Articles for tag: baptism, canons, uniqueness of the Church

GIVING WITNESS TO THE TRUE CHURCH

Orthodox Christians all over the world have received the unchanging Christian Faith, passed down from the Holy Apostles to their successors, and continue to practice it today in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church – The Orthodox Church.

There is no “valid” baptism outside the Church — Part 2 of 2

The first half of this post is an excerpt from The Heavenly Banquet: Understanding the Divine Liturgy where we discuss the subject of baptism in our brief commentary on the Creed. The second half of this post is a collection of canons from The Rudder that pertain to Baptism.

The “one baptism” we confess is the one granted in and by the Church. According to St. Nektarios († 1920), “Those who are not reborn by the divine grace in the only ONE HOLY, CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH, do not belong to any church, either visible or invisible.”1 There are no Mysteries (Sacraments) outside the Church.2 The Church is the great Mystery (see Eph. 5:32) in which all the Mysteries of God are realized. The position of the Church concerning heretical baptism was stated once for all by St. Cyprian of Carthage. Here are two passages from his writings:

Some of our colleagues, by a curious presumption, are led to suppose that those who have been dipped among the heretics ought not to be baptized when they join us; because, they say, there is ‘one baptism’. Yes, but that one baptism is in the Catholic Church. And if there is one Church, there can be no baptism outside it. There cannot be two baptisms: if heretics really baptize, then baptism belongs to them. And anyone who on his own authority concedes them this privilege admits, by yielding their claim, that the enemy and adversary of Christ should appear to possess the power of washing, purifying, sanctifying a man. Our assertion is that those who come to us from heresy are baptized by us, not rebaptized. They do not receive anything there; there is nothing there for them to receive. They come to us that they may receive here, where there is all grace and truth; for grace and truth are one.3

The second quote:

The Church is one and indivisible: therefore there cannot be a Church among the heretics. The Holy Spirit is one, and cannot dwell with those outside the community; therefore the Holy Spirit has no place among heretics. It follows that there can be no baptism among heretics; for baptism is based on this same unity and cannot be separated either from the Church or from the Holy Spirit. It is ridiculous to assert that spiritual birth—that second birth of ours in Christ through the bath of regeneration—can take place among the heretics where, it is admitted, the Spirit has no place. Water cannot of itself purify and sanctify, unless it is accompanied by the Holy Spirit”.4

We repeat the important distinction that we made in our previous post, which should clarify things.

ACCEPTANCE AND RECOGNITION OF BAPTISM
(Acceptance does not mean recognition)

Acceptance addresses the issue how does the Church receive converts.
Recognition addresses the “validity” of baptism.

The Church recognizes no baptism as “valid” that is performed outside of her. However, in the exercise of oikonomia (dispensation), at times and places and special circumstances, at the discretion of a bishop or synod of bishops, she accepts a baptism that resembles to a greater or lesser extent her baptism, of someone who is being received in the Orthodox Church from heresy or schism. Acceptance is not concerned with “validity” or recognition of baptisms performed outside of her, concepts which are foreign to her terminology and practice.

The fact that the Orthodox Church receives certain converts by oikonomia through Chrismation does not mean that the Orthodox Church recognizes a baptism performed outside her pleroma nor does she admit by such action that there is grace among the heterodox.

How the heterodox should be received has become not an issue of whether to exercise akriveia (strictness) or oikonomia (dispensation, exception), but an imposition by the ecumenists of their erroneous belief, namely that there is one baptism and that this one baptism is administered validly by anyone (even by non-Christians!), as long as the name of the Holy Trinity is invoked and water is used in any form.

Because for the prevailing ecumenism, it has almost become an article of faith that any baptism performed, whether inside or outside the Orthodox Church, is a valid baptism (so long as it is performed by invoking the name of the Holy Trinity). For this reason the Ecumenical Patriarchate does no longer allow under any circumstances to receive heterodox through baptism, because it is viewed as a repetition of the one true baptism. They will no longer allow the strictness to be applied even by oikonomia!!

Ecumenists are not willing to accept the patristic and synodal witness, that when the Church allows baptism by oikonomia she does so without addressing at all its “validity” outside the Church–which the ecumenists do because of their ecumenistic and synchretistic considerations.

The holy canons of the Church listed below support fully the above statements.

46th Apostolic Canon

“We ordain that a bishop, or presbyter who has admitted the baptism or sacrifice of heretics, be deposed. For what concord hath Christ with Beliar, or what part hath a believer with an infidel?”

47th Apostolic Canon

“Let a bishop or presbyter who shall baptize again one who has rightly received Baptism, or who shall not baptize one who has been polluted by the ungodly, be deposed, as despising the Cross and death of the Lord, and not making a distinction between the true priests and the false.”

50th Apostolic Canon

“If any bishop or presbyter does not perform the three immersions of the one initiation, but one immersion, given into the death of the Lord, let him be deposed. For the Lord did not say, “Baptize into my death,” but, “Go, make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”

68th Apostolic Canon

“If any bishop, presbyter, or deacon shall receive from anyone a second ordination, let both the ordained and the ordainer be deposed, unless indeed it be proved that he had his ordination from heretics; for those who have been baptized or ordained by such persons cannot be either of the faithful or of the clergy.”

Canon 1 of the Regional Council of Carthage

“[…] No one can be baptized outside of the catholic Church, there being but one baptism, and this being existent only in the catholic Church. […] Among heretics … there is no Church… […] There being but one baptism, and there being but one Holy Spirit, there is also but one Church… and for this reason whatever they [i.e. the heretics] do is false and empty and vain, everything be counterfeit and unauthorized. For nothing that they do can be acceptable and desirable with God. In fact, the Lord calls them His foes and adversaries in the Gospels: “He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad” (Mt. 12:30). […]”

Epitome of Canon 19 of the First Ecumenical Council

“Paulianists must be rebaptized.”

Interpretation by St. Nikodemos: “For how can anyone that has not been baptized in accordance with the Orthodox faith receive a visitation of the Holy Spirit, and grace, in ordination?”

Canon 7 of the Second Ecumenical Council

[Summary:] Certain heretics and schismatics who are baptized the same way Orthodox are baptized are received through recantation of their errors and then through holy Chrism. But those who are baptized with a single immersion and… (those belonging to) any other heresies… we are willing to accept as Greeks [i.e. through baptism].

Summary of Canon 7 of Laodicaea

“Certain heretics are accepted after being catechized and chrismated”, [Interpretation by St. Nikodemos]: “seeing that they used to baptize themselves in identically the same way as are Orthodox Christians, and on this account and for this reason alone they do not need to be baptized a second time.”

Canon 8 of Laodicaea

“As concerning those returning from the heresy of the so-called Phrygians, even though they happen to be in the class which with them is supposed to be the clergy… such persons are to be catechized … and … baptized…”

Epitome of Canon 1 of St. Basil

“The ancients… ordered (that) those that were baptized by [heretics and schismatics], and came over to the Church, to be purged by the true baptism, as those that are baptized by laymen. But let none be received without unction.”

Epitome of Canon 47 of St. Basil

“We re-baptize them all.”

Summary/Interpretation of Canon 66 of Carthage

“If persons baptized by the Donatists in their infancy learn the truth of Orthodoxy after coming of age and attaining to discretion, and come to hate the cacodoxy, whether they, I say, seeing that they have been baptized in the baptism which is performed in accordance with tradition, to wit, that performed by the Orthodox… ought not to be baptized” (Interpretation by St. Nikodemos).

Canon 84 of the Sixth Ecumenical Council

“Following the canonical institutions of the Fathers, we order that whoever does not know nor can prove by documents that he has been baptized, he must without any hesitation be baptized.”

Canon 95th of the Sixth Ecumenical Council

Same as Canon 7 of the Second Ecumenical Council.

We end with another quote from our study on the Divine Liturgy, The Heavenly Banquet, taken from our commentary on “The Catechumens” (p. 153).

“The [Greek Orthodox] Church in America does not baptize the converts any longer, admitting them through Chrismation, as they are allegedly already baptized. But if they were baptized they would be members of the Church. What would they be joining then when they became Orthodox? The Church Canons should be strictly adhered to, in administering the true baptism by triple immersion, practiced only in the Orthodox Church, to those who have not received it.”

Note 651 in The Heavenly Banquet. Saint Nektarios, Two Studies, 1. On the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church 2. On Sacred Tradition (in Greek), Bookstore Nektarios Panagopoulos, Athens 1987, p. 28.

Beginning of Note 652 in The Heavenly Banquet. Read the small treatise, I Confess One Baptism… by Protopresbyter Dr. George D. Metallinos, St. Paul’s Monastery, Holy Mountain 1994.

(Epistle LXXI. 1, in Henry Bettenson, The Early Fathers, A Selection from the writings of the Fathers from St. Clement of Rome to St. Athanasius, Edited and translated by Henry Bettenson, Oxford University Press, Oxford-New York-Toronto 1969, p. 271)

(ibid., LXXIV 4-5)

Fr. Emmanuel Hatzidakis (+2024) is the author of The Heavenly Banquet: Understanding the Divine Liturgy and Jesus: Fallen? The Human Nature of Christ Examined from an Eastern Orthodox Perspective.

GIVING WITNESS TO THE TRUE CHURCH

Orthodox Christians all over the world have received the unchanging Christian Faith, passed down from the Holy Apostles to their successors, and continue to practice it today in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church – The Orthodox Church.

The Uniqueness of Our Faith

A sermon written and delivered in 1997 on the 5th Sunday of Great Lent

It would be tempting to think of other religions as offering essentially the same thing the holy Church is offering, with perhaps our religion having a relative superiority over them, if any at all. This would be a fatal mistake. Because by doing so we would be comparing “the blood of goats and calves” with “the blood of Christ.” Thus we would exchange the imitation for the real thing, the copy for the original, we would prefer to live in the shadow rather than in the light of the Sun of Righteousness, we would refuse the real cleansing for what is merely its prefigurement, its symbol, its image, its anticipation, its typos. And in exchanging the created for the uncreated we would be found guilty of idolatry. Therefore far from getting us “closer to God,” the other religions would alienate us from God.

What Christ offers to us — cleansing and purification, forgiveness and remission of sins, reconciliation with God and union with Him forever and ever, is not available through anyone else or through any other means — is offered only through Christ.

Christ is not simply “better,” at a higher level, even the perfection. The perfect superseded the imperfect. The old was temporary; when the new arrived He rendered it “obsolete” (Heb. 8:13). We cannot therefore say that if we are Christ’s followers we get a perfect 10, but if we happen to follow Judaism that’s worth a 9, if Islam that deserves an 8, and if Sikhism appeals to us we should get at least a 7, and as for Hindus, Buddhists, Confucianists, Taoists, Shintoists, Shumminists, Janists and Zoroastrians they get a passing grade as well. And why leave animists, universalists and new-agers out? They deserve a place in the sun also. In fact any belief in God certainly cannot lead us astray — after all there is only one God with different names, right? But why should we exclude otherwise decent people, who may be religious theists, rationalists, enlightened atheists or even historical materialists, just because they say they don’t believe in God? As long as they are good people, God will surely have mercy on them as, we hope, He will on us. After all, in the ultimate analysis, isn’t “to be good and to do good” what counts? Thus reason the humanists, who want to substitute the uniqueness of Christ with a purely human vision.

Man’s Religion

This subjective, humanistic view of “religions,” according to which Christianity is just another religion, while consoling and appealing to many today, albeit among them many Orthodox Christians as well, is plainly and radically wrong.

A charming tapestry

The religions of the world are viewed as cultural manifestations, worth studying and preserving. Here in the US, religions and their practices and traditions are seen as an enrichment of our multi-culture society, adding charm to “the tapestry we call ‘religion,’” and, more importantly, offering choices. Isn’t this choice that counts? Are we all the same? Since we are not, then what would be more natural from giving expression to our particularity and individuality, our uniqueness as human beings, than to have our own set of beliefs and traditions? This diversity, far from separating us and bringing clash among peoples, could, and should, be viewed as a beautiful tapestry, a beautiful mosaic, creating beauty, harmony, balance. Says an author of world religions, from whom we quoted above: “Despite the rich diversity of its expressions, all of religion shares the goal of tying people back to something behind the surface of life — a greater reality which lies beyond, or invisibly infuses, the world that we can perceive with our five senses.”1 Different religions simply represent different attempts to “connect” with this greater reality. Why, then, should we consider one religion superior to another? Why should we impose our beliefs on others? Why can’t we respect the religious preferences of others, as we do with their food taste, ideologies and philosophies? Why behave as religious fanatics, instead of opening our minds, accepting other people as they are, living with each other in brotherhood and love?

Unnecessary but helpful

Then, there is another view, the modern, “enlightened”, materialistic and scientific view, according to which man invents religion to satisfy his needs: “Man makes religion, religion does not make man,” said Karl Marx.3 Man, with his science, can explain everything, can create everything — now, with cloning, even man himself! At most we allow that some search and pursuit of a certain spirituality can have “positive” effects on human beings — back to what we were saying earlier: let us respect each other, live in harmony with each other, make our environment “user-friendly,” protect our environmental resources, make our life on this planet more comfortable, raise the standard of living of all human beings, seek peaceful coexistence among all nations — now these are pursuits everyone would agree with and strive for, no matter what our particular beliefs are. Religion, then, not only need not divide us, but it is not needed to unite us — it is not needed. Period. Respecting each other’s rights and personal freedom is what unites people, both as individuals and as nations. Let us then unite hands, and celebrate the sacredness of life and existence, even co-existence.

Pantheism

A precursor of the Ecumenical movement, Christoph Blumhardt, wrote: “We must finally divorce ourselves from the idea that the Lord Jesus Christ would have allowed Himself to be cloistered up in some one of the many churches or sects… Christ does not meddle in the quarrels of churches. His kingdom is much higher…” The time of creeds and churches should not even be posed in our time. We left all that behind us, he said.2 I watched on video the young Presbyterian Korean feminist “theologian” Dr. Chung Hium Kiung, addressing the World Council of Churches in Canberra, Australia, in 1991. She invoked 18 different spirits: among them the spirits of the forests, the spirits of the creatures of the sea, the spirits of earth, air and waters and, in the same breath, the Spirit of God! Imagine: “The Spirit of Truth” on a par with the demonic spirits! “The Giver of Life” with the spirits of death! Then during the Second Parliament of World’s Religions held in Chicago in 1993, the Tibetan Buddhist Dalai Lama was applauded and cheered loudly by a gathering of 6,000 representatives of some 250 religions, including Roman Catholics, in which he communicated his syncretistic ideas: “One religion cannot satisfy millions of people,” he said, adding: “The best religion is what is best for me, which may not be what is best for you.” Then he added: “All religions are more or less the same,” thus placing the God-founded Christian Church on the same plane with idolatry and the pantheon of the world’s false religions. Is this the religion we want to have?

God’s Church

Christ makes this exclusive right over life and death available through His holy Church: not through issuance of indulgences, but through that same blood spilled on the Cross — offered only in the Holy Church, “through the eternal Spirit” (Heb. 9:14).

Where does that put Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross? Are we ready to accept that it cannot satisfy everyone? Do we see why we cannot unite hands with the world’s religions? Because our liberation and redemption are based not on our knowledge, whether rational, mystical or scientific, not on our gut feelings, not on our efforts nor on our perception of truth or love, and not on our perceived union with the divine Being either, but it was revealed to us through the Only Begotten Son of God that salvation is obtained only through His blood, and our acceptance of its unique power to redeem us and transform us and unite us with Him. “Salvation is not [available] in nobody else [but Christ],” says the holy scripture, in a strong double negative phrase (Acts 4:12). Therefore there are not, and there cannot be, any other paths. That’s why we reject and abhor any syncretistic notions that there are other paths that lead to God, other than Christ and the Church He established, a Church we identify fully with the Orthodox Church. Presumptuous, intolerant, bigotist as this may sound, we believe wholeheartedly in the uniqueness of the “path” called Christ: “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except by Me” (John 14:6).

The true path

This hardly allows for acceptance of other paths. Christianity is unique, because if it weren’t, then Christ would be (Lord forgive me for saying this) a charlatan and a deceiver and a liar, when He said (let’s repeat it),

“No one comes to the Father except by Me.”

He also said:

“Apart from Me you can do nothing” (John 15:5)

and

“He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him” (John 5:23).

The chief of the Apostles also says:

“Every soul that does not listen to that prophet (i.e. Christ) shall be destroyed from the people” (Acts 3:23).

There are no other saviors, redeemers, or mediators. Unity, oneness, unification may come about only in the person of Christ and in His Body, the holy Orthodox Church, and not by agreeing to some lowest common denominator in an ecumenistic gathering of WCC or in a syncretistic gathering of PWR. Let’s face it:

“The Truth is in Jesus” (Eph. 4:21)

and in no one else. So we

“cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons” (1 Cor. 10:21).

These are hard words, but express the Orthodox faith. Elsewhere also the Apostle Paul says:

“Look out for the dogs, look out for the evil-workers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh. For we are the true circumcision” (Phil. 3:2-3).

He talks about the Jews, who, as he says elsewhere, “displease God” (1 Thes. 2:15). The biblical truth, the teaching of the Church, is that our Faith is unique. If not, then all of our Fathers and Mothers in the faith that preceded us would be deceived, because they preached the uniqueness of Christianity. Who would want to follow such false religion if one were to accept that there are other paths that lead to the same place?

Today we are super-sensitive to the issue of the uniqueness of our Faith. If not ourselves, then our sons and daughters are, who are married to non-Orthodox, and maybe to non-Christians. We already exclude their spouses from our sacraments. So instead of finding ways to bring such people closer to Church, are we saying, that they are lost, that there is no hope for them, unless they become Orthodox? No. Not at all. What we are saying is that God’s mercy is infinite and His love for us immeasurable. We are all saved by God’s mercy. But as salvation came out of Israel (“Jesus” means, The One Who Saves), likewise salvation continues to be made available only through Christ’s Body, the true Israel, the Orthodox Church. “He became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey Him” (Heb. 5:9). All the means of salvation are available through His Church. Those who despise the Church and its means to obtain salvation should know that they despise the way God chose to make His salvation available to us, and they should be aware of the risks associated with it.

Lest we tragically misunderstand the uniqueness of our Faith, we say with God’s inspired word:

“The sacrifices of the non-Orthodox are abomination to the Lord, while the prayers of the Orthodox are acceptable to Him” (Pr. 15:8).

And elsewhere the holy scripture repeats:

“The sacrifices of the non-Orthodox are an abomination to the Lord for they offer them illegitimately” (Pr. 21:27).

God’s first commandment is:

“You shall have no other gods before me” (Ex. 20:3, Deut. 5:7)

We should resist the temptation to compromise and dilute our faith in our “pluralistic” society. Therefore the participation by the various Orthodox jurisdictions in the WCC should be terminated immediately, because it undermines the uniqueness of our Church in the jumble of the Protestant “churches.” Let’s stop recognizing “sister churches,” “valid” baptisms outside the Church, apostolic succession, priesthood, sacraments — these are the unique and exclusive gifts of the Lord to His “all fair love, in whom there is no flaw” (Song of Songs, 4:7).

One with the Body of Christ

As for us, Orthodox Christians, we too should know, my dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ, that the Crucified Lord is not reached through baptism and chrismation alone, through contemplation alone, through prayer alone, through ascetical practices alone, through obedience to God’s commandments alone, through faith alone, through works of love alone, through the sacraments of the Church alone, through all of the above put together — but through all of the above and especially, and above all, through God’s grace, mercy, love and compassion, and sacrifice on the Cross. It is especially in the partaking of the Cup of the Lord that we unite ourselves with Him and with one another. It is supremely in the act of holy Communion with the most sacred Body and Blood of our Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ that everyone is drawn to oneness, to unity with the divine, and the human, and with one’s own inner being. Redemption, spiritual cleansing, eternal life for which we all long, are found only in the blood of Christ. Freedom from the oppression of sin is offered only by the crucified Lord.

We stand before the Lamb who takes away the sins of the world. We all know there is no substitute. Whoever eats of this Bread and drinks of this Wine worthily has life. This we know. This we preach. For this we live. For this we are ready to give our lives.

Fr. E.H./97

Heading photo by T.H.

Living Religions: An Encyclopaedia of the World’s Faiths, Mary Pat Fisher 1997, p. 12.
Quoted by Protopresbyter Michael Pomazansky, Selected Essays, p. 213.
Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel’s “Philosophy of Right”.

GIVING WITNESS TO THE TRUE CHURCH

Orthodox Christians all over the world have received the unchanging Christian Faith, passed down from the Holy Apostles to their successors, and continue to practice it today in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church – The Orthodox Church.

What Should we do when our Bishop is an Ecumenist?

Fr. Emmanuel,

Bless!

What is your opinion on the Orthodox ecclesiological statements that Patriarch Bartholomew makes when speaking to Orthodox audiences? Which Patriarch Bartholomew should we trust? The one who speaks like an Orthodox bishop on Mt. Athos or the one who concelebrates with the heterodox? What should traditional Orthodox do when our first hierarch is tending towards Uniatism?

Maximus
[from a comment to this post]

Dear Maximus,

What a glorious name you bear! As long as you remain anchored unto this luminary of Orthodoxy you too will shine with the truth (as you do).

Thank you for asking this vexing question. It has been in my mind for many years. I have come to a solution that works for me—uneasily, I should add.

Admittedly it is painfully true that the ecumenical (read ecumenist) Patriarch speaks from both sides of his mouth, depending upon who his audience is: Orthodox in his statements for internal consumption; ecumenist when addressing his non-Orthodox “brethren.”

So, dear Maximus, with justification you raise the question, what should we do when we witness the acknowledged first-in-honor bishop of the Orthodox Church flagrantly violating the canons of the Church with common prayers and with statements that compromise the uniqueness of the Church?

What better authority to turn to in order to obtain a reliable, Orthodox answer to your question than the luminary of the true faith and life, the one you chose to be named after—the Confessor himself!

St. Maximos the Confessor would not receive holy communion from the hands of those he considered to be heretics because this supreme act of inter-communion was tied to their erroneous confession of faith, and it would be viewed as a public admission that he shared in their heresy.

More importantly, let us not forget that the Lateran council convened in 649 under pope Martin, in which St. Maximos was present, condemned and deposed the Patriarchs and bishops of the East who had embraced Monothelitism. Therefore St. Maximos had every justification to break communion with them.

Our situation is different. While our Patriarch and most of our bishops, whether openly or tacitly, are ecumenists, they don’t make holy communion a test, neither have they been officially condemned by a Church synod.

For us who are unequivocally non-ecumenists, the faith of the Patriarch, as that of his two predecessors, is a personal matter. They are not the Church. Those who faithfully follow the Fathers and keep the true faith are the Church.1

As long as things remain the way they are, we’ll continue to keep our Orthodox faith, while openly condemning ecumenism as a heresy, exactly as St. Maximos did—and accept the consequences.

However, if our bishop happens to be an ecumenist who will equate reception of holy communion to acceptance of his erroneous faith, then we too will stop receiving it from his hands, and we’ll look for an Orthodox bishop to follow.2

Old Calendarists will retort that they feel fully justified breaking communion with the New Calendarists based on the 31st of the Holy Apostles and especially on the 15th Canon of the First-Second Synod and, according to which Christians wall themselves off heretical or schismatic bishops.3

We are not ready to follow them and their uncanonical bishops. We will suffer where we are and we will continue to give witness to the true faith from within, praying that soon the truth will shine.

It just happens that recently (Nov. 27, 2014) the Metropolis of Piraeus, Greece, organized a seminar, in which three Orthodox theologians, including the Metropolitan of Piraeus Seraphim himself, addressed the aforementioned Canon and the question “when is it allowed to wall ourselves off from communion with our bishop”?4

The seminar expanded and explained the Canon stating that a priest or bishop may break communion with his superior if he publicly preaches a heresy even though it has not yet been condemned by a synod, but is acknowledged by the Fathers to be a heresy.

A couple of observations: First, breakage is not mandatory. It is a right, not an obligation. Second, we follow the holy Fathers, not our impulses. Even though many Fathers have written against ecumenism, calling it a heresy, even a pan-heresy, they fought against it from within, suffering the consequences.

We are not going to behave as supreme keepers and judges of the faith. There are others more knowledgeable and more pious than we are. Let us bear patiently in longsuffering if our bishop happens to be an ecumenist. We have as examples the recently declared Saints Justin Popović, Paisios the Hagiorite, Philotheos Zervakos, Sophrony Zaharov, and many other contemporary elders.

I praise and glorify God who gave me the answer to your question through the lips of the newest Saint of the Church, St. Paisios the New, who writes:

In our times we see that many faithful children of our Church, monastics and laymen, have unfortunately seceded from her, on account of the philo-uniates. I am of the opinion that it is no good at all to separate from the Church every time the Patriarch is at fault. Instead, from within, near our Mother Church, everyone has the duty and obligation to struggle in his own way. To discontinue the Patriarch’s commemoration, to secede and form one’s own Church, and to continue to speak insulting the Patriarch—this, I think, is illogical. If we separate ourselves at the first and second detour of our Patriarchs from our own churches – God forbid! – we’ll surpass even the Protestants.5

We should add, however, that later on, and for three years (1970-1973), the Saint together with other Hagiorite Fathers and a few Metropolitans interrupted the commemoration of Patriarch Athenagoras. At the same time we should note that they did not impose the cessation of the commemoration to other hierarchs, neither did they condemn as heretics those who continued to commemorate him, but maintained the ecclesiastical communion with the patriarchate and the Church of Greece.

Metropolitan of Gortynos Jeremiah included the above quotation from St. Paisios in his homily for the feast of St. Gregory the Theologian (Jan. 25, 2015), as an example to follow. Let us do that, while praying that soon a synod will specifically and directly condemn ecumenism and those bishops who follow it, praying and hoping that they will repent and will once more “teach the word of truth correctly” (2 Tim. 2:15).

This is what Saint Paisios the New says: “Our Orthodox Church lacks nothing. She only lacks serious hierarchs and pastors with patristic principles. The chosen are few. Yet it is not disheartening. The Church is the Church of Christ. He is the One who governs her.” (Orthodoxos Typos, Feb. 20, 2015)
Fr. Thomas Hopko gave a podcast on the subject (Resisting Like St. Maximus).
Pedalion, pp. 46-48 and pp. 470-71.
See Orthodoxos Typos, Dec. 12, 2015.
Letter of Elder (now Saint) Paisios of Jan. 23, 1969 (Orthodoxos Typos, Feb. 20, 2015-my translation).

GIVING WITNESS TO THE TRUE CHURCH

Orthodox Christians all over the world have received the unchanging Christian Faith, passed down from the Holy Apostles to their successors, and continue to practice it today in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church – The Orthodox Church.

There is no “valid” baptism outside the Church — Part 2 of 2

ACCEPTANCE AND RECOGNITION OF BAPTISM
(Acceptance does not mean recognition)

GIVING WITNESS TO THE TRUE CHURCH

Orthodox Christians all over the world have received the unchanging Christian Faith, passed down from the Holy Apostles to their successors, and continue to practice it today in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church – The Orthodox Church.

The Uniqueness of Our Faith