GOC

[1937 Miraculous Cross]

Dear George,

If the Sigillion does not say "and the Menologian" as you state, can you please provide the proper text. If it only says and refers to solely the Paschalion, you may have a point about the hierarches being in error and perpetuating a lie. Nonetheless, you still miss the point of the inherent nature of the Church to create unity with regard to the Calendar. Pascha is the pinnacle of the Church Calendar. Why would the Church fix this date centuries ago? what is the phronema: to create unity! this is a simple concept to grasp. It only follows that the rest of the calendar should be the same everywhere. Yes, you are correct that in ancient times there were differences in the calendars. The Celtic Church had its own reckoning and traditions about this, but ultimately this was corrected at the Synod of Whitby in the 7th or 8th century.

Yes you are correct that Antioch, Alexandria and Cyprus, despite condemning the new calendar, later changed to the new Calendar, but that only shows their error. Plus, it says nothing about "regime" changes within synods. Traditionalists get ousted and appointees of the Greek State govt get appointed in.

Plus, your comment about the problems of todays world and catastrophies, while these are tremendous humanitarian concerns, is meaningless and irrelevant to this discussion about the Church and ultimately about ecumenism. Lets keep the comments on track. Perhaps??...you feel the calendar innovation is not an issue, but there were many pious people in Greece in the 1920's and so on that were persecuted because of this.

Lastly, do you believe the Miraculous Cross appearance in 1925 to be a true miracle on the Old Calendar date? If so, how do you interpet God's sign. If not, why?

So, if you can, please provide a correct wording of the pertinent part of the Sigillion. (English of course!) Also, do you know what the 8 synods I listed from 1902 to 1924 were condemning? The Gregorian calendar or the "revised" Julian calendar.(New Calendar).

Lastly

Nectarios

[Anastasios]

There are stories of people dying on feast days of the Old Calendar and people around them hearing the angels singing the hymns of such Old Calendar feasts while they, being New Calendarists, were doing something else (see the Old Calendar and Science by Fr Cassian)

There are stories about many things; does not mean that they are true.

That is true, heretics have miracle stories too. I tend to view miracles as a confirmation of a faith already held, not a proof.

Anastasios

[George Australia]

If the Sigillion does not say "and the Menologian" as you state, can you please provide the proper text.

Dear in Christ Nektarios,
Here is the text of The Sigillion of the Council in Constantinople in 1583. I have added some notes in red at the point where the false addition is made.

+Sigillion+
To all the genuine Christian children of the Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of Christ of the East in Trigovyst and in all places, be grace and peace and mercy from Almighty God.

Not a little distress took possession of that Ark of old, when, storm-tossed, it was borne upon the waters; and if the Lord God, remembering Noe, had not in His good will calmed the water, there would have been no hope of salvation in it. In a like manner with the new Ark of our Church, the heretics have raised up a relentless war against us, and we have deemed it well to leave behind the present tome against them so that with the things written in it you may be able more surely to defend your Orthodoxy. But in order that the document may not be burdensome to simpler people, we have decided to set forth the entire subject to you in simple speech as follows:

From old Rome have come certain persons who learned there to think like Latins; and the bad thing is that from being Byzantines (that is, Greeks) born and bred in our own parts, they not only have changed their faith, but they also battle the Orthodox and true dogmas of the Eastern church which Christ Himself delivered to us. Whereupon, having cut them off as rotten members, we order:

1) Whosoever does not confess with heart and mouth that he is a child of the Eastern Church baptized in an Orthodox manner, and that the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the father, essentially and hypostatically, as Christ says in the Gospel, although He proceeds from Father and Son in time, let such a one be out of our Church and let him be anathematized.

II) Whosoever does not confess that in the Mystery of Holy communion laymen should commune from two kinds, both of the precious Body and Blood, but says that it is enough to receive only the Body, for the Blood is also there, even though Christ has spoken and has given each one separately, and they do not keep it, let such be anathematized.

III) Whosoever says that our Lord Jesus Christ at the Mystical Last Supper used unleavened bread as do the Hebrews and not leavened bread, that is, raised bread, let him be far from us and under the anathema as one who thinks like a Jew and as one who introduces the doctrines of Appolinarios and of the Armenians into our Church, on which account let him be anathematized a second time.

IV) Whosoever says that when our Christ and God comes to judge He does not come to judge the souls together with the bodies, but comes in order to decide only for the body, anathema to him.

V) Whosoever says that when they die the souls of the Christians who repented in this life but did not do their penance go to Purgatory - which is a Greek myth - where fire and torment purify them, and they think that there is no eternal torment, as did Origen, and give cause by this to sin freely, let such a one have the anathema.

VI) Whosoever says that the Pope is head of the Church and not Christ, and that he has authority to admit into Paradise with his letters, and can forgive as many sins as will be committed by one who with money received an indulgence from him, let such a one have the anathema.

VII) Whosoever does not follow the customs of the Church which the seven Holy Ecumenical Councils have decreed, and the Holy Pascha and calendar which they enacted well for us to follow, but wants to follow the newly-invented Paschalion and the new calendar of the atheist astronomers of the Pope;[Ed: This phrase in bold italic is the one which some choose to render as "Menologion", but the Sigillion was written in Greek and "menologion" is a Greek word- if the Sigillion meant to say "Menologion", it would have. The word used in the original is " Ήμερολόγιον", literally "reckoning of days" ie. "calendar". The phrase obviously refers to the Gregorian Calendar which was not called the Gregorian Calendar at this stage as Pope Gregory was still alive, and so this as yet nameless new calendar is therefore referred to as "the new calendar of the atheist astronomers of the Pope".] and opposing them, wishes to overthrow and destroy the doctrines and customs of the Church which we have inherited from our Fathers, let any such have the anathema and let him be outside of the Church and the Assembly of the Faithful.

VIII) We exhort all pious and Orthodox Christians: remain in those things which you learned and in which you were born and bred, and when the times and circumstances call for it, shed your very blood in order both to keep the Faith given us by our Fathers and to keep your confession. Beware of such people and take care, that our Lord Jesus Christ help you. May the blessing of our humility be with you all. Amen.

The 1583rd year from the birth of the God-man, Indiction 12, November 20th.

Jeremias, of Constantinople
Sylvester, of Alexandria
Sophronios, of Jerusalem

[George Australia]

Plus, your comment about the problems of todays world and catastrophies, while these are tremendous humanitarian concerns, is meaningless and irrelevant to this discussion about the Church and ultimately about ecumenism. Lets keep the comments on track.

Dear in Christ, Nektarios,
I also would like to see all Orthodox Christians united, and I agree it would also be excellent if they all followed the same Calendar- however, I don't see this second point to be as essential as the first. The Unity of the Church does not depend on following a calendar uniformly. When the house is on fire, one does not stop to adjust a tilted picture-frame.

Perhaps??...you feel the calendar innovation is not an issue, but there were many pious people in Greece in the 1920's and so on that were persecuted because of this.

Both Old Calendarists and New Calendarists should live in harmony together. People being persecuted is wrong for any reason. But I can understand how misunderstandings arose and we were persecuted in Greece. Greece is a country with no official seperation of Church and State. We would have been viewed not only as schismatics, but traitors as well.

Lastly, do you believe the Miraculous Cross appearance in 1925 to be a true miracle on the Old Calendar date? If so, how do you interpet God's sign. If not, why?

Honestly, I don't know if it is divine, natural or demonic.
In 1917, tens of thousands of witnesses in Portugal saw the sun spinning and plunging towards Earth in the village of Fatima, allegedly "confirming" the message given to three Roman Catholic children, given to them by the 'Virgin Mary'. We ourselves have many records of demons appearing to Saints in the guise of Angels, or Saints, or even Christ.
Christ said: "by their fruits, you shall know them." I am not gifted with discernment, but so far as I can see, the fruit of this "Miraculous Cross" has been schism- not only between New and Old Calendarists, but even between Old Calendarists.
Another thing I don't understand about this 'miracle' is that in the witnesses descriptions, it is said:

"The form of the Cross itself was an especially dense light which could be clearly seen as a Byzantine cross with a crossbar toward the bottom."

But the Byzantine Cross (shown below) has three crossbars, not two. The Cross never appears in representations with only a single second smaller crossbar towards the bottom. Why this new image of the Cross? And why did the witnesses insist on calling it a "byzantine" Cross when it only had two crossbars?

The Cross which has two crossbars is the Patriarchal Cross, but the smaller crossbar is at the top (as shown below), not the bottom.

This is why I hesitate to say whether this was divine, natural or demonic.

[Aristokles]

George Australia,
Do you have or can you post the entire Sigillion of the Council in Constantinople, 1583 in Greek? Perhaps a link, even?

Thanks,
Demetri

[gphadraig]

Surely, God sanctified time..........

Secondly, the calendar brought disparate peoples and churches together. Just as time, synods and such brought us a single date for celebrating Pascha.

In adopting the so-called New Calendar, a rent was introduced and the conciliar process was ignored. It was not simply a question of why or what 'legal' forms were or were not followed. What was done was divisive and was not done in love. It brought a 'liturgical' rent into the body of Orthodoxy and the fruit of that anti-canonical and anti-Orthodox act has come down to us as is self-evident.

To propose that the EP have somehow brought this act about 'legally' is surely a view which is more Latin than Orthodox?

As to the question of ecumenism in the first half of the previous century. One, did the Orthodox fully comprehend their Latin brothers beliefs, e.g. Bishop Raphael and the Anglicans? Two, the Latins, whether Roman or protestant, changed in terms of their beliefs, worship and much else during that time to a point that referring to what they do or do not believe is more difficult than ever, surely? That is the differences between have deepened and become more varied, rather than narrowed. Only the Orthodox 'ecumenists' believe otherwise.

Examples include, bishops and clergy who do not believe in the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection, miracles, the uniqueness of Christianity. Ecumenism appears to giving way to Inter-faithism. Latin masses often appear to have acquired the appearance of protestant services and elements drawn from Hindhuism and other non-Christian faiths and practices.

In my lifetime, some sixty years, I no longer recognise much that is present day western Christianity. And the changes more often than not are not for the better. What I do see is a change which followed through would be tantamount to recognising our spirituals forebears who struggled against the Latins seperation from Orthodoxy as misguided, down to ignorance, bigotry or prejudice. And we in our times are, of course, better placed to have a 'new' and more informed understanding of these our brothers, with whom there are no real differences seperating us. (Except territory, jurisdiction, and a few cosmetic matters). And those who sacrificed their lives, rather compromise their Orthodox Catholic faith, how should we remember them?).

Being faithful does not mean we have to be aggressive, or somehow emulate - with appropriate language and accents - an Orthodox variation of Dr Ian Paisley, with his strident shouts of "No Popery" and "No surrender"'!

[1937 Miraculous Cross]

Dear George,

Thank you for your posts.
you wrote:

VII) Whosoever does not follow the customs of the Church which the seven Holy Ecumenical Councils have decreed, and the Holy Pascha and calendar which they enacted well for us to follow, but wants to follow the newly-invented Paschalion and the new calendar of the atheist astronomers of the Pope;

I will examine this with others who speak Greek as well; however, I still see different interpetations of this from what you believe. To be literal, this indicates that the Papal calendar in its exact form is wrong. What is the intent however? It could be construed to also mean that any form or adoption of the Gregorian calendar is wrong...even if it was partial, such as the menologion. In other words, if the whole is wrong, so is any part.

I would also bring up again that the mindset of the Church is to have feast days celebrated together. If an Ecumenical Council thought it important for Christians to celebrate Christ's arising together, it also follows that they celebrate His Nativity together, and so on with all the feasts. That is why Calendar irregularities were generally corrected over time.

Also, I wonder what the eight 20th century local Church condemnations that I listed mean to you. Are they not of significance? By this time the "revised Julian' calender was being tossed around, as well as the early roots of ecumenism and the general desire to "do all things Western". The New Calendar was not a problem like the Celtic Church which inherited a different Tradition regarding the dating of Pascha, the N.C. was an innovation creating a division in the Church, with an aim to unity with the Western heterodox.

Nectarios[/b]