The Ecumenist False Council of 2016

[Maria]

This is a block-buster video, which should be carefully watched by all whether in World Orthodoxy or Traditional True Orthodoxy.

Description of the video (in Greek with English captions)

January 28, 2016

Fr Theodoros Zisis is Emeritus Professor of Patrology and former Chair of the Department of Pastoral and Social Theology at Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. In the video below Fr. Theodore, known as a staunch defender of traditional, patristic Orthodoxy, offers his thoughts on the upcoming Great and Holy Council, the decades of preparatory councils in which he sometimes took part, and the themes to be discussed

http://www.pravoslavie.ru/english/90197.htm

[Matthew]

In this video Fr Theodore Zisis discusses the 10 points of discussion that have been settled upon for the 2016 Great and Holy Council. I found it interesting in several points when, at 9:20, he introduces the 5th topic to be discussed saying,

The next theme is the calendar, and the connected theme of the common celebration of Pascha [with the Latin heretics]. What might one expect with regard to this theme? One might expect that after the schism created with the Old Calendar, which divided families...We have lived through drama...drama...as a result of this division. One might expect that we would think this through seriously, and if we find we have made a mistake, we would correct the mistake. Many elders, Athonites, Elder Philotheos Zervakos, for example--I wrote this in the book that I gave you--has said that the only answer is to bring back the Old Calendar since the Calendar Reform was a mistake. They do not want to hear this at all now! There are some churches, however, which say, "If you don't want to return to the Old Calendar the division between Old and New will continue." Russia persists. They are on the Old Calendar. Serbia persists, isn't it so Father? The Holy Mountain persists. Will the Holy Mountain change? The Holy Mountain is on the Old Calendar. And so the Ecumenical Patriarchate, all of us, the Church of Greece, we ought to say that we made a mistake with the calendar reform. The Mason-Patriarch Metaxakis orchestrated this. We made a mistake with the reform; let us correct it! Now, however, the Ecumenical Patriarchate, and we the New Calendarists, want to bring the others onto the New Calendar. We want to bring the Church of Russia, the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, and the Holy Mountain to us. There is opposition, however. I rejoice because it has been stated clearly--it has been said recently--prior to the council--"Don't wait on us because we are not going to change. You return to the Old Calendar!" What joy there would be if this injury, this wound were corrected with an act of repentance, a "Forgive us, we made a mistake!" Where is our repentance? Where is our humility? Two, three Churches made this decision--the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Church of Greece, without a council! Now we are about to have a council. Correct your mistake, then! Let the world cease to be divided into Old and New Calendarists with schisms here and there! This, however, is not enough. Now, as has come to light, they push onward from the theme of the New Calendar toward the common celebration of Pascha. While we have always kept Pascha on the Old Calendar, we celebrate Pascha together with those on the Old Calendar, now they want us to change this so that we can celebrate with the Pope and the Protestants! Or to set a date which will be common to all. Here, too, there is opposition, thankfully.

I understand that he is trying to raise the alarm as someone who is perhaps more traditionally minded a clergyman than many others in the New Calendar Greek Church. I do not call his sincerity into question. However, I want to highlight some things that show how his own thinking is warped by ecumenism and modernism, even though he and his vocal parishioners seem to indicate their opposition to the madness of the zealot-ecumenists in their hierarchy. Note the following errors he makes:

1. He begins by stating that it is the Old Calendar that has caused the division. He probably did this unconsciously and had he had time to write an essay to say what he wanted to say he possibly would have stated the opposite, that the introduction of the Papal Menaion caused divisions. But this goes to show how it is impossible, even if one is conscientiously traditionalist, to remain in communion with heretics and not be infected with the heterodox mind.

2. He refers to this introduction of the Papal Calendar, as "a mistake". Uh, no, you didn't make any mistakes. You knew what you were doing when you did it, and you meant to do it. That is not a mistake. Every bishop, priest, deacon, reader, monastic, and layman knew that the Latin Calendar was anathematized. And even a child can understand that anything that falls under anathema cannot be "Baptised" or, "rehabilitated". Can the anathematised doctrine of Arius be "rehabilitated" and be introduced in some rehabilitated form to the Orthodox Faithful? If you say, "Of course not. I am not a fool." Why then, do you waver, or continue in your trespasses, New Calendarist? Know, then, that the adoption of the Pope's "New Calendar" is heretical and antithetical to the Orthodox confession of Faith, and that those who worship according to it have committed apostasy. So, please, Father Theodore, let's be honest here. You did not make a little "boo-boo". Everyone who accepted the calendar change sinned and committed apostasy. That is the correct diagnosis. That is how a truly humble appreciation of your condition would be stated.

3. In his monologue, he goes on and on about, "The Old Calendar" and the "New Calendar". I am sorry, but again, if one has an Orthodox traditional mind and understanding, we cannot refer to the correct and traditional Calendar as the "Old Calendar" because for a True Orthodox confessor of the Patristic Faith there can only ever be ONE calendar, The Church Calendar. Secondly, the problem is not simply that the calendar the State Church of Greece is using is NEW. The problem is that it is heretical. It is the creation of Papal and Latin heresy. That is why their calendar has been Anathematized by at least three Holy Synods or local councils. So, again, he shows that he does not understand what has happened to them in the "New Calendarist" Orthodox Church, because he has imbibed and uncritically accepted the idea that it is of minor importance or difficulty--one of inconvenience and division, but it would be fine if all the Orthodox would simply agree together to switch to the "New Calendar". Obviously he doesn't get it. His opposition and lament is based on the objection that not going back to the "Old Calendar" will ensure that the divisions will persist. So the problem is really only in the lack of unity of plan "B" versus plan "A", and not the heretical nature of plan "B" itself. Look, if we could get everyone to accept and agree to Arianism, would that take the anathema away? Would that solve the objectionable nature of Arianism in the Church? NO! Why then, I ask you, do you not see, New Calendarist or those in communion with New Calendarists, that the problem is not the persisting divisions that exist by not abandoning the New Calendar? The real cause for lament would be in the case that the divisions would cease because as long as no communion exists between Old Calendarists and the New Calendarists this means some people actually understand that there can be no grace for those Orthodox in communion with those under anathema.

4. He seems to be suggesting that the "schisms here and there" are those who refuse to adopt this "mistake". He does not understand that the ones causing the schism, the schismatics, are those who have made this change (whether willingly or unwillingly, but nonetheless have adopted it). But of course, he does not want to accept the obvious--that he is a schismatic just as much as Metaxakis was, and as his head Bartholomew is. He called for humility--"Well, where is your own practise of it?" one might ask him.

5. He says, "I rejoice" for the "opposition" of those in World Orthodoxy who are still on the "Old Calendar" and who refuse to follow the example of the "New Calendarists". He doesn't understand that the Russian World Orthodox are themselves New Calendarists, inasmuch as they accept communion with those who are on the anathematised Papal Menaion. It is the heretical New Calendarist mentality to think that heresy or communion with it does not drive out grace--and the Russians on the "Old Calendar" have fallen into this heresy. The Holy Fathers and Saints are unanimous: Heresy drives out grace--Every Single Time. Again, Father Theodore is also "thankful" for the opposition among both those on the Church Calendar and those on the Papal Calendar who are against the push towards establishing a common date for the celebration of Pascha with the heretics. Too little, too late, and he doesn't get it. The changes they have already accepted, including the Russians and others on the Old Calendar, are far worse than the adoption of a common date with the heretics for observing Pascha. If they all, including this priest, Father Theodore Zisis, for the sake of "preserving the unity of the Church", have accepted the New Calendar and remaining in communion with bishops who sign joint declarations of shared baptismal grace with not only Papists but with Protestant sects that officially recognise and admit homosexual and lesbian ministers [see: http://www.euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/vi ... 220#p67220], why on earth should we believe that this smaller compromise will be more than they can tolerate and force their departure to True Orthodoxy? I tell you what--it is all a pipe dream, and they will not resist, they will not stand firm, nor will they escape their communion with heresy. The vast majority of traditionalist New Calendarist priests, men like Father Theodore Zisis, will express dismay and disappointment about any of these further changes to please the heterodox, but they will, yet again, declare, "We must not break the unity of the Church." And they will remain in communion with heretics because, as I demonstrated above, they have already lost their discernment and cannot detect that they are already in apostasy and under the anathemas of three local holy councils of the Orthodox Church.

[Maria]

Great observations, Matthew.

I still think that this video might, just might, open the eyes of a few World Orthodox, particularly the Eastern block of Slavic Orthodox who follow the Old Calendar and who are being pressured by the EP to adopt the New Calendar.

I could not but notice that Theme #2 espouses Papal (or EP) Supremacy.

Rather than the EP denouncing Papal Infallibility and Supremacy, he is advocating it for himself.

[Matthew]

Great observations, Matthew.

I still think that this video might, just might, open the eyes of a few World Orthodox, particularly the Eastern block of Slavic Orthodox who follow the Old Calendar and who are being pressured by the EP to adopt the New Calendar.

I could not but notice that Theme #2 espouses Papal (or EP) Supremacy.

Rather than the EP denouncing Papal Infallibility and Supremacy, he is advocating it for himself.

Indeed, the video is not without merit, perhaps. However, in considering my own ten years in the World Orthodox communion, I later came to realise that I would have left New Calendarism much sooner and recognised it as Pseudodox rather than Orthodox, had it not been for such seemingly staunch "defenders of Orthodox tradition" who gave us the impression that the WO were still the Church and not under anathema. So, it is this kind of deficient and deceptive approach of admitting and identifying heretical heirarchs and doctrines and formal declarations, and then attacking that with true statements, but still remaining in communion with all that heresy as though grace is unaffected by communion with heresy, that kills so many souls who would otherwise escape and be without spot and be true witness to authentic Orthodoxy. At the end of the day, all these "New Calendarist Traditionalists" do is chloroform the traditionally minded in their midst and numb them from the need to leave communion with heretics. Heresy Drives Out Grace. That is the patristic view. There can be no communion decade after decade with heresy without coming under the same condemnation even if they themselves confess correctly the faith. Grace is driven out of every altar in communion with the masonic ecumenist heretics in the World Orthodox WCC Church. That is the patristic position and confession. Breaking communion is the patristic response to a few years of unrepentant double-talking heretic bishops and seminary scholars hobnobbing with lesbian presbyterian ministerettes (who preach sermonettes, to christianettes, who smoke cigarettes!).

So, yes, reading books by ecumenist anti-ecumenist pseudo-defenders of Orthodox Tradition, like Justin Popovitch, can help people form a more Orthodox critical mind about the evils of ecumenism, however, this good is often counteracted, prolonging the concerned laymen's sojourn in fake Orthodoxy, by his seeming to represent the idea, "But if there was no grace here or if it were against the canons to remain in communion with heretics, surely Holy Elder Justin [or fill in blank of favourite anti-ecumenist ecumenist elder] would have left! Who am I? I will follow his lead because I see he is holy and loves the tradition as much as any confessor." And this logic keeps them enslaved to the communion of heretics--and brings them all under the same condemnation.

[Matthew]

Another point about Father Theodore Zisis' joyfulness and thankfulness about the "resistance" to the papal calendar of the Russians and other Slavic WCC member Orthodox Churches is this:

Being thankful that the World Orthodox still on the Church Calendar refuse to adopt the "New Calendar", and being joyful that they resist the agenda to harmonize the celebration of Pascha with their other WCC "brothers and sisters", is like being thankful and joyful that the the Monophysites are resisting Nestorianism.

What part of "under anathema" do they not understand?

[Maria]

Very excellent points, Matthew.

Re: Sacramental Grace
Personally, I know that my own struggles in resisting temptation have borne much more fruit now that I am within True Orthodoxy. Yes, I still struggle, and as long as I live, I will continue to struggle, but I am now fighting the good fight with the grace of God; I am being victorious over sin in my life. Nevertheless, as Christ helps me to conquer and root out one sin, another one pops up, there all the time, but unseen.

While I was in World Orthodoxy, I tended to bring the same laundry list of sins leading to a feeling of being stuck in rut, making no real improvement, and fighting indifference with no success. I had the same experience within Roman Catholicism where the priest would soothe my conscience by saying, "You are struggling, so don't worry." If one is struggling, but almost drowning, then something is wrong.

[Matthew]

While I was in World Orthodoxy, I tended to bring the same laundry list of sins leading to a feeling of being stuck in rut, making no real improvement, and fighting indifference with no success. I had the same experience within Roman Catholicism where the priest would soothe my conscience by saying, "You are struggling, so don't worry." If one is struggling, but almost drowning, then something is wrong.

Yes, I have found what you have said to be true. Also, when we consider the lives of the saints, they are such a testimony of what the "normal Christian life" truly is; it is an exalted road, a narrow path, but one which mounts higher and higher to the heights of God's enabling grace.