HOCNA Encyclical...

[timothyvargas]

Holy Martyr Callistratus
27 September/10 October, 2012
We, the hierarchs of the Holy Orthodox Church in North America, provide this resume
of the patristic teachings concerning the Name of God, and do hereby declare that these
traditional teachings on this subject are held by us unconditionally and without reservation.
All should understand that, by these pronouncements, we hierarchs are not Nameworshippers
as defined in this statement, and that we believe, confess and espouse the
Orthodox Christian belief, also defined in this statement.
Concerning the Constantinopolitan patriarchs’ resolutions of 1912 and 1913, and also, the
decision of the so-called Russian synod of 1913, these pronouncements against the Nameworshippers
are not reasoned theologically according to the traditional teachings of the
Orthodox Church. Their basic reasoning rejects the patristic teaching that the Name of God
is Holy by nature; further they teach that It is not an energy or operation, nor the grace of
God. Those who believe this fall under their own condemnation because, like the Nameworshippers
they condemn, they believe that God’s revealed Name is separate from Him.
Further, they perpetually speak of God’s eternal Name as if it were some created object, not
revealed from on high, as our Fathers teach.
It is for this reason that we hierarchs of the Holy Orthodox Church in North America
are not Name-worshippers. The reasons for the hierarchs’ refusal to accept the various
resolutions and decisions concerning Name-worshippers should also be clear.
Our position is blatantly Orthodox, consistent with the traditional teachings of the Holy
Fathers of our Church; this we believe, this we proclaim, this we confess and this we teach.
“We follow in the footsteps of the Holy Fathers.”
(Fourth Ecumenical Council)
1
DIVERGENT TEACHINGS
I. Name-worshippers believe:
1) That God’s Name is his Essence.
2) That God’s Name is separate from Him.
3) That God’s Name is another deity.
4) That created letters, sounds and random or accidental thoughts about God
may be deified, or be used for occult or magical purposes.
II. Orthodox Christians believe:
1) That God’s Name is not His Essence, but rather is the revealed truth about
Himself, that is, His Uncreated Energy, His Uncreated Grace, His Providence,
His Glory. In fact, His Essence is unknowable and has no name.
2) That God’s Name is not separate from Him.
3) That God’s Name is not another deity.
4) That created letters, sounds and random or accidental thoughts about God
must not be deified. Further, they believe that these letters or sounds must not
be used for occult or magical purposes.
St. Basil of Ancyra (+363) said to the pagan proconsul, “My chief name is ‘Christian,’
derived from ‘Christ,’ the Name that is eternal and beyond human understanding.” These
words are the straightforward and singular confession of every believing Orthodox
Christian today also. Furthermore, as St. Cyril of Jerusalem (+386) says, “The Name of
God is in its nature holy, whether we say so or not.” St. John Chrysostom (+407) also tells
us, “The Name of God is worthy of praise by its very nature;” and St. Macarius of Corinth
(+1805) affirms, “The Name of God is by nature holy and supremely-holy, and the source
of sanctification.” This makes matters perfectly clear, because, as Orthodox Christians, we
know and believe that the only Entity that is eternal, holy, supremely-holy, and the source of
sanctification by nature is God Himself! This can only mean that His Name is indeed God
Himself — again, not in His Essence, but in His Grace.
Together with St. Clement of Rome (+100), Orthodox Christians believe that, “The Name
of God gave existence to all creation.”1 For St. Clement and the Church Fathers, this is
exactly the same as saying “the Grace of God gave existence to all creation;” which is exactly
the same as saying, “God gave existence to all creation.” This is why the Orthodox, together
with St. Tikhon of Zadonsk and St. John of Kronstadt, can say, “The Name of God is God
Himself” because the Name of God is His Energy and Grace.
In addition, as St. John of Kronstadt affirms, “when you pronounce to yourself in your heart
the Name of God, of the Lord, or that of the most Holy Trinity, or of the Lord of Sabaoth,
1 Obviously, for St. Clement, the term “Name of God” signifies a power of God that is eternal and uncreated.
2
or of the Lord Jesus Christ, then in that Name you have the Lord’s whole being; in it is His infinite
mercy, His boundless wisdom, His inaccessible light, omnipotence, and immutability” —
that is to say, you have God’s uncreated and divine Grace.
The Hesychastic Councils of the 14th century and the Synodicon of the Orthodoxy affirm that
both the Essence and the Grace of God are God Himself, although they are distinct one from
the other (see The True Vine, #31, p. 12ff.). Therefore, “the Name of God is God” indeed,
since His Name and His Grace are one and the same.2
III. Name–fighters:
confuse the doctrines described in sections I and II above, and therefore, like the Roman
Catholics and Protestants, come to the erroneous conclusion that Orthodox Christians
are guilty of pantheism and heresy (see the Resolutions of Patriarch Joachim III of
Constantinople in 1912, and the Resolutions of Patriarch Germanus of Constantinople
in 1913, and the Russian Synod of 1913.) As a result of their having confused these two
divergent teachings, the Constantinopolitan Resolutions of 1912 and 1913 stray from
the truth; especially the Russian Synod of 1913 itself comes under the anathemas of the
14th Century Hesychastic Councils and the Synodicon of Orthodoxy, because it teaches falsely
concerning the Grace of God.
Orthodox Christians cannot “unconditionally” accept, endorse and perpetuate these false
teachings.
IV. Concerning the “Russian Synod”
Metropolitan Anthony Khrapovitsky wrote, “Our Church [in Russia] is governed by
a layman, or, to say it officially, by a collegial institution never seen by the Church of
Christ before….The [Russian] Church is deprived of its lawful head and is given over for
enslavement to lay officials, which hide behind an assembly of six or seven hierarchs who
are changed every half year, and two presbyters. Who is not aware that such an institution
is uncanonical? That it was not approved at its very inception by two Patriarchs; and even if
it had been approved by all four, this would only show the unlawful deed of the Patriarchs
and not the canonicity of [Russian] Synodal rule, because no Patriarch can establish and
authorize an institution which is unknown to Holy Orthodoxy and which was invented only
to bring weakness and decay….”
( Voice of the Church, January 1912)
2 It is precisely to this Orthodox teaching concerning the Name of God that the fathers expelled from Holy
Mountain in 1913 adhered. They refused to be labeled as Name-worshippers, but rather called themselves Nameglorifiers.
3

[Maria]

"When the present day bishops of HOCNA defend the teachings of Antony Bulatovich and claim the Russian Church fell into heresy in 1913, Metropolitan Ephraim and Metropolitan Makarios proclaim that they are actually not bishops, but rather they are laymen." - Metropolitan Moses of Portland and the Western United States, Oct. 12, 2012.

HOCNA Encyclical
II. Orthodox Christians believe:
1) That God’s Name is not His Essence, but rather is the revealed truth about
Himself, that is, His Uncreated Energy, His Uncreated Grace, His Providence,
His Glory. In fact, His Essence is unknowable and has no name.

On the contrary, the Name-Glorifiers/Name-Worshippers heretically teach that God's Name is His Uncreated Energy, His Uncreated Grace, His Providence, His Glory.

Orthodox Christians neither believe that God's Name is His Essence, nor do they believe that God's Name is His Uncreated Energy, Uncreated Grace, Providence, or Glory.

Since the three HOCNA "bishops" are openly espousing heresy (Awake-Sleepers and Name-Glorifying), they are no longer worthy to be called True Orthodox.

[timothyvargas]

"...out of ignorance into the full knowledge of the splendour of His Name, that may hope in His Name, which existed before all creation." (St. Clement of Rome; First Epistle to Corinthians, 59)

It is clear, God's Name existed before ALL CREATION, therefore is NOT created. Since God's Name is in fact His energy and Grace, those who reject such are preaching the Latin Heresy of Created Grace and have become "Name-haters" or "Name Attackers"... Perhaps in the near future those clergy who err in teaching that Gods energy/grace is created may correct themselves before too long.

The Toronto Clergy who condemn the Awake Sleeper article actually preach a form of the heresy of Predestination, which states that God creates some for the Heavens and others to hell, not allowing each individual person to exercise their free will in either accepting or denying the message of the Gospel. The whole point of the Awake sleeper article is that EVERYONE will have that chance, whether in this life or in Hades... there is NO second chance ;o)

[timothyvargas]

Holy Martyr Callistratus
27 September/10 October, 2012
We, the hierarchs of the Holy Orthodox Church in North America, provide this resume of the
patristic teachings concerning the Name of God, and do hereby declare that these traditional
teachings on this subject are held by us unconditionally and without reservation.
All should understand that, by these pronouncements, we hierarchs are not Name-worshippers as
defined in this statement, and that we believe, confess and espouse the Orthodox Christian belief,
also defined in this statement.
Concerning the Constantinopolitan patriarchs’ resolutions of 1912 and 1913, and also, the decision
of the so-called Russian synod of 1913, these pronouncements against the Name-worshippers are
not reasoned theologically according to the traditional teachings of the Orthodox Church. Their
basic reasoning rejects the patristic teaching that the Name of God is Holy by nature; further they
teach that It is not an energy or operation, nor the grace of God. Those who believe this fall under
their own condemnation because, like the Name-worshippers they condemn, they believe that God’s
revealed Name is separate from Him. Further, they perpetually speak of God’s eternal Name as if it
were some created object, not revealed from on high, as our Fathers teach.
It is for this reason that we hierarchs of the Holy Orthodox Church in North America are not
Name-worshippers. The reasons for the hierarchs’ refusal to accept the various resolutions and
decisions concerning Name-worshippers should also be clear.
Our position is blatantly Orthodox, consistent with the traditional teachings of the Holy Fathers of
our Church; this we believe, this we proclaim, this we confess and this we teach.
“We follow in the footsteps of the Holy Fathers.”
(Fourth Ecumenical Council)
1
DIVERGENT TEACHINGS
I. Name-worshippers believe:
1) That God’s Name is his Essence.
2) That God’s Name is separate from Him.
3) That God’s Name is another deity.
4) That created letters, sounds and random or accidental thoughts about God may be
deified, or be used for occult or magical purposes.
II. Orthodox Christians believe:
1) That God’s Name is not His Essence, but rather is the revealed truth about
Himself, that is, His Uncreated Energy, His Uncreated Grace, His Providence, His
Glory. In fact, His Essence is unknowable and has no name.
2) That God’s Name is not separate from Him.
3) That God’s Name is not another deity.
4) That created letters, sounds and random or accidental thoughts about God
must not be deified. Further, they believe that these letters or sounds must not be
used for occult or magical purposes.
St. Basil of Ancyra (+363) said to the pagan proconsul, “My chief name is ‘Christian,’ derived
from ‘Christ,’ the Name that is eternal and beyond human understanding.” These words are
the straightforward and singular confession of every believing Orthodox Christian today also.
Furthermore, as St. Cyril of Jerusalem (+386) says, “The Name of God is in its nature holy, whether
we say so or not.” St. John Chrysostom (+407) also tells us, “The Name of God is worthy of praise
by its very nature;” and St. Macarius of Corinth (+1805) affirms, “The Name of God is by nature holy
and supremely-holy, and the source of sanctification.” This makes matters perfectly clear, because,
as Orthodox Christians, we know and believe that the only Entity that is eternal, holy, supremelyholy,
and the source of sanctification by nature is God Himself! This can only mean that His Name is
indeed God Himself — again, not in His Essence, but in His Grace.
Together with St. Clement of Rome (+100), Orthodox Christians believe that, “The Name of God
gave existence to all creation.”1 For St. Clement and the Church Fathers, this is exactly the same as
saying “the Grace of God gave existence to all creation;” which is exactly the same as saying, “God
gave existence to all creation.” This is why the Orthodox, together with St. Tikhon of Zadonsk and
St. John of Kronstadt, can say, “The Name of God is God Himself” because the Name of God is
His Energy and Grace.
In addition, as St. John of Kronstadt affirms, “when you pronounce to yourself in your heart the
Name of God, of the Lord, or that of the most Holy Trinity, or of the Lord of Sabaoth, or of
the Lord Jesus Christ, then in that Name you have the Lord’s whole being; in it is His infinite mercy, His
boundless wisdom, His inaccessible light, omnipotence, and immutability” — that is to say, you
have God’s uncreated and divine Grace.
1 Obviously, for St. Clement, the term “Name of God” signifies a power of God that is eternal and uncreated.
2
The Hesychastic Councils of the 14th century and the Synodicon of the Orthodoxy affirm that both the
Essence and the Grace of God are God Himself, although they are distinct one from the other (see
The True Vine, #31, p. 12ff.). Therefore, “the Name of God is God” indeed, since His Name and His
Grace are one and the same.2
III. Name–fighters:
confuse the doctrines described in sections I and II above, and therefore, like the Roman Catholics
and Protestants, come to the erroneous conclusion that Orthodox Christians are guilty of pantheism
and heresy (see the Resolutions of Patriarch Joachim III of Constantinople in 1912, and the
Resolutions of Patriarch Germanus of Constantinople in 1913, and the Russian Synod of 1913.) As
a result of their having confused these two divergent teachings, the Constantinopolitan Resolutions
of 1912 and 1913 stray from the truth; especially the Russian Synod of 1913 itself comes under
the anathemas of the 14th Century Hesychastic Councils and the Synodicon of Orthodoxy, because it
teaches falsely concerning the Grace of God.
Orthodox Christians cannot “unconditionally” accept, endorse and perpetuate these false teachings.
IV. Concerning the “Russian Synod”
Metropolitan Anthony Khrapovitsky wrote, “Our Church [in Russia] is governed by a layman,
or, to say it officially, by a collegial institution never seen by the Church of Christ before….The
[Russian] Church is deprived of its lawful head and is given over for enslavement to lay officials,
which hide behind an assembly of six or seven hierarchs who are changed every half year, and two
presbyters. Who is not aware that such an institution is uncanonical? That it was not approved at its
very inception by two Patriarchs; and even if it had been approved by all four, this would only show
the unlawful deed of the Patriarchs and not the canonicity of [Russian] Synodal rule, because no
Patriarch can establish and authorize an institution which is unknown to Holy Orthodoxy and which
was invented only to bring weakness and decay….”
( Voice of the Church, January 1912)

• Ephraim, Metropolitan of Boston
• Makarios, Metropolitan of Toronto
• Gregory, Auxiliary Bishop of Brookline
  2 It is precisely to this Orthodox teaching concerning the Name of God that the fathers expelled from Holy Mountain in
  1913 adhered. They refused to be labeled as Name-worshippers, but rather called themselves Name-glorifiers.
  3

[Maria]

Below is an excerpt from the 1913 decision of the Russian Synod. In the last sentence of paragraph 1, it is stated that the name of God is neither God/divinity, nor is it an energy of God.

1. The name of God is holy, worshipful, and desirable, because it is useful to us as a verbal designation for that most desired and most Holy Being, God, the source of every good. This name is of God, because it was revealed to us by God, it speaks to us of God, it refers our spirit towards God, etc. In prayer (especially the Jesus prayer) the name of God, and God Himself are inseparably in our consciousness, and it is if they coincide, and indeed, they cannot and ought not be separated, opposing one to the other; but this only in prayer and only by our heart. Examined theologically and in reality, the name of God is only a name. It is not God Himself nor an attribute (characteristic) of His. The name of an object is not the object itself. Therefore, it is impossible for it to be considered or named either God (this would be mindless and blasphemous) or divinity, for it also is not an energy of God.

http://onimyaslavie.blogspot.com/2012/0 ... -1913.html

[Maria]

Several Name-Worshippers, including Timothy Vargas, who have been recently banned at E.Cafe, are starting to post openly at the Yahoo Group, paradosis. Apparently, they have agreed to post in as many internet forums who will accept them.

Bishop Tikhon, the retired OCA bishop of San Francisco and the West (part of World Orthodoxy) seems to have come to our defense against these Name-Worshippers.

Below is his most recent post at paradosis. I have quoted it because there is some concern that St. Vladimir Seminary is now teaching the Name-Worshipping heresy.

It's indeed best to be simple. "Lord, have mercy" suffices for
everything.There are, of course, many beautiful ways to embroider on
that, but, when it comes down to it, "Lord, have mercy' suffices for
everything.

As for how the Son of God Himself taught us to address God: "Our
Father..." is IT. When He said, "Hallowed by Thy name," He did not
refer to the name, "Jesus," nor the title, "Christ." The Father's name
Which is to be hallowed is "I AM THAT I AM' , in Hebrew "Jahweh"
(pronounced yah-veh).

"Lord Joshua Messiah, Son of God, have mercy on me a sinner" is indeed
a good variation on "Lord, have mercy," and it is sanctified by
centuries of usage in the Orthodox Church Which, unlike our Lord the Son
of God, was mostly Hellenized.
Perhaps someone will be kind enough to give us the Arabic for that,
phonetically spelled, of course? I assume that the name Allah will be in
it, as well as Messiya or the like; no Greek version: 'Christ" and no
German version: 'God'.

-Bishop Tikhon

[Maria]

Also at Paradosis is a poster well known at NFTU, George Ellis, who apparently espouses the Name-Worshipping heresy or is going in that direction. Ellis posted "Very cool!" in response to a link posted by "rollin" to a new blog that promotes Name-Worshipping. This is the same link that appears in the signature of the now-banned E Cafe member, Timothy Vargas (see his OP here), who might be posting as "rollin" over at Paradosis.

Let us pray for all Name-Worshippers, especially Timothy, that he may be converted and saved.