Announcement regarding the Greek Newspaper Άποψις
ANNOUNCEMENT
February 10/23, 2006
St. Charalambos
An interview with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew as well as an interview with our Metropolitan, which is unrelated to that of Patriarch Bartholomew, appeared in the January 14, 2006 issue of the Greek newspaper Άποψη (Opinion) (pages 8-9). These two incohesive statements are presented in a way that gives a misleading impression; they are connected in a way that is very improper. The interview of our Metropolitan is presented as a positive response to the interview of Patriarch Bartholomew. The title of the article �The courageous outreach of the Ecumenical Patriarch� with the subtitle �Patriarch Bartholomew�s invitation for dialogue and Pavlos� acceptance of this in an interview� is completely inaccurate; while the subtitle �towards the unity of all the dogmas of Orthodoxy(!)� may be characterized as illogical at best. Since when did Orthodoxy consist of many dogmas? Orthodoxy is one and unique. It is the only Truth that was revealed unto us on the day of Pentecost. This is exactly our difference with the Ecumenical Patriarch and the other ecumenists.
Obviously, the columnist was moved by a well-disposed enthusiasm in the article in question. However, he does not express the position of our Metropolitan but rather expresses his own wishes. Hearing our Metropolitan speak concerning dialogue in the interview he hastened to connect it with the Patriarch�s invitation. This correlation is mistaken because:
A) As one can deduce from his words, Patriarch Bartholomew perceives the significance of dialogue in a completely different way than we do. He considers Eucharistic communion with the Ecumenical Throne as the basis for the canonicity of the Church and calls us to dialogue based on the model of the Monastery of St. Irene Chrysovalantou in New York. This reminds us of the papal view of the Church; that canonicity is founded on communion with the �Holy See� of Rome. In Orthodoxy, canonicity is directly connected with the truth and not with any particular episcopal throne. Often times in ecclesiastical history, heretics occupied the Ecumenical Throne (Nestorius, Macedonius, the iconoclasts etc.) and the Church justified those who refrained from communion with the aforementioned heretics. It is well known to us that Bartholomew is not interested in the calendar. The problem is not the calendar but Ecumenism. The Uniates of Ukraine follow the Old calendar but have communion with the Pope. Patriarch Bartholomew desires dialogue, so that us he can make us �Uniates�; following the Old calendar but being under the Patriarchate. A dialogue with such a prospect does not interest our Metropolitan, and this should be clearly understood.
B) We consider the truth to be the basis of any dialogue. Moreover, the doctrines and the Holy Canons of the Orthodox Church express the truth. As far as we are concerned, this is the criterion of truth. Dialogue, as we define it (and in particular public dialogue) has as its aim to reveal which side is based on the truth of the doctrines and Holy Canons of Orthodoxy. On this basis, it is our wish that the Ecumenical Patriarchate plays a leading role and thus constitutes the lighthouse of Orthodoxy. With sorrow, however, him we see it playing a leading part in precisely the opposite direction, in Ecumenism. For this reason, we consider that our courses not only do not converge, they are diametrically opposed to one another.
As we see it, the dialogue must aim to show which side follows the Apostolic Tradition and have both sides follow this path. If we are disinclined toward Orthodox Tradition, may we return. If the other side is disinclined, then let them return. The uniqueness of truth is not the subject of negotiations and reciprocal reprocesses (give and take), for \\\"There is no compromise in the things of the faith\\\".
From the Office of the Metropolis