst of the blessed farm of the Church and they deceive many. If however you want to make flour from wheat and weeds mixed together, and you knead and make bread from them, and you eat this bread, then you will sense the difference. This bread will create dizziness in you. For it is not pure, genuine bread. Thus occurs also with the heresies. It is not the pure bread of Orthodoxy. It is bread, which brings dizziness and spiritual confusion.
The heretics have developed great activity. The poison, which is spilled from their tongue and pen, was so much, that, if someone were to gather it together, he would have formed some other lake, a cursed lake, on the shore of which there should be written: Wormwood! Be careful!
It’s good for weeds not to grow in farms. And it’s good for heretics not to appear in the farm of the Church. The uprooting of weeds from the farms is difficult. Much more difficult is the uprooting of heretics from the Church. For this reason vigilant caution is demanded on the part of those responsible in the Church, that the enemy of the salvation of souls doesn’t find time to sow weeds (Matt. 13: 24-26).

What Is The Cause For The Convening Of Ecumenical Synods?

For the fighting against heresies and the preserving of the purity of the word of God, by which souls hungering for God are nourished, strong spiritual struggles were waged, nations and kingdoms were agitated, entire empires were shaken, Regional and Ecumenical Synods were convened. The cause of the convening of Ecumenical Synods was, first and foremost, the heresies; and secondly the cause was concerning ethos and anomalies regarding order. This indicates how much and what significance the Church renders to the purity of the word of God, as this has been passed down in Her and interpreted by her authoritatively. According to the declaration of the Second Canon of the seventh Ecumenical Synod “the essence of the hierarchy according to us is the god-given words, that is, the true science of the divine Scriptures”. The correct interpretation and development of those passages of Holy Scriptures which the various heretics would interpret, creating the towers of their errors and deceptions – this constituted the primary work of those ever-memorable Fathers, who came together from the ends of the earth and convened the Ecumenical Synods. And in clear and brief propositions they contained the precious gold of Christian revelation.
The cause, we have said, of the convening of the Ecumenical Synod was primarily the heresies. And that this is true, one can easily conclude by reading the history of the Ecumenical Synods. Thus the cause of the convening of the most glorious Ecumenical Synod, the 1st at Nicea of Asia Minor (325), was the heresy of Arius, denying the Divinity of the Son. Of the 2nd in Constantinople (381) the cause was the heresy of Macedonius, denying the Divinity of the Holy Spirit. Of the 3rd in Ephesus (431) the cause was the heresy of Eftychous, preaching one only nature in the Christ, that is the human nature being sucked up supposedly by the divine nature. Of the 5th in Constantinople (553) the cause again was the heresy of the monophysites, as well as certain other views of authors. Of the 6th in Constantinople (681) the cause was the heresy of the monothelite Pope of Rome Onorious, whom the Synod also condemned as a heretic (Where then the famous infallibility of the Pope?). Of the 7th again in Nicea of Asia Minor (787) the cause was the heresy of Iconoclasm.

The Gospel Upon The Throne

As we see, the primary purpose for the convening of all the Ecumenical Synods was heresy, that is, as another Lernea Hydra, which constantly cropped up new heads for the poisoning of the body of the Church. Now pious emperors called together Ecumenical Synods, emperors who considered heresy as the greatest disaster, disturbing and disrupting not only the unity of the Church, but also the unity of the Christian State. The emperor then, in accordance with the wholesome apprehension of his authority, was considered a bishop on the outside, and co-assistant of the bishops, taking care for the securing of those external conditions, under which a Synod would be able to be convened and to work. The emperor would not preside nor participate in the spiritual discussions of the Synod. And if ever someone would dare to participate in the matters of the Synod, he would be repelled by the sturdy voice of the champions of Orthodoxy, one of whom, Kordouis the Devout, directing himself to the emperor, said: “Neither is it permitted for us to rule upon the earth, nor do you, O king, have the authority to incense”. The Fathers who convened Ecumenical Synods came together not for their own individual matters, but came together in the name of the Lord for the solving of matters of the whole Church and they had the consciousness and sense of the presence of Christ in the midst of them, Who affirmed: “Wherever two or three are gathered together in My name, there I am in the midst of them”. And: “Behold I am with you all the days until the end of the age” (Matt. 18 20 and 28, 20). And proof of the vast respect, which those Fathers had towards the Founder of the Church, Whose work they would continue upon the earth, is this too: In the middle of the hall of the conventions they would set up a throne. And upon this throne no one would sit, but the Gospel would be placed there, as a vivid reminder of Paul’s saying: “And if we or an angel from heaven preach to you something different from what we preach to you, let him be anathema… If anyone preaches to you something besides what you have received, let him be anathema” (Gal. 1: 8-9).

What Is Demanded For A Synod To Be Characterized As Orthodox?

Besides the seven Ecumenical and the recognized Regional Synods, during the period of the first eight centuries there came together other Synods also, of a regional or ecumenical character, which however were not recognized by the ecclesiastical conscience. Now the ecclesiastical conscience is the conscience of the pious membership of the Church, which has from God that spiritual sense to distinguish truth from falsehood, in the same way, according to the beautiful comparison of Basil the Great, sheep have by nature the sense to discern the beneficial plants from the harmful. The faithful, the Orthodox people, who lives in spiritual contact with the Church, with Christ, and having the Holy Spirit, when it hears a decision of a Synod, which is in accordance with the faith handed down by the Fathers (with “whatever always, everywhere and by all is believed”), it senses special joy and gladness, it shakes, and being inebriated from Holy Spirit it shouts forth: “This is the faith of the Apostles, this is the faith of the Fathers, this is the faith of the Orthodox, this is the faith that has held the ecumeni, or inhabited world, secure”. If however the pious people hear a decision of a Synod, which is not in accordance with the faith handed down by the Fathers, it is sorrowful robustly and displays its disapproval of that Synod.
So that according to the Orthodox perception the Synods are subject to the censure of the ecclesiastical conscience, which is not limited to the clerical members of the Church, but extends and is brought to its zenith in the pious people, whose approval or disapproval has a decisive significance for the characterization of a Synod as being true or not. And in this regard, again, the Orthodox Church differs from the Papal, insofar as in the Papal Church infallibility has one person, the Pope (he thinks of course that he has it), but in the Orthodox Church the fullness of the Church possesses infallibility, the pious people, who is also called “the guardian of the Faith.” The individual, the believer and the one devoted to the Savior, is not annihilated in the Orthodox Church, however humble a position he may possess, but constitutes a living member of the whole body of the Church, whose head is Christ. And just as the head is not able to ignore the pains and the needs even of the most humble member of the body, thus also the administration of the Church is not able to ignore the spiritual pains and the needs and the desires and the shouts of the humblest believer. Ecclesiastical harmony exists there where the Church functions and moves as a living organism, as the body of Christ. Ecclesiastical decisions apart from the pious lay people and contrary to their mentality are incapable of standing firmly. The Acts of the Apostles, which have saved the image of first Synod of the Church, the Apostolic Synod, clearly speak concerning the manner according to which its decisions were made. God-inspired Luke writes: “It seemed good to the apostles and the presbyters together with the whole Church” (Acts 15:22). Do you hear, sirs, as many of you who make decisions on the account of Orthodoxy and the Orthodox? What are you? Superior to the Apostles? The Apostles took into view the “whole Church”. And you take into view only your own selves? You have such a great idea of your own selves? You think you have so much wisdom and holiness, that you don’t feel the need for others? The truly wise and saints hear even the voice of a small child.

Robber Synod

As an example of a Synod, which the ecclesiastical conscience did not recognize, but disapproved of, is the large Synod convened at Ephesus in the year 449. This same Synod came together under the prevalence of violence, which various multitudinous groups, brazen native soldiers, fanatic monks coming from Constantinople and Syria, strong-handed sailors and badly behaving wreckless men, who were nurses, used also as grave-diggers, and in need for whatever other serious purpose” (Stephanides [Greek historian]). And indeed when the Patriarch of Constantinople Flavianos rose up to support the Orthodox dogma concerning the two natures of Christ, shouts were heard, rods were raised, fists were made, slaps and kicks were given, terrorism increased to the extreme, and Flavianos sought refuge under the holy Table, but there too being pushed and struck he was thrown out of the temple, was defrocked and sent into exile. The improprieties of this Synod are affirmed by credible witnesses. Hierarchs, who had taken part in the Synod and under pressure signed the minutes. These Hierarchs confessed before the 4th Ecumencial the violence, confessing publicly and saying: “None (of us) agreed. It was done by violence; violence with wounds; we signed on a paper without writing on it, blank. We were threatened with defrockment: soldiers used rods and knives, and we were afraid of the rods and knives; where there are rods and knives what synod could there be? For this reason Dioscoros received soldiers; place the murderer outside” (See Mansi, Minutes 4th Ecumenical Synod). On account of these improprieties the pious people named this a robber synod.

Centuries Without Activity?

The last Ecumenical Synod came together, as we have seen, in the year 787. From then till today 12 centuries have flown by (1185 to be exact). A certain gentleman, who is taking part in the conventions of the Interorthodox Preparatory Committee in Geneva for the future Great Synod that is to come together, was heard saying that these were 12 centuries of synodical inactivity for the Orthodox Church. That gentleman is making a mistake, who bears the title of a Metropolitan of a non-existent Metropolis. The Orthodox Church, as we had the occasion to say at another time, was and is until today at the forefront of struggling Christianity. If one opens Ecclesiastical History and casts a glance at those 12 centuries of “inactivity”, he will see, that the Orthodox Church has not ceased to champion the Orthodox Faith against small and great beasts at different times which the abyss boiled over to devour the sacred flock of Christ. Shall we bring to mind these beasts? One is Islam, which surged forth from the Arabic desert and spread fire and iron and transformed blossoming cities and lands of the Byzantine Empire into ruins. The second beast is Papism, which with the excuse of supporting the Christians of the East enacted those fearful Crusades, which, besides other things, weakened the Byzantine Empire and contributed not a little for the same to fall into the mouth of the first beast. The dread, which the crusaders of the Pope sowed among the Christian world of the East, was such, that between two evils, of Islam and of Papism, they preferred the first, as being the less pressuring and dangerous for the Orthodox Faith, which in the assessment of the scale of values of life was placed first, above all. And during the present century the third great beast appeared, the red beast, atheist Communism, which devoured thousands of saints behind the iron curtain and continues to roar against Religion.

The Eight Ecumenical Synod And Other Ecumenical Synods

During this long period, from the 7th Ecumenical Synod to the end of the last century, in the Orthodox region there came together small and great Synods, more than 30. Listen you, who maintains, that Orthodoxy was being found in synodical inactivity. If it were possible to gather together all the minutes of these Synods, entire volumes would be formed, in whose pages one would see, that the Holy Spirit has not ceased to speak in the Church things correct and necessary. Certain of these Synods could be characterized as Ecumenical. For example, the Synod having convened in Constantinople during the years 879-880 could be considered as Ecumenical, in which 383 bishops participated, among whom were also representatives from the Patriarchates of the East and representatives of the Pope. This same Synod, among other decisions, made this decision also: It condemned, in the presence and the assent also of the representatives of the Pope, the Filioque. In the Synod the Symbol of Faith was said without the addition of the Filioque and it was read and became accepted by all, (that is, also by the Papal representatives), a declaration according to which changing by addition or subtraction from the Symbol if it is by a cleric is subject to defrockment, and if by a lay person is subject to anathema. This same Synod in the conscience of the pious people was considered as the 8th Ecumenical Synod. And it is characterized thus by distinguished professors of Canon Law and Hierarchs of the Orthodox Church. Now the modern historian of the Church Stephanides writes concerning it, that since it is not officially recognized as the 8th Ecumencal Synod, the future Ecumenical Synod that will be convened must deal with this issue too.
But besides the above Synod certain other Synods would be able to be characterized as Ecumenical. Such ones, we think, are those Synods during the years 1341, 1347 and 1351 that convened in Constantinople against the cacodoxies or false views of the notorious Barlaam and Akindynou and of the Patriarch of Constantinople John Kaleka. These three most important Synods vindicated the champion of Orthodoxy Gregory Palamas. But perhaps also the Synods that convened during the years 1482, 1593 and 1642, which condemned the cacodox, or false, views of the Papists and the Protestants, are not able to be discussed as their being characterized as Ecumenical?
Perhaps certain ones will say, that since after the Schism and the Reformation Christianity was broken up into three divisions, Orthodox, Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, how do you want to characterize as Ecumenical those Synods, in which neither the Protestants, nor the Papists participate? They are able to be characterized, they will say, as pan-orthodox, Ecumenical no. To this objection in answering we say what the ever-memorable leading theologian Chrestos Androutsos said, namely, that we recognize and believe as the Church to be only Orthodoxy. And the so-called Churches outside of Orthodoxy are not but schisms and heresies. And consequently a Synod, in which all of Orthodoxy is represented, can be characterized as Ecumenical.

Does There Exist A Need Today To Convene An Ecumenical Synod?

And after this brief retracing of the past, we come to offer an answer to two questions, which arise in the conscience of the Orthodox on the occasion of the very closely approaching convening in Alexandria of a new Ecumenical Synod.
These questions are: First: Does a need exist for the convening of an Ecumenical Synod? Do the prerequisites exist for the convening and success of an Ecumenical Synod?
In answering the first question we say, that, if the primary cause for which Ecumenical Synods are convened, is heresy, there is truly a serious reason for an Ecumenical Synod to be convened. And this reason is: Besides other errors, or deceptions, and heresies, which must be condemned, there is also the heresy, which by a distinguished ever-memorable Hierarch of the Greek Church has called the heresy of heresies. It is a contemporary heresy of our days. The name of the heresy? Ecumenism. The followers of Ecumenism think, that the truth from revelation is not found fully in one Church or in one Religion or in one philosophical system, but that it is found spread about more or less in all the Churches and in all the Religions and in all the philosophical systems. And consequently Orthodoxy is not able to say, according to them, that She possesses from revelation the whole truth, that she is “the pillar and ground of truth”, the treasure chest of the word of God, the clear and never failing source, towards which only, nations and peoples must turn to draw the living and changing water.
Not accepting the uniqueness of Orthodoxy the followers of Ecumenism turn also towards other wells, cloudy ones, towards broken wells according to the prophet. The followers of Ecumenism, to make easier, as they say, the creation of the brotherhood of all peoples under a common roof, they tend, through the mixing of various elements, to create a new Religion or rather a Super-religion, a mixture of truths and falsehoods, whose taste is pleasant in the palates of the people of various ideologies and apprehensions. Ecumenism is a revival of an old current, of Syncretism, in which our ancient progenitors and other peoples, doubting with regard to the truths of their Religions, tried to extinguish their metaphysical thirst, inasmuch as in this current of Syncretism there came together and united many small currents of various views.
Unfortunately from Ecumenism not a few have been attacked even from among the Orthodox, clergy and laity, theologians and not, and even monks. The itch of Ecumenism has reached even Mount Athos… Remember what at times the mellifluous mouths of mega-schema representatives of the Ecumenical Patriarchate vomit out, who according to their understanding interpret even that title of the Patriarchate.
Those who are attacked from the contagion of Ecumenism have spiritual daltonism. They don’t distinguish the differences between the Orthodox Church, heterodox, and even of those of other religions. These people only see similarities. And for the sake of similarities they call all to unite all the faiths and to become one! And they become wrathful and get all riled up if someone dares and reminds them of dogmatic differences and that a great chasm stands between Orthodox, heterodox and those of other religions, and that it is extremely dangerous to attempt lightning fast jumps. In Ecumenism Orthodoxy loses its color and its aroma, the blood and the fragrance of Christ.
The danger coming from Ecumenism is unimaginable. And only for the condemnation of Ecumenism as a frightful heresy ravaging all of Orthodoxy it is necessary for an Ecumenical Synod to be convened.
But besides Ecumenism, as we have said, other errors and heresies exist today, which are ravaging the Orthodox people and they must be discussed and condemned. The main ones of these are atheist Communism, which does not limit itself in an economical system, but extends into a frightful and unending polemic against Religion, calling it the opiate of the masses and preaching the existence of Christ as a myth. Masonry, which is a revival of ancient mystical Religions and the denial of the Divinity of Jesus, and it includes in its bosoms surpassing personages according to wealth, power and science, and through its dark activities becomes a serious obstacle for the progress of Christianity. Millenialism, or the so-called Jehovah’s Witnesses, which is a distortion and overthrowing of practically all the dogmas of Christianity, a kind of spiritual plague, which attacks the lower strata of the people and daily creates new victims, breaking apart the world of Orthodoxy. Spiritualism, a religion of demons, deceiving many, especially of the cultivated classes, who desire to hear news and prophesies from beyond and to come into contact with the souls of beloved persons who have died. To these must be added also the danger of Papism, who through the Unia, a satanic schema, tries shamefully to proselytize the Orthodox people and to attach it to the chariot of the Pope. The Unia must be condemned also in an Ecumenical Synod, together with the other errors of Papism, and the Orthodox who followed it, let them be excommunicated as apostates and betrayers of Orthodoxy.
But besides the errors and heresies and antichristian systems, which must constitute matters of discussion in an Ecumenical Synod and must be condemned, there exists also moral issues, which need discussion and the making of decisions according to the Orthodox Tradition. Such issues are: Freud’s theory, according to which chastity is impossible, holiness is mocked and fornication and the rest of the sexual sins have ceased to be deviations from the moral order. We are found before a frightful revival of Nicolatianism, a heresy, which plagued the ancient Church. The avoidance of childbearing which has taken on great dimensions. And certain other subjects, created by the bad use of the discoveries of technological civilization, which are tending to become the world idols of the epoch, and for which the admonitions of the Holy Spirit must be repeated: “Children, guard yourselves from idols” (1 John 5: 91)
And without exception, as occurred in the Ecumenical Synods, in the future Ecumenical Synod about to be convened there must be read in the beginning of the sessions the Terms of the previous Ecumenical Synods as a proof of the unity of ecclesiastical teaching, which emanates from the totality of the Church and not from this or that person. And moreover, as the first issue to be set, it is necessary for the above mentioned Synods to be recognized as Ecumenical, and especially the one in Constantinople in 879-880.
And already we ask: These are the issues, which will occupy the Synod to be convened in Alexandria? No unfortunately! But as the Inter-orthodox Preparatory Committee in Geneva announces, the subjects are other ones, the following: divine Revelation. The fuller participation of the lay element in the worshipful and the other life of the Church. The re-adaptation of decrees concerning fasting according to the demands of the contemporary epoch. Economy in the Orthodox Church.
But if for only these issues the Great Synod must be convened, we don’t see a sufficient reason of convening, which, we stress again, is extrapolated from the history of the Ecumenical Synods, the condemnation of hetero-teachings, or non-orthodox teachings. But concerning hetero-teachings there is no word. Because it is not to the interest of the Ecumenists. In the announcement of the Inter-orthodox Preparatory Committee, as also in certain published declarations, statements and articles of Hierarchs and theologians, members of the Committee, it is easily clearly seen what wind is blowing. A wind that is modernized in the sense of secularization and of Ecumenism. Through the introduction, for example, of the Church of Greece is proposed marriage of deacons after ordination!…

Do Prerequisites Exist?

We already come to the second question: Do the prerequisites exist for the convening and success of an Ecumenical Synod?
We answer straightway and say, No, agreeing completely with the opinion of the distinguished theologian of the Orthodox Church, of the holy ascetic Fr. Justin Popovitch, who for the witness of Jesus had been limited to a certain sacred monastery of Serbia. He submitted a memoir to the Sacred Synod of the Church of Serbia, which was translated in Greek and was published by the Orthodox periodicals “Three Hierarchs” and “Orthodox Press”.
A study of persons and things in all the Orthodox countries persuades even the most optimistic person, that today there do not exist the demanded prerequisites. Because first, who is the one convening today the Ecumenical Synod? A pious emperor? He doesn’t exist. The Ecumenical Patriarchate? But this is suffering from a harsh winter. And the worst thing from the Orthodox perspective, Patriarch Athenagoras and his representative, Metropolitan of Chalcedon, Meletios, with their anti-orthodox declarations from time to time have shaken the trust of the pious membership. The aforementioned distinguished theologian Justin Popovitch in his memoir dares to call the Patriarch “a source anarchism and nihilism in the Orthodox world”. “The Hagiorites,” he says moreover, “justly call him a heretic and apostate… He, with his neo-papistic behavior in his words and in his deeds, has scandalized for a decade the Orthodox consciences, by denying the unique and all-salvific truth of the Orthodox Church and Faith, by recognizing the Roman extremist Pontiff with all his demonic anti-ecclesiastical pride.”
It is not the appropriate time for the convening of an Ecumenical Synod, because we ask moreover: Who will take part in the Synod? The Hierarchs of the Russian Church with the notorious Nicodemos at the head? But the Russian Church, trampling underfoot Synodical decisions, decided as of late the administering of the Spotless Mysteries to the Papists and thus preached union with the Papal Church. And also, she recognized as Orthodox the Raskolnikovs, the old believing Russians, who not only for the difference of Typicon, but also for heretical teaching had been condemned by Synods of the Russian Church. Concerning them the ever-memorable professor Papamichael, who knew well the Russian matters, wrote, that the consequence of the errors of the old believers adulterated true Orthodoxy in Russia. Against these struggled also the ever-memorable Hierarchs Eugenios Voulgaris and Nikiphoros Theotokis. So will the Hierarchs of the Russian Church who came into mystagogical communion with the heretics be accepted in the Ecumenical Synod? But besides this both the Russian Church and the other Orthodox Churches of the lands of the iron Curtain unfortunately are not free to express their convictions according to the Orthodox conscience. But they speak and write under the pressure and terrorism of an atheist totalitarian regime, a pressure and terrorism worse than that, under which, as we have seen, the Hierarchs of the robber Synod at Ephesos in 449 would convene. Or perhaps it is false, that the notorious Leningrad Nicodemos during the meetings of the Inter-orthodox Committee in Rhodes was found to be in constant communication by phone with the Kremlin and received directions from there?…
And while at these sessions those Hierarchs under atheistic terrorist regimes of the lands of the iron Curtain are taking part, on the contrary, those will be absent, who first should participate in the Synod and whose word should weigh more. And these are the modern confessors of the Faith, those who survived the frightful persecutions of the red beast and in their body bear the stigmata of the Lord Jesus. What an antithesis of the Synod being prepared to the 1st Ecumenical Synod, in which there participated the confessors of the Faith with the stigmata of the martyrs from the last persecutions and by their presence evoked sacred shuddering! Of whom, I beg to ask, will the new Ecumenical Synod be made up of? Where are the heroes and confessors, who will constitute the guarantee of Orthodoxy? Woe! Such persons will be absent. The primary position will be overtaken in the Synod by persons that are under judgment by the Orthodox conscience, Bishops and Metropolitans without flocks, with empty titles, with a light conscience, speaking without a sense of responsibility.

*
**

Under such conditions the Great Synod being convened will fail miserably and will become a source of new spiritual disasters for the Orthodox world.
The least Bishop of the Orthodox Church, sharing in the struggle of the faithful people, I will observe vigilantly the evolution of the issue and will return by means of further elements.