Saint Philaret of New York, the Father of Fathers: Saint ... · Saint Philaret issued this Anathema...

Saint Philaret of New York, the Father of Fathers.

1

Saint Philaret of New York, the Father of Fathers:

Saint Cyprian and Ecumenism

A Study of the Basis in Ecumenical Authority

of

The Anathema Against Ecumenism of 1983.

THE ANATHEMA AGAINST THE HERESY OF

ECUMENISM AND ITS ADHERENTS

To those who attack the Church of Christ by teaching that Christs Church is

divided into so-called branches which differ in doctrine and way of life, or that the

Church does not exist visibly, but will be formed in the future when all branches or

sects or denominations, and even religions will be united into one body; and who do

not distinguish between the priesthood and mysteries of the Church from those of

heretics, but say that the baptism and eucharist of heretics is effectual for salvation;

therefore, to those who knowingly have communion with those aforementioned

heretics or who advocate, disseminate, or defend their new heresy of Ecumenism under

the pretext of brotherly love or the supposed unification of separated Christians,

ANATHEMA

This Anathema was lawfully enacted by the Synod of Russian Bishops Abroad,

convened in full council under the presidency of His Eminence Saint Metropolitan

Philaret in Mansonville, Quebec, Canada, from July 21 / August 3 to July 30 / August 12,

1983.

Saint Philaret issued this Anathema on Sunday 14/27 October, 1983, the Feast of Saint

Gregory Palamas.

The opening lines of this anathema, i.e. To those who attack the Church of Christ by

teaching that Christs Church is divided into so-called branches which differ in doctrine

and way of life, or that the Church does not exist visibly, but will be formed in the

future when all branches or sects or denominations, and even religions will be united

into one body; identifies specific attacks against the Church which now come under

the Anathema.


2

In the following lines, and who do not distinguish between the priesthood and

mysteries of the Church from those of heretics, but say that the baptism and eucharist of

heretics is effectual for salvation; is found a position that had already been identified

as a departure from Holy Tradition in The Seventieth Epistle of Saint Cyprian of Carthage

(255 A.D.).1 Under the presidency of Saint Cyprian of Carthage the Synod of Bishops

outlined as that long since settled by our predecessors, and observed by us; thinking,

namely, and holding for certain, that no one can be baptized outside the Church, in that

there is one Baptism appointed in the holy Church, as it is written, the Lord himself

speaking, They have forsaken Me the Fountain of living water, and hewed them out

broken cisterns that can hold no water (Jer. 2:13 LXX).2 Saint Philarets teaching in The

Anathema Against Ecumenism rests solidly upon the decision of the Holy Fathers of the

Quinisext Council In Trullo, Canon II, in 692 A.D. under which Saint Cyprians

Seventieth Epistle received the sanction of Ecumenical Authority.3

Significantly, The Holy Fathers of the Seventh Ecumenical Council identify the

Fathers of the Quinisext Council as the Fathers of the Sixth Ecumenical council. The

Quinisext Council, as a continuation of the Sixth Ecumenical Council, was accepted

without reservation by the Church, East and West, by the Holy Fathers of the Seventh

Ecumenical Council.4

The historical record shows that this is also called the Canon of St. Cyprian, which

was issued by a Synod of 31 Bishops under St. Cyprian in Carthage in 255 A.D, referred

to in the Second Canon of the Synod in Trullo, the Quinisext Council, 692 A.D., an

Ecumenical Council.5 St. Cyprian, commemorated on August 31, was vigorously

supported by Saint Firmilian Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, who is commemorated

on October 28. 6

1 Please see The Appendix to this Study.

2 NPNF Vol. 10 The Seven Ecumenical Councils pp. 518, 519.

3 http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/trullo.html

4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Council_of_Nicaea

5 http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/trullo.html

6 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmilian

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmilian


3

I

The Gathering Storm

A brief backward glance tells us that, as far as Orthodox Christians are

concerned, the Ecumenical movement saw its inception when the Encyclical To the

Churches of Christ Wheresoever They Might Be was published by the Patriarchal

locum tenens, Metropolitan Dorotheos of Prusa, together with other hierarchs, in

January, 1920.7 What is the starting point of those in the Ecumenical Movement? What

is the goal of the Ecumenical Movement? Without proceeding any further, which would

lie outside the scope of our treatment of the Ecumenical Movement, we can give an

answer to the two questions above.

Proponents of the Ecumenical Movement assume first, that if ever there did exist

a One Church, it is impossible to discern that Church amid the contemporary

disarray of Christian bodies, even though, somehow, each of these organizations has

retained some token of the putative lost unity. Second, a possible restoration of this

unity, assuming that such unity did obtain at some point in time past as yet to be

identified, or that if Christian unity is actually desirable, it might be realized through a

process of mutual respect between all groups of Christians by setting aside all the

disputes of the past, with a view to consent to unite on the basis of some mutually

agreed platform.8

To state the obvious, the cacophonous discussion in the preceding paragraph

stands at the greatest possible distance from the Ecumenical Councils, Canons, and

Anathemas to which every Orthodox Bishop at the time of his consecration to serve the

One, Holy Catholic, and Apostolic Church vows, without any qualification, God being

his helper, to uphold, with every ounce of his wit and strength.

II

Deceiving, and being deceived (2 Timothy 3:13)

7 Generally speaking, the beginning of the Ecumenical Movement is considered to be the Edinburgh

Missionary Conference in 1910.

8 Cf. St. Philarets summary of Ives M. J. Congars remarks concerning the essence of that movement,

i.e. ecumenism, drawn from Chrietiens Desunis, Ed. Unam Sanctam, Paris, 1937, pp. XI-XII; quoted in A

Second Sorrowful Epistle, 1971.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edinburgh_Missionary_Conference


4

The following discussion of The Ecumenical Movement draws directly from the

Sorrowful Epistles written from July, 1969 through December, 1975 by Our Father

Among the Saints Philaret Metropolitan of New York, the New Confessor. Each of

these, be it an Epistle or the Open Letter, has the character of a witness against the

heretical ecumenists.9 We also include selected details from three communications: 1) A

Protest of December, 1965 to Patriarch Athenagoras on the so-called Lifting of the

Anathemas of 1054, 2) A letter of May, 1968 to Patriarch Athenagoras which mentions

the Patriarchs support of the presently fashionable error of ecumenism, and 3) an

Open Letter to Archbishop Iakovos dated the Feast of Orthodoxy, 1969 informing him

that, among other errors, You are uniting with the heterodox not in truth but in indifference

to it.10 The purpose of these three communications, spanning a period of three years

and six months is to make it possible, in a respectful mode of address, that the

addressee, at least in the last letter, might read the following; We are writing...so that

other Bishops and the faithful might know that not all the Church agrees with your

pernicious ecumenical ventures. 11

Turning to the First Sorrowful Epistle, dated Sunday of the Sixth Ecumenical Council,

1969, Saint Philaret, after summarizing certain decisions of the World Council of

Churches at Uppsala in 1968, the Pan-Orthodox Conference in Geneva in 1968, and,

among others, the WCC in Evanston in 1954, states the theme of this Epistle:

If initially the Orthodox participated in Ecumenical meetings only to present the truth, performing, so

to speak, a missionary service among confessions foreign to Orthodoxy, then now they have combined

with them, and anyone can say that what was said at Uppsala was also said by the member Orthodox

Churches in the persons of their delegates. Alas that it should be said in the name of the whole Orthodox

Church!

We regard it as our duty to protest in the strongest possible terms against this state of affairs.12

The remainder of this Epistle reviews the history of other incidents which led to

Uppsala and to related events on a broader view.

9 The Soviet Government in 1961 required the Moscow Patriarchate to embrace Ecumenism to spread Soviet propaganda through

diplomatic channels. (N. B. The Moscow Patriarchate is not to be confused with The Russian Orthodox Church which then and now,

thrives in the Catacombs and has nothing to do with Ecumenism).

10 Open Letter, Feast of Orthodoxy, 1969, p. 4. The italics are in St. Philarets text.

11 Ibid. p. 4.

12 Saint Philarets First Sorrowful Epistle 1969. The bold italics are in St. Philarets text.


5

The Second Sorrowful Epistle, dated two years later in 1971, closes with the following

trenchant lines:

It must be understood that the circumstance which prompted our Saviour to wonder if at His Second

Coming He would find the faith yet upon the earth is brought about not only by the direct propagation of

atheism, but also by ecumenism.

The history of the Church witnesses that Christianity was not spread by compromises and dialogues

between Christians and unbelievers, but through witnessing the truth and rejecting every lie and every

error. It might be noted that generally no religion has ever been spread by those who doubted its full

truth. The new, all-encompassing church which is being erected by the ecumenists is of the nature of

that Church of Laodicea exposed in the Book of Revelation: she is lukewarm, neither hot nor cold toward

the Truth, and it is to this new church that the words addressed by the Angel to the Laodicean Church

of old might now be applied So that because thou art lukewarm and neither cold nor hot, I will spew

thee out of my mouth (Rev. 3:16). Therefore because they have not received the love that they might be

saved, instead of a religious revival this church exhibits that of which the Apostle warned: And for this

cause God shall send them a strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be damned

who believe not in the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness (II Thess. 2:10-12).

The Third Sorrowful Epistle has as its subject The Thyatira Confession, or The Faith and

Prayer of Orthodox Christians, by His Eminence Athenagoras Kokkinakis, Archbishop of

Thyateira and Great Britain. It was published with the Blessing and Authorization of

the Ecumenical Patriarchate Demetrios of Constantinople and printed by the Faith Press

in 1975.

Saint Philaret chooses to introduce this, his last Sorrowful Epistle, with a paragraph

designed to remind every Orthodox Hierarch of how to fulfill the oath he took at his

consecration to the Episcopate:

Instructing us to preserve firmly in everything the Orthodox faith which has been commanded us, the

holy Apostle Paul wrote to the Galatians: But though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach unto you any

gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let him be anathema (Gal. 1:8). His disciple Timothy he

taught to remain in that which he had been instructed by him and in that which had been entrusted to

him, knowing by whom he had been instructed (II Tim. 3:14). This is a pointer which every Hierarch of

the Orthodox Church must follow and to which he is obligated by the oath given him at his consecration,

The Apostle writes that a Hierarch should be one holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he

may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convict the gainsayers (Titus 1:9).

With such cautions in mind, let us examine a focal issue as stated by The Thyateira

Confession.

In The Thyateira Confession on page 12, we read:


6

Orthodox Christians, Roman Catholics, Anglicans and Armenians, Copts, Ethiopians, Lutherans and Methodists, etc., are Christians, baptized in the Name of the Father, and of the Son,

and of the Holy Spirit.

Such a teaching, apparently an articulation of the new understanding mentioned in

The Thyateira Confession on p. 12, represents a clear departure from Holy Tradition. Is it

possible for anyone to be baptized outside the Church?13

Saint Archbishop Ilarion writes in response to a letter from Mr. Robert Gardiner

dated September 13/26, 1916: The Church is One and only She alone has the entire fullness of the charismatic gifts of the Holy

Spirit. Whoever has in whatever way fallen from the Churchin heresy, in schism, in unlawful

assemblythis man loses the communion of the grace of God. Therefore, mysteries performed outside

the Church have no charismatic action. Only for the sake of the good of the Church, for the sake of

facilitation of being united to the Church, can the rite of baptism not be repeated over those being

converted, if it has been correctly preformed outside the church. Not because this rite was already a

mystery with grace, but in the very hope that the grace-filled gift will be received in the very union with

the body of the Church.14

In effect, the position taken by The Thyateira Confession asserts that there exists a

baptismal rite outside the Church which is already a mystery with grace. The contrast

provided by the juxtaposing of the quotes above takes us as far as is needed here.15

The stance taken by The Thyateira Confession in the above cited instance is enough to

justify Saint Philarets caution which he expressed in the first paragraph of The Third

Sorrowful Epistle: Instructing us to preserve firmly in everything the Orthodox faith...

Saint Philaret closes with these lines:

Submitting to the new dogma of pleasing the times, the author of the Thyateira Confession clearly

forgets the instruction of the Savior that if your brother neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as a

heathen and a publican (Matt. 18:17), and the same instruction of the Apostle: A heretic, after the first and

second admonition, reject (Tit. 3:10).

Therefore, with great sorrow we must acknowledge that in the so-called Thyateira Confession there

has resounded from Constantinople not the voice of Orthodox truth, but rather the ever more widespread

error of ecumenism.

13 Please see below in section III how Saint Philaret responds to this question.

14 The Unity of the Church and The World Conference of Christian Communities, by Archbishop Ilarion Troitsky, January 18,

1917 translated by Mrs. Margaret Jerinec, Acton, Massachusetts, U.S.A. Introduction. Holy Transfiguration Monastery, Boston,

Massachusetts, 1975. Edited by Monastery Press Montreal, Canada, 1975, p. 44 Please note that, in an Orthodox context, grace is

the divine progression of uncreated energies from God, and is God Himself acting in the world for us men and for our salvation,

which is the Holy and Blameless Faith of the Pious and Orthodox Christians.

15 http://uncutmountain.com/uncut/docs/heers_baptism.pdf This treatment of the way Orthodox Ecumenists employ the Latin

Sacramental doctrine of created grace is well worth reading. Its scope, however, takes us beyond the span of Saint Philarets

lifetime.

http://uncutmountain.com/uncut/docs/heers_baptism.pdf


7

But what will be done now by those whom the Holy Spirit hath made overseers, to shepherd the

Church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood (Acts 20:28)? Will this false teaching,

officially proclaimed in the name of the whole Church of Constantinople, remain without protest by the

Hierarchs of God? Will there be further, in the expression of St. Gregory the Theologian, the betrayal of

the truth by silence?

Being the youngest of those who preside over the Churches, we had wished to hear the voices of our

elders before speaking out ourselves. But up to now this voice has not been heard. If they have not yet

become acquainted with the content of the Thyateira Confession, we entreat them to read it attentively

and not to leave it without condemnation.

It is frightful that there might be referred to us the words of the Lord to the Church of Laodicea: I

know thy work, that thou art neither cold nor hot; I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art

lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of my mouth (Apoc. 3:15-16).

We now warn our flock and call out to our fellow brethren, to their faith in the Church, to their

awareness of our common responsibility for our flock before the Heavenly Chief Shepherd. We entreat

them not to disdain our announcement, lest a manifest mutilation of Orthodox teaching remain without

accusation and condemnation. Its broad distribution has moved us to inform the whole Church of our

grief. We would wish to hope that our cry will be heard.

President of the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia

Metropolitan Philaret

December 6/19, 1975

Day of St. Nicholas, Wonderworker of Myra in Lycia

III

Reverence is due to antiquity

As Orthodox Christians, we receive from the Holy Fathers as their gift everything

that we have from Christ. "For not by laboring and sweating, not by fatigue and

suffering, but merely as being beloved of God, we received what we have received;"

thusly does St. John Chrysostom witness to Gods gift.16 When, as we often do, we

repeat the supplication, Through the prayers of our Holy Fathers Lord Jesus Christ our

God have mercy on us, we make a profound acknowledgement that reverence is due

to antiquity.17 Simply stated, our Orthodox Christian understanding of antiquity is the

one faith (Eph. 3:5) which was once delivered to the saints (Jude 3) by which alone

16 Homily 1 on Saint John Chrysostoms Commentary on Saint Matthew NPNF vol. 10 p. 28.

17 Session Six of the Seventh Ecumenical Council tr. John Mendham 1850 London p. 345.


8

we become partakers of the Divine Nature (2 Pet. 1:4), sanctified in body and soul

and made immortal.

The Troparia for the Feast of Saint Philaret calls him a Father of Fathers. What did

he provide to the Church to have earned this laurel? What phrase might capture his

signal contribution? What distinguishes New Yorks Confessor of the Orthodox Faith is

his fidelity to the dictum: reverence is due to antiquity. The Holy Fathers of the

Seventh Ecumenical Council laboured faithfully to enact this reverence, the Holy

Fathers of the First Ecumenical Council similarly strove for this same purpose, and

Saint Philaret, aligning himself with them and the entire choir of Saints, also, by the

superessential, participatible18 power of Christ, was granted, together with his

forerunners, the identical power to overcome and to receive a crown of life (Rev.

2:10).

At the First Ecumenical Council the sharpest opposition to those who wished to

establish the Council on the deliverance of Holy Tradition was the constant

maneuvering of those whom the Fathers of the Seventh Council nickname the

Ariomanics. Followers of Arius the heresiarch, they pretended to entertain the

suggestions of the Orthodox as a way to reach agreement, but any desire for true

conciliarity was not in them. They merely wanted to keep the debate alive.

His Eminence Metropolitan Ephraim presents the situation at the opening of the

Council in this way: The Arians came to the First Ecumenical Council with complete confidence, and with the full

expectation of victory over the party of Patriarch Alexander of Alexandria. And in fact, things werent

going well at all as far as the Orthodox party was concerned. The Alexandrinians confronted the Arians

with the traditional scriptural phrases which appeared to leave no doubt as to the eternal divinity of the

Son. But, to their surprise, they were met with total acquiescence on the part of the Arians! Only as each

scriptural test was propounded, it was observed that the Arians whispered and gesticulated to one

another, evidently hinting that each scriptural phrase could be safely accepted, since it admitted of

evasion. If the Arians were asked to assent that the Son is like the Father in all things, they would agree,

with the reservation that all men, as such, are in the image and likeness of God. When the Orthodox

pointed out that the Son is called the power of God, this only elicitedafter some whispering among

the members of the Arian partythe explanation that the host of Israel also was spoken of as dynamis

Kyriou the power of God, and that even the locust and the caterpillar are called the power of God

in the Holy Scriptures! The eternity of the Son was countered completely out of context by the

text, We who live always...19

18 St. Gregory Palamas The Philokalia Vol. iv, 4 107 pp. 394-395

19 The Arians, as usual, twisted the text and left out the most important part. In the Greek original (2 Cor. 4:11), the

text actually says: We who live are always delivered unto death


9

The Fathers were baffled. They were not yet familiar with the tactics of the Arians.

The test of the word homoousios of one essence was being forced upon the majority by the

evasions of the Arian party. When the day for the decisive meeting arrived, it became apparent that the

choice lay between the adoption of the word homoousios [] or the admission of Arianism to a

position of toleration and influence in the Church.

The adoption of the word homoousios was a momentous decision. The word was not scriptural. We

are told the Council paused. But the Council Fathers brought to mind all the previous discussions with

the Arians, and they were reminded of the futility of the scriptural tests alone, of the locusts and the

caterpillars, of the whisperings, the nods, the winks, the evasions. Whereupon, the Council closed its

ranks and resolutely marched to its conclusion. The word homoousios was adopted, and Arius

blasphemy was condemned forever.20

Saint Philarets singular strength in the aspect of the struggle against Ecumenism

which he faced was his own grace-bourne resolution. He did have allies in certain well-

informed, adamantine individuals, but they were not plentiful.

The Fathers of the First Ecumenical Councils response to the way the Ariomanics

slipped around each scriptural rebuttal offered by the Orthodox concerning the Fathers

substantial unity with the Son was the declaration of the Son as homoousios with the

Father.

Precedence for this step:

The publication of The Thyateira Confession in 1975 did bring to the light of day the

new ground adopted by the Ecumeniacs, if, borrowing from the Fathers of the Seventh

Council, we may coin a term akin to their Ariomanics by their ungrounded assertion

that: Orthodox Christians, Roman Catholics, Anglicans and Armenians, Copts,

Ethiopians, Lutherans and Methodists, etc., are Christians, baptized in the Name of

the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Saint Philaret recognized his

unsupported assertion for what it was: Another gospel (Gal. 1:6). The question

arises; what was the best way to refute this novelty?

When Saint Metropolitan Philaret of New York turned for help to the Fathers of the

Church, he was guided to the Quinisext Council and its Second Canon. Reviewing this

Canon and looking for the appropriate selection he passed over such notables of

antiquity in the listing offered by the Canon as Dionysius and Athanasius the Great,

Archbishops of Alexandria; Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, and Gregory

the Wonderworker, Bishop of Neocaesarea, to settle upon the most senior in time

among them all, that is the Canon set forth by Cyprian, Archbishop of the country of

20

www.homb.org Saint Athanasius and the Arian Controversy Metropolitan Ephraim of Boston, typescript (no

date), pp. 1, 2.

http://www.homb.org/


10

the Africans and Martyr, and the Synod under him, which has been kept only in the

country of the aforesaid Bishops, according to the custom delivered down to them. 21

Before we move on, please permit yet another aside. A salient trait of the reverence

due to antiquity is underscored by Metropolitan Anthony Khrapovitsky of thrice

blessed memory who refers to it as a rule of life:22

What happened with the Supreme Apostle is a rule of the life which operates in all of God's servants. It is not in daring plans, nor in bold imagination that their power is disclosed, but in the very

denial of their natural strength does the power of God find a place.

Metropolitan Anthony follows the guidelines which were imparted by Saint

Paul to Saint Dionysius the Areopagite who tells us that he has explained: some things by a sound mind, and unfolding them; and by conducting the religious and unpolluted mind

to the bright visions of the Oracles; but others, as being full of mystery, by approaching them according to the Divine Tradition, for we consider them as being beyond any noetic activity.

23

Thus do all who, confessing their own weakness with unhesitating steps, accord

the reverence due to antiquity by following Holy Tradition.

This is Saint Philarets strength: his courage to stand in and for that mystery as

being beyond any noetic activity. Accordingly, he rightfully gained the heights as a

Father of Fathers.24

IV

We are contending for everything we have.25 Saint Athanasius to the Bishops of Egypt

We now have two documents before us. First, The Anathema against the Heresy

of Ecumenism and Its Adherents of 1983, and, second, The Seventieth Epistle of Saint

21 The Seven Ecumenical Councils NPNF Vol. 14, p. 361.

22 Metropolitan Anthony Khrapovitsky: cf. As St. Gregory Palamas indicates: Moses and David, and whoever else

became vessels of divine energy by laying aside the properties of their fallen nature, were inspired by the power of

God cf. The Philokalia vol. iv 1995 76, p. 381.

23 On the Divine Names 2:7, (P. G. 3 645A) Saint Dionysius the Areopagite, tr. John Parker M. A. Reprint of the

1897-1899 edition. pp. 20, 21. ,

.

24 The Lord has granted the Church, as was chanted at Saint Philarets Glorification, his incorrupt relics as a

manifest sign of his sanctity. In the Vespers for Saint Philarets feast we chant: And the full incorruption of thy body is the seal and sign from Heaven * that thy confession was incorrupt.

25 www.homb.org Saint Athanasius and the Arian Controversy Metropolitan Ephraim of Boston (n. d.), p. 7.



11

Cyprian of Carthage of 255 A.D. Although seventeen centuries stand between them,

there is no gap. How do these two documents relate to each other? To condense things a

bit, we will first make reference to the Epistle, and then also to the Anathema.

The Epistle sketches the general outline of our discussion and of the Anathema.

There are those of the one true Catholic Church. There are also those who are

heretics and schismatics who are outside the Church. In the Epistle we hear that no

one can be baptized outside the Church. The Epistle refers to the priesthood in the

Church and to the very interrogatory which is put in Baptism. The water of baptism,

Chrism, the Eucharist, and the order of the Christian way of life are also touched upon.

These concerns are articulated by the Prophet Ezekiel in the command to the priesthood

that they shall teach My people to distinguish between holy and profane, and they

shall make known to them the difference between unclean and clean.26

If in the few lines above we have offered an accurate sketch of the Epistle, we

may take the next step and compare and contrast the content of this outline of our

Canonical Epistle of 255 A.D., which gained Ecumenical sanction in 692 A.D., and with

the Anathema of 1983 A.D.

What do we notice in the text of the Anathema that is not present in the Epistle?

A point-by-point examination discloses no difference, except in the Epistles extensive

Scriptural references, which serve to ground it solidly in Holy Tradition. When mention

is made of the difference between the priesthood and mysteries of the Church and

those of heretics attention is drawn to those who do not recognize that there is such a

difference.27 As heretics, these latter say that the baptism and eucharist of heretics is

effectual for salvation. Since those who do not acknowledge that such a difference

exists are the subject of the Anathema it is not in appropriate for the Anathema to

specify those who, after Saint Philarets many efforts to rouse their consciences,

knowingly refuse to return to the Church.

Let us have another look at what St. Dionysius refers to as Divine Tradition

, which, as he teaches us, is superior to mental activity since it is

26 Jezekiel xliv.23 (LXX).

27 And they shall teach My people to distinguish between holy and profane and shall make known to them the

difference between unclean and clean. (Jezekiel 44:23 LXX). Cf. The 350 holy Fathers of the Seventh Ecumenical

Council under the Presidency of St. Tarasius in 787 A.D. and the holy Empress Irene as regent for her son

Constantine VI. St. Irenes incorrupt relics may be venerated on the island of Corfu.


12

full of mystery.28 This characteristic well serves the Areopagite when he

effects his departureand once he has made his renunciation, he does not return to the

methods of cognition of the divine cherished either by the philosophic schools of his or

the present day.29 On this basis we are shown how the mystery of Christian dogma is

the crucible from which the power to eliminate any and all so-called likeness of truth

with error arises. How? By imitating those, following Christ Jesus, Who before Pontius

Pilate, witnessed a good confession,30 themselves turn away from human wisdom and

embrace the foolishness of the Cross.

Saint Philaret destroys the Ecumeniacs boastful foundations as articulated in The

Thyateira Confession when he asks St. Cyprian to speak, not only for the 31 bishops who

met with him in 255 A.D., but also for the Church, when he says, no one can be

baptized outside the Church.31

The anathema quarantines, or puts those who refuse reconciliation with the

Church into isolation so that their sicknessand sin is highly contagiousdoes not

contaminate others of the faithful. They deliberately went out from us but they were

not of us, says the Beloved Virgin Disciple of the Lord.32

The Anathema stays within the lines drawn by the Epistle. It is, as an Anathema,

simply a logical extension of the Canonical Epistle.

The Church, Holy Baptism, The Seven Ecumenical Councils, their Canons, the

teaching of the Holy Fathers, the local Anathemasthis listing is not all inclusivego

together to form the structure of the living experience of Holy Tradition in the Church.

At the head of this structure is the Diocesan Bishop and his Synod of Bishops. If the

28 St. Dionysius the Areopagite On Divine Names P.G. 3 645 A (Cf. DN 6)

29 Divine Names 1:1 Parker Vol. 1 pp. 1-3. Modern commentators, to all intents and purposes, pay no attention to

St. Dionysius abrupt break with the methods of knowing things divine employed by the philosophers. From his

point of view they all use the same fallible procedures. Might our commentators have the intuition that, were they

accurately to articulate the Areopagites method, the sand upon which they have chosen to build would be washed

away by the Saints ineluctable analysis and his laconic eloquence?

30 I Timothy 6:13.

31 The Seventieth Epistle of Saint Cyprian of Carthage, NPNF Vol. 10 The Seven Ecumenical Councils pp. 518, 519; for

the text of this document, please see the Appendix to this study.

32 1 John 2:19.


13

Bishop with his Synod explicitly holds the Correct Faith of Orthodoxy, the faith that

each Hierarch vows to keep, teach and to promote, then those with him are Orthodox

Christians.

The Anathema of 1983 has far-ranging consequences. Based, as we have seen,

upon the Second Canon of the Quinisext Council, it introduces nothing new. It reminds

us not only that outside the Church there is no Baptism, but also there is but one faith

into which we may be baptized, namely, the one faith of the Church.

Our comparison of the difficulties faced by the Fathers of the First Ecumenical

Council as they articulated the Churchs faith in One God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit,

the Trinity one in Essence and Undivided, and the challenge presented by the

Ecumeniacs when they, as it first appeared in The Thyateira Confession, attempted to set

up a structure parallel to the Church, has been helpful. We can now see the similarities

between Arianism and Ecumenism. The first denies the unity of God; the second, aptly

called the heresy of heresies, attacks the unity of the Church. They both draw from

relativizing currents of thought present in the culture. Ariomanics copied both

subordination in the idea of the deity in Neo-Platonism and also its attendant moral

decay. Ecumeniacs use the Nihilism of the nineteenth century as a standard, complete

with its notions of evolution, human improvement, and moral relativatism. At the end

of the day the motive force of Ecumenism, as well as of Arianism, is unmistakably anti-

Christian.

V

I remembered God and I was gladdened. Psalm 76:3 LXX

As human beings we are able to learn through many avenues. The Ecumenical

Councils, Canons and Anathemas provide us with one such path which rightly

divides (Gen. 4:7 LXX) the word of Thy truth. The lives of the Saints follow another

route, yet they have the same goal; when we retell a narrative we see the same thing the

Fathers have always taught, but we appropriate the faith lived out in terms that most

folks can readily appropriate. We see how another human being was himself

transfigured into the undistorted image and likeness of God by the faith.

Metropolitan Ephraim elsewhere writes:


14

On December seventh, we celebrate the memory of a certain Orthodox woman

of Rome. Her name is unknown to us, but we must surely call her blessed. In the year

474, the Arians raised up a terrible persecution against the Orthodox Catholic

Christians. Sunilda, the wife of the Arian ruler of Rome, took it upon herself to attempt

to force one Orthodox woman to accept the baptism of the Arians. The woman would

not consent, so the Arians seized her, took her by force to one of their churches, and

immersed her into the water in the presence of the Arian bishop. As she came out of

the water, she turned to her handmaid who was holding a purse. She took two coins out

of the purse, handed them to the Arian bishop, and said to him, Thank you for the

bath.

This so enraged the Arians, they dragged her out of their temple, tied her to a

post, and burned her alive.

In her, truly, are fulfilled the words of King David the Prophet: We went

through fire and water, and Thou didst bring us out into refreshment (Psalm 65:12).

By her intercessions, and of those of all the Saints, may we be counted worthy of

the Heavenly Kingdom. Amen.33

Our times are such that the faithful Christian must be a confessor of Orthodox

piety at every step if he would be faithful to God, crying with Saint George: the true

confession that Christ is the only true God cannot be uttered apart from the

confession of the one faith (Eph. 4:5) once delivered to the saints (Jude 3) that no

one can be baptized outside the Church. (Quinisext Council Canon 2).34

To Him alone, therefore, is due glory and magnificence unto the ages of ages.

33 www.homb.org The Form of Holy Baptism by His Eminence Metropolitan Ephraim of Boston, p. 28.

34 A paraphrase of the closing lines of Saint Philarets Sermon #66 on the Feast of Saint Barlaam, Nov. 19/ Dec. 2,

1972.



15

APPENDIX

The Seventieth Epistle of Saint Cyprian of Carthage

Epistle LXX A.D. 25535

Cyprian, Liberalis, Caldonius, etc. to their brethren Januarius, Greeting.

WHEN we were together in council, dearest brethren, we read the letter which

you addressed to us respecting those who are thought to be baptized by heretics and

schismatics, whether, when they come to the one true Catholic Church, they ought to be

baptized. Wherein, although ye yourselves also hold the Catholic rule in its truth and

fixedness, yet since, out of your mutual affection, ye have thought good to consult us,

we deliver not our sentence as though new but, by a kindred harmony, we unite with

you in that long since settled by our predecessors, and observed by us; thinking,

namely, and holding for certain, that no one can be baptized outside the Church, in that

there is one Baptism appointed in the holy Church, as it is written, the Lord himself

speaking, They have forsaken me the Fountain of living water, and hewed them out

broken cisterns that can hold no water (Jer. 2:13 LXX). Again, holy Scripture

admonishes us, and says, Keep thee from the strange water, and drink not from a

fountain of strange water (cf. Proverbs 5:15-18 LXX).

The water then must first be cleansed and sanctified by the priest, that it may be

able, by Baptism therein, to wash away the sins of the baptized, for the Lord says by the

prophet Ezekiel, Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be purged

from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols, and I will cleanse you. And I will

give you a new heart, and will put a new spirit in you (Jezekiel 36:25 LXX). But how can

he cleanse and sanctify the water, who is himself unclean, and with whom the Spirit is

not? Whereas the Lord says in Numbers, And whatsoever the unclean man shall touch

shall be unclean (Num. 19:22 LXX). Or how can he that baptiseth give remission of sins

to another, who cannot free himself from his own sins, outside of the Church?

35

NPNF Vol. 10 The Seven Ecumenical Councils pp. 518, 519.


16

Moreover, the very interrogatory which is put in Baptism, is a witness of the truth.

For when we say, Dost thou believe in eternal life, and remission of sins through the

holy Church? we mean that, remission of sins is not given, except in the Church; but

that, with heretics, where the Church is not, sins cannot be remitted. They, therefore,

who claim that heretics can baptize, let them either change the interrogatory or

maintain the truth; unless indeed they ascribe a Church also to those who contend

they have a Baptism.

Anointed also must he of necessity be, who is baptized, that having received the

chrismthat is, unction, he may be the anointed of God, and have within him the grace

of Christ. Moreover, it is the Eucharist through which the baptized are anointed, the oil

sanctified on the altar. But he cannot sanctify the creature of oil, who has neither altar

nor Church. Whence neither can the spiritual unction be with heretics, since it is

acknowledged that the oil cannot be sanctified nor the Eucharist be celebrated among

them. But we ought to know and remember that it is written, As for the oil of the

sinner, let it not anoint my head Ps. 140:6 LXX; which the Holy Spirit forewarned in

the Psalms, lest any, quitting the track, and wandering out of the path of truth, be

anointed by heretics and adversaries of Christ. Moreover, when baptized, what kind of

prayer can a profane priest and a sinner offer? in that it is written, God heareth not a

sinner, but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth His will, him He heareth ( cf.

John 9:31).

But who can give what himself hath not? or how can he perform spiritual acts,

who hath himself lost the Holy Spirit? Wherefore he is to be baptized and received, who

comes uninitiated to the Church, that within he may be hallowed through the holy; for

it is written, Be ye holy, for I am holy, saith the Lord (cf. Lev. 11:44 LXX). So that he who

has been seduced with error and washed outside [the Church (ed.)] should, in the true

Baptism of the Church, put off this very thing also; that he, a man coming to God, while

seeking a priest, fell, through the deceit of error, upon one profane. But to acknowledge

any case where they have been baptized is to approve the baptism of heretics and

schismatics.

For neither can part of what they do be void and part avail. If he could baptize, he

could also give the Holy Spirit. But if he cannot give the Holy Spirit because, being set

outside [ed.], he is not with the Holy Spirit, neither can he baptize any that cometh: for

that there is both one Baptism, and one Holy Spirit, and one Church, founded by Christ

the Lord upon Peter, through an original and principle of unity; so it results, that since

all among them is void and false, nothing that they have done ought to be approved by


17

us.

For what can be ratified and confirmed by God, which they do whom the Lord

calls his enemies and adversaries, propounding in His Gospel, He that is not with Me is

against Me; and he that gathereth not with Me scattereth (Lk. 11:23). And the blessed

Apostle John also, keeping the commandments and precepts of the Lord has written in

his Epistle, Ye have heard that the Antichrist shall come; even now there are many

Antichrists, whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but were

not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us (cf. I

Jn. 2:18, 19). Whence we, too, ought to infer and consider, whether they who are the

adversaries of the Lord, and are called Antichrists, can give the grace of Christ.

Wherefore we who are with the Lord, and who hold the unity of the Lord, and

according to this vouchsafement administer His priesthood in the Church, ought to

repudiate and reject and account as profane, whatever His adversaries and Antichrists

do; and to those who, coming from error and wickedness, acknowledge the true faith of

the one Church, we should impart the reality of unity and faith by all the sacraments of

divine grace.

We bid you, dearest brethren, ever heartily farewell.

And to our God be glory.

Saint Philaret of New York, the Father of Fathers: Saint ... · Saint Philaret issued this Anathema...

Documents

Transcript of Saint Philaret of New York, the Father of Fathers: Saint ... · Saint Philaret issued this Anathema...