Dr. Constantine Cavarnos on the Views of the Blessed Elder Philotheos
The problem that has been created in the Orthodox Church by the introduction of the New Calendar, known as the Gregorian Calendar (named after Pope Gregory XIII, who introduced it into the Latin Church in 1582), is one that worried the late Greek Elder, Blessed Philotheos (Zervakos), very much, from the time of its introduction into the Orthodox Church in 1924 until his death. He dwelt upon it in his publications and in his letters of counsel to those who were under his spiritual direction.[1] The New, Papal Calendar and Its Fruits [To Neon, Papikon Hemerologion kai hoi Karpoi Autou]—a 40-page pamphlet—is his most extensive treatment of this innovation. It was published at Thessaloniki by the periodical St. Nectarios. The date when it was published is not listed. From internal evidence, particularly the reference to an article by Archbishop Iakovos (of the Greek Orthodox Church of North and South America), which appeared on September 25, 1967, it is clear that it was published sometime after that date.
Two quotations at the beginning of the pamphlet serve as an introduction to what Father Philotheos has to say. The first, taken from the Seventh Holy Œcumenical Synod, states: "If someone sets aside any tradition [of the Church], written or unwritten, let him be anathema." The second, which is taken from St. Augustine, says: "Let there be no innovations, because innovations defile antiquity. For the Bridegroom and His Bride, the Church, are without blemish." The discussion of the Calendar innovation starts with an explanation of how it was introduced into the Church of Constantinople in 1924 by Patriarch Meletios Metaxakis and soon, the same year, by Archbishop Chrysostomos Papadopoulos of Athens. (Later, the New Calendar was adopted by the Patriarchates of Bulgaria, Rumania, and Alexandria. The Patriarchates of Jerusalem, Serbia, and Russia, the Archbishopric of Mount Sinai, and the Holy Mountain of Athos have avoided this innovation.)
The holy Elder states that when he learned that the New Calendar was going to be introduced into the Church of Greece, he wrote a letter to Archbishop Chrysostomos entreating him not to introduce the Papist Calendar, because this innovation would divide the Church into hostile parts. He remarked that "the Traditional, Old Calendar neither caused any harm to the Church in the past nor is causing any harm now, whereas the adoption of the New Calendar would banish peace from the Christian population of Greece, would cause divisions, confusion, malice, and turmoil" (pp. 4-5).
Chrysostomos, he says, did not heed this counsel and proceeded to introduce the New Calendar. The consequences were exactly those which Blessed Philotheos had foreseen. This prompted him to write a second letter to Chrysostomos, in which he said: "The fruits of the New Calendar which you introduced thoughtlessly, anticanonically, and unlawfully are the banishment of love and the generation of malice. It banished happiness and brought sorrow. It banished peace and brought division, disputes, quarrels, and warfare. Before, the Christians were united and you divided them. The Orthodox Church, which for twenty centuries was one, you divided into two: that of the Old Calendarists and that of the New Calendarists" (p. 6). Unfortunately, remarks the venerable Elder, Archbishop Chrysostomos Papadopoulos paid no attention to this letter, either.
From that time on, he goes on to say, there began the fruits of the New Calendar. "The first ones to reap these fruits," he observes, "were those who introduced it" (p. 7). He explains that the Patriarch of Constantinople Meletios Metaxakis was beaten by zealous Orthodox Christians of Constantinople and was forced to seek refuge in Greece.... After a time, he became Patriarch of Alexandria. Then he sought to become Patriarch of the more prestigious Patriarchate of Jerusalem. Having failed in this, he fell sick from sorrow. Tortured by disease and censured by his conscience, Meletios Metaxakis died saying: "I am suffering because I split the Church" (p. 7).
As far as Archbishop Chrysostomos is concerned, Father Philotheos informs the reader that this innovator was struck in the face and head with scissors as he stood at the Bishop’s Throne in a Church in the city of Piraeus. The man who struck him was a barber who wanted to humiliate him by shearing off his beard. Father Philotheos proceeds to describe in detail various other fruits of the New Calendar innovation: divisions, dissensions, quarrels, hatreds, various forms of going astray (pp. 8-31).
The Elder asserts that "the Old Calendarists did well in not accepting the Papist Calendar—which was introduced into the Orthodox Church anticanonically and unlawfully—and following the Traditional, Old Calendar, which was handed down to us by the Holy Fathers of the First Holy Œcumenical Synod" (p. 28).
Having described some of the evil fruits of the Calendar innovation, Father Philotheos proceeds to give advice as to what should be done in order to reunite the members of the Orthodox Church and put an end to the grievous dissensions and hatreds. As far as Greece is concerned, he says that the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece should meet and canonically and lawfully reject the New Calendar and introduce the Old, Traditional one. "If the government should object, let the government keep the New Calendar for its dealings and correspondence with other nations; while the Church ought to keep for itself the Old Calendar for its holy feasts" (p. 32). He adds that "if perchance some clergymen and laymen, who are philo-Papists or philo-Protestants, innovators and modernists, should oppose this, the Church should admonish them once or twice. If they do not repent but persist in their opposition, the Church should expel them as corrupt members" (p. 32).
Continuing, Father Philotheos adds that the rejection of the New Calendar and the restoration of the Traditional one is necessary not only in order to put an end to the division of the Church, to dissensions and hatreds, but also for the following reasons: a) because following the Old Calendar is a tradition of the Church, and those who reject it are subject to the anathema of the Seventh Holy Œcumenical Synod, which is quoted at the beginning of his treatise; and b) because the introduction of the New Calendar abolishes the Fast of the Holy Apostles, which is an old tradition of the Church: sometimes it abolishes this fast completely and sometimes reduces it to only one or two days. (Originally, this fast was a seven-day one, then it became longer.)
Finally, Blessed Philotheos notes that as a Church calendar the New Calendar has been condemned and anathematized by three Regional Synods (in 1583, 1587, and 1593). This pamphlet has the merit of putting the Calendar problem in proper perspective, dealing with its essential aspects in a brief, clear, incisive manner. New Calendarists think that the question is about thirteen days, about astronomical correctness, and view the Old Calendarists as simply stubborn, ignorant persons who are averse to scientific improvements. Father Philotheos makes no mention of "astronomical correctness" vs. "astronomical incorrectness," because this is not really the point at issue. What is at issue is whether Orthodox Christians should remain faithful to Tradition, or are free to innovate as they please, with a view to some political or other secular expediency, without regard to the Church’s canonical way of doing things and without regard to foreseeable evil consequences ("fruits") of their innovations for the Church.
It should be added that the New Calendar was introduced into the Orthodox Church not for the sake of astronomical correctness, but as the first step in achieving a forced, false union of the Orthodox Church with Unorthodox New Calendarist Christian bodies, for the sake of certain secular advantages which such a union was expected to have. This was to be the beginning of the Orthodox Church’s participation in the "Ecumenical Movement"—a movement which has further divided the Orthodox Church into mutually hostile parties: the Ecumenists and the anti-Ecumenists. All the Greek Old Calendarists are anti-Ecumenists, while some of the New Calendarists are Ecumenists and others are anti-Ecumenists. Thus, the evil fruits of the introduction of the New Calendar, which the Blessed Elder clearly foresaw, keep growing in number.
--------
ESPAÑOL:
El Dr. Constantine Cavarnos sobre las opiniones del bendito anciano Philotheos El problema que ha sido creado en la Iglesia Ortodoxa por la introducción del Nuevo Calendario, conocido como Calendario Gregoriano (llamado así por el Papa Gregorio XIII, quien lo introdujo en la Iglesia Latina en 1582), es uno que preocupó al fallecido Anciano Griego, Beato Philotheos (Zervakos), muchísimo, desde el momento de su introducción en la Iglesia Ortodoxa en 1924 hasta su muerte. Se detuvo en ello en sus publicaciones y en sus cartas de consejo a quienes estaban bajo su dirección espiritual. [1] El nuevo calendario papal y sus frutos [Para Neon, Papikon Hemerologion kai hoi Karpoi Autou] —un folleto de 40 páginas— es su tratamiento más extenso de esta innovación. Fue publicado en Salónica por el periódico San Nectarios. No se incluye la fecha en la que se publicó. De la evidencia interna, particularmente la referencia a un artículo del Arzobispo Iakovos (de la Iglesia Ortodoxa Griega de América del Norte y del Sur), que apareció el 25 de septiembre de 1967, está claro que fue publicado en algún momento posterior a esa fecha.
El santo anciano afirma que cuando se enteró de que el Nuevo Calendario iba a ser introducido en la Iglesia de Grecia, le escribió una carta al Arzobispo Chrysostomos pidiéndole que no introdujera el Calendario Papista, porque esta innovación dividiría a la Iglesia en partes hostiles. Comentó que "el Calendario Antiguo Tradicional no causó ningún daño a la Iglesia en el pasado ni lo está causando ahora, mientras que la adopción del Nuevo Calendario desterraría la paz de la población cristiana de Grecia, causaría divisiones, confusión, malicia y confusión "(págs. 4-5).
A partir de ese momento, continúa diciendo, comenzaron los frutos del Nuevo Calendario. "Los primeros en cosechar estos frutos", observa, "fueron los que los introdujeron" (p. 7). Explica que el Patriarca de Constantinopla Meletios Metaxakis fue golpeado por celosos cristianos ortodoxos de Constantinopla y se vio obligado a buscar refugio en Grecia ... Después de un tiempo, se convirtió en Patriarca de Alejandría. Luego buscó convertirse en Patriarca del más prestigioso Patriarcado de Jerusalén. Habiendo fracasado en esto, cayó enfermo de dolor. Torturado por la enfermedad y censurado por su conciencia, Meletios Metaxakis murió diciendo: "Estoy sufriendo porque he dividido la Iglesia" (p. 7).
El anciano afirma que "los antiguos calendaristas hicieron bien en no aceptar el calendario papista, que se introdujo en la Iglesia ortodoxa de manera anticanónica e ilegal, y en seguir el antiguo calendario tradicional, que nos fue transmitido por los santos padres del Primer Santo "Sínodo ecuménico" (pág. 28).
Habiendo descrito algunos de los frutos malignos de la innovación del Calendario, el padre Philotheos procede a dar consejos sobre lo que se debe hacer para reunir a los miembros de la Iglesia Ortodoxa y poner fin a las graves disensiones y odios. En cuanto a Grecia, dice que el Santo Sínodo de la Iglesia de Grecia debería reunirse y rechazar canónica y legalmente el Nuevo Calendario e introducir el Antiguo y Tradicional. "Si el gobierno se opone, que el gobierno mantenga el Nuevo Calendario para sus tratos y correspondencia con otras naciones; mientras que la Iglesia debe guardar para sí el Antiguo Calendario para sus fiestas santas" (p. 32). Añade que "si acaso algunos clérigos y laicos, que son filopapistas o filosotestantes, innovadores y modernistas, se opusieran a esto, la Iglesia debería amonestarlos una o dos veces. Si no se arrepienten sino que persisten en su oposición, el La Iglesia debería expulsarlos por ser miembros corruptos "(p. 32).
Finalmente, el Beato Filoteo señala que, como calendario de la Iglesia, el Nuevo Calendario ha sido condenado y anatematizado por tres Sínodos Regionales (en 1583, 1587 y 1593). Este panfleto tiene el mérito de poner el problema del Calendario en su debida perspectiva, abordando sus aspectos esenciales de una manera breve, clara e incisiva. Los nuevos calendaristas piensan que la pregunta es sobre trece días, sobre la corrección astronómica, y ven a los viejos calendaristas como personas simplemente obstinadas e ignorantes que son reacias a las mejoras científicas. El padre Philotheos no menciona la "corrección astronómica" versus la "incorrección astronómica", porque este no es realmente el punto en cuestión. Lo que está en cuestión es si los cristianos ortodoxos deben permanecer fieles a la Tradición, o son libres de innovar como les plazca, con miras a alguna conveniencia política o secular, sin tener en cuenta la forma canónica de hacer las cosas de la Iglesia y sin tener en cuenta el mal previsible. consecuencias ("frutos") de sus innovaciones para la Iglesia.
Debe agregarse que el Nuevo Calendario se introdujo en la Iglesia Ortodoxa no en aras de la corrección astronómica, sino como el primer paso para lograr una unión forzada y falsa de la Iglesia Ortodoxa con los organismos cristianos del Nuevo Calendarismo no ortodoxo, por el bien de ciertos ventajas seculares que se esperaba que tuviera tal unión. Este iba a ser el comienzo de la participación de la Iglesia Ortodoxa en el "Movimiento Ecuménico", un movimiento que ha dividido aún más a la Iglesia Ortodoxa en partidos mutuamente hostiles: los ecumenistas y los antiecumenistas. Todos los antiguos calendaristas griegos son antiecumenistas, mientras que algunos de los nuevos calendaristas son ecumenistas y otros son antiecumenistas. Así, los malos frutos de la introducción del Nuevo Calendario, que el Bendito Anciano claramente previó, siguen creciendo en número.
+++
