Click on the dropdown button to translate.

Translate this page:

Excerpts from our Book...

......Amidst Scandals, a Papal Resignation,
East & West separated for nearly 1,000 years
and the revolt of a Protestant Reformation...
BEING CATHOLIC
...That All May Be One!
What Pope & Patriarch Must Do
...to Heal the Church of Christ!
...in Truth & Humility...A New Pentecost for the
ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC & APOSTOLIC CHURCH
-Guidebook for Unity & The New Evangelization-
(With Blessing for the Author from Pope Francis & Patriarch Bartholomew)
​Archpriest Michael D. Kirkland

​Holy Pascha/Easter 2017
 
His Holiness Francis, Pope of Rome
His All-Holiness Bartholomew, Ecumenical Patriarch
 
Most Holy Fathers,
 
“Christ is Risen!  -  Indeed He is Risen!”
 
Both the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches profess One Lord, One Faith and One Baptism.  Both were founded by Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, both share in the valid Apostolic Succession, both possess the “Real Presence” of Christ in the Holy Eucharist and both have been guided by the same Holy Spirit.
 
For nearly 1,000 years, the Church of Christ has been separated.  It is the greatest scourge of Christianity!  2016, for the West, has been a “Jubilee Year of Mercy”…for the East, the hopes of a Great Council.  As our Spiritual Leaders, past differences & suspicions must now be laid aside; it’s time for you to boldly & courageously fulfill the prayer of Christ…that, “all may be ONE,” …for His Church to be healed!
 
“Be not afraid,” for now is the opportunity to accomplish it…
 
Easter Sunday, 16 April 2017, was a common celebration date for our Holy Pascha!  On Holy Saturday, the Patriarch of Jerusalem, in the very Tomb of Christ, was witness to the miraculous Uncreated Light of “Holy Fire”…the “Miracle of Orthodoxy”…where annually the Holy Spirit, GOD HIMSELF, blesses His Holy Church with Light of the Divine Son’s Resurrection!  Let this miracle usher in a NEW PENTECOST for all of Christendom…for all the world to celebrate this Triumphal Christian Feast on a same COMMON DATE, to heal & restore UNITY to the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church!
 
                                    ALLELUIA!  ALLELUIA!  ALLELUIA!

“Our Lady of Soufanieh, Pray for Us”
 
May Pope Francis and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew
be guided by the All Holy, Good & Life-Giving Spirit.
That they will fulfill Christ’s prayer that, “all may be one”…
to heal the Church of Christ on behalf of all Popes and Patriarchs,
to restore the UNITY of The One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church.

Phanar, May 31, 2013
 
Dear Fr. Michael,
 
               His All-Holiness our Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew has directed me to respond to your gracious letter dated April 19, 2013, wherein you express your fervent hope and prayer for Christian unity, particularly between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches.
 
               His All-Holiness commends you for your passionate interest and concern to obey the commandment of our Lord, that all His disciples “may be one” [ut unum sint](John 17.21), and congratulates you on your effort to promote this goal through your admirable publication on the reconciliation of our churches.
 
 
 
Phanar, September 5, 2015
 
               His All-Holiness our Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew has directed me to communicate with you.
 
               His All-Holiness would like to thank you for your warm letter of encouragement regarding the ongoing dialogue between the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches.  It is also his own fervent prayer that the Holy Spirit may guide, always, the two churches and all of their faithful towards reconciliation and the fulfillment of our Lord’s will for his children.
 
               Conveying to you the Patriarchal prayers and best wishes of His All-Holiness for success in all of your future endeavors, I remain
 
Sincerely Yours,
 
+ Archimandrite Bartholomew Samaras
Chief Secretary
​

From the Vatican, 10 October 2014
 
Dear Archpriest Michael,
 
               His Holiness Pope Francis has received your letter of 29 September last, requesting his blessing for your new book…I wish to assure you of a remembrance in the Holy Father’s prayers.
 
Yours Sincerely,
 
Monsignor Peter B. Wells
Assessor
 
 
From the Vatican, 17 October 2014
 
The Holy Father Francis cordially imparts the requested Apostolic Blessing to Father Michael D. Kirkland and Family invoking abundant divine graces.
​

Pray for the Miracle...The "all may be ONE"

​+
St. Nicholas Press
P.0. Box 687
New Albany, Ohio 43054
 
 
© 2017 Archpriest Michael D. Kirkland
All rights reserved.  Published 2017
Printed in the United States of America
 
Library of Congress Control Number: 2013904230
ISBN: 978-0-9723053-1-0
 
Unless otherwise noted, All Scripture quotations are taken
From the Revised Standard Version of the Bible: Second
Catholic Edition, copyright © 2000 and 2006 by the
Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the
Churches of Christ in the United States of America.  Used by
Permission.  All rights reserved.  The Revised Standard Version
Of the Bible: Second Catholic Edition was published in 2010
by Ignatius Press.  With ecclesiastical approval of the
Unites States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Also, from the Challoner Revision of the Douay-Rheims Bible,
from 1749-1752, which is in the public domain
 
Appreciation for Materials & Quotes Used by Permission:
“Light From The East” Miracles of Our Lady of Soufanieh
by Fr. Robert J. Fox, © 2002 Fatima Family Apostolate
“Holy Fire” The Miracle of Holy Saturday At The Tomb Of Christ
by Haris Skarlakidis, © 2015 Haris Skaralakidis, Elea Publishing
“The Ratzinger Formula” a Dissertation by Richard A. Mattiussi
Excerpts from www.east2west.org by Dr. Anthony Dragani
“Our Lady Visits Damascus: Soufanieh” by Roy A. Varghese
Excerpts on a Married Priesthood by Deacon Keith Fournier
Excerpts on a Married Episcopacy by Archpriest James Scully
 
 
Cover Photographs used by Permission:
SERVIZIO FOTOGRAFICO
L’OSSERVATORE ROMANO, CITTA’DEL VATICANO
Black & White Photographs Courtesy
Archives Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Catholic New Service

 Heartfelt Appreciation to His Majesty King Abdullah II
Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
Muslim Sovereign, Direct Descendent of the Prophet Muhammad
Guardian and Custodian of the
Christian and Muslim Sites in Jerusalem
For the Royal Benefaction provided for the 2016 restoration
of Jesus’ Tomb in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem
​

​The following designations are used in this book:
 
CATHOLIC CHURCH – all those Churches, both East & West, Greek & Latin, Byzantine Rites & Western Rites, together…established personally by Jesus Christ, born on Pentecost Sunday, possessing the valid Apostolic Succession
GREEK CHURCH – all those Churches that use the Byzantine Rite, whether they are separated from Rome or in communion with the pope; whether they are by race or speech Greek or Slavs, Rumanians, Georgians, etc.
LATIN CHURCH – all those Churches that use the Western Rite and are in communion with the Bishop and Church of Rome
EASTERN ORTHODOX CHURCH or ORTHODOX CHURCH – all those Churches, without distinction of speech or race or nationality, all the existing Churches of the Byzantine Rite, separated from Rome
BYZANTINE/EASTERN RITE CATHOLIC CHURCH – all those Churches that use the Byzantine Rite that are in communion with the Bishop of Rome
ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH - all those Churches of both Latin Rite & Byzantine/Eastern Rite that are in communion with the Bishop of Rome

“Brothers of the Faith in Unity”
Sts. Peter of Rome & Andrew of Constantinople
 
(Holy Icon given by His All-Holiness Athenagoras I, Ecumenical
Patriarch and Archbishop of Constantinople, to His Holiness Paul VI,
Pope of Rome and Patriarch of the West, upon their first meeting
In Jerusalem to heal the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church)

 + Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras Lifting the Anathemas in 1964 +  ​

​DEDICATION
 
To My Dearest Wife Sharon (Presbytera Sophia)
…the Love of My Life, who gives me strength each day…
 
To My Beloved Family and Friends…
For without their prayers and support, this work would
Never have been completed:
 
Parents Joshua & Leurline, Thomas & Hannah Mae
Sons Thomas, William, Robert & Michael; Daughter, Yan Sah
Grandchildren Anya Lee, Leah Alexandria, Paige and Alec
The Honorable Judge David M. Gormley, George Gigicos
Lifelong Dedicated Friends Jeff Pearce, Peter Thomas
 
To My Faithful Teachers, Clergy and Religious Instructors…
For their personal guidance, prayers and inspiration:
 
Most Rev. Peter A. Zhurawetzkyj, Most Rev. Nikolaus Ilnyckyj
Met. Archbishop Michael Shaheen, Archbishop Martin DePorres
Met. Archbishop Cyrille Bustros, Rev. Father Aloysius Dressman OSB
Proto Presbyter Damian Criscella, V. Rev. Father John E. Hamatie
V. Rev. Father Hector RG Perez, Msgr. Charles A. Bartok
Rev. Father Peter Rocca CSC, Rev. Father Ignatius Harrington
 Fr. Deacon Jeff Martin, Mother Agnes OP, Sr. Margaret Victor SSJ
Sr. Marie Antoinette SSJ, Sr. Marie Bernard SSJ, Mrs. Lucille Hall
 
Special Acknowledgment and Thanks to:
 
Pontifical College Josephinum
St. Mary’s Seminary & University
St. John Vianney Minor Seminary
University of Notre Dame
St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary
Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology

                                                                                                             FORWARD

​​              I was happy to finally hear words that would put my work to rest and allow me to publish this book!
 
            On 21 November 2016, in a letter issued by Pope Francis of Rome dealing with reconciliation, forgiveness and the grave sin of abortion, he clearly stated, that, “there is no sin that God’s mercy cannot reach and wipe away when it finds a repentant heart seeking to be reconciled with the Father.”
 
            Similarly, on 19 June 2016 [the same date of the First Ecumenical Council held in Nicæa in 325 AD], Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople dealing with the absence of Sister Churches at the Holy and Great Council, stated clearly, that, “none of us…can exist in isolation from the rest…we are one Church, one body and we should resolve all our possible differences [in a Synod]…this is what we have received from our holy tradition and to that we should adhere to.”
 
            In both instances, our great Spiritual Leaders spoke the truth…addressing it and knowing that some would not agree…be it within the Roman Curia or with other Orthodox Patriarchates.
 
            Pope Francis has had his hands full ever since his election to the Papacy in March 2013.  Of course, he’s always been an advocate for the poor.  As Archbishop of Buenos Aires he lived in a small apartment and it was much rumored he would drive to officiate at Confirmations in nearby parishes with the top of his Episcopal crosier peeking out from the sunroof of his little car. 
 
            Since arriving in Rome and becoming the 266th Successor of St. Peter and Pope of the Roman Catholic Church, Francis, in some estimations, has caused great concerns in trying to change things!         He has called for decentralization of the Church to be more synodal, like that of the ancient patriarchates and for the papacy to be more faithful to what Christ intended it to be. He has instrumented a study for the return of Female Deacons, for allowing married men to be ordained to the priesthood and given specific definitions regarding the reception of Holy Communion for divorced and remarried Roman Catholics.
 
            Likewise, Patriarch Bartholomew has had his hands full ever since his election to the Ecumenical Throne in November 1991.  He is a staunch advocate for religious freedom and human rights and, as a great promoter of ecology and the protection of the environment, has earned the title of “the Green Patriarch.”
 
            Since arriving in Constantinople [modern day Istanbul] and becoming the 270th Successor of St. Andrew [brother of St. Peter and “first called” of the Twelve] and Ecumenical Patriarch of the Eastern Orthodox Church, Bartholomew, has fought to maintain unity within the many Eastern Patriarchates, the necessity of keeping discipline within the “Synodal System” as defined by tradition and Ecumenical Councils…and for his sincere desire for reconciliation with the West. 

             With all the ills in the world…the rise of ISIS, slaughter and elimination of Christians, even entire Christian communities in the Middle East, a growing culture of death, same sex marriage, abortion, homosexuality, gender confusion, etc., mankind is literally in a crisis situation!  All of this is life threatening; and, if there’s any hope for survival, Christians must come together as one, strong, united Body!
            For the best understanding and correct implementation of a restored unity…and full communion between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches…there are five crucial and historical facts that must be acknowledge and accepted:
 
            1) That St. Peter was indeed the prominent one of The Twelve, taking on a leadership role as evidenced in the Book of Acts by leading the first Church in Jerusalem but calling himself “a servant.” (II Pet 1:1) He never proclaimed any supremacy over his brother Apostles and didn’t even preside at the first Apostolic Council of Jerusalem in 50 AD (Acts 15, Gal 2)…instead, he instructed the elders not to be “domineering of those in your charge.” (1 Pet 5:1-5)
 
            And, although, St. Peter may have held a special place for Christ among the Apostles…all the Apostles received the same authority to teach, to baptize and to forgive sins, as “they were all filled with the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 2:4)


2) That the “Faith of the Apostles” was held to be Orthodox, that is, “rightly believing” ~ and ~ Catholic, that is, “universal” as believed, held & practiced by all inhabitants of the world who believed in Jesus Christ and called themselves Christians.
 
            3) That the Second Ecumenical Council, Canon 3, initially declared the position of the Bishop of Rome to be first among equals stating: “The Bishop of Constantinople is to be honored next after the Bishop of Rome.” However, the Fourth Ecumenical Council, Canon 28, declared: “The Bishop of New Rome (i.e. Constantinople) shall enjoy the same honor as the Bishop of Old Rome, on account of the removal of the Empire…”  Also, the Sixth Ecumenical Council, Canon 36: “Let the throne of Constantinople be next after that of Rome, and enjoy equal privileges.   After it, Alexandria, then Antioch, and then Jerusalem.”
 
            Be that as it may, these declarations were intended as rights of honor to the bishops of the capital cities of the Roman Empire, and not of authority and power over the others.  Accordingly, the five ancient Patriarchates were always independent of each other… administratively, yet united in the same “Faith of the Apostles,” Sacred Tradition, Sacramental life, worship and canonical discipline. 
 
            4)  That the Catholic Church…meaning both the East & West together…held, believed & taught the same exact “Faith of the Apostles,” for over ONE THOUSAND YEARS! 
 
            5)  That the One, True Church founded by Jesus Christ was established in the East.  And, from the East, came the Ecumenical Councils …which were the fulfillment of the promises of Pentecost …and held to be infallible …where all Truth was given to His Church from the mouth of the All Holy, Good and Life-Giving Spirit.
 
             From the East came revered, well known Saints and Apostolic Teachers that gave us the basic understandings of the Orthodox Faith: St. Jerome, St. John Chrysostom, St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Cyprian of Carthage, St. Nicholas of Myra, Sts. Clement & Athanasius of Alexandria, St. Augustine of Hippo, St. Irenaeus of Lyon, Sts. Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzen and Gregory of Nyssa, St. John Damascene of Syria, Sts. Cyril and Methodius St. Germanus of Constantinople, St. Andrew of Crete, St. Polycarp of Smyrna, St. Justin Martyr and St. Ephraim the Syrian.  Also, birthed from the East came monasticism by St. Antony of the Desert and St. Mary of Egypt.
 
              There is perhaps no better description of the original “Faith of the Apostles” than this excerpt from the decrees of the Seventh Ecumenical Council at Nicæa, as recited at the end of the procession of the holy icons on the first Sunday of Lent, —“Orthodoxy Sunday:”

               “As the Prophets beheld, as the Apostles have taught, as the Church has received, as the Teachers have dogmatized, as the Universe has agreed, as Grace has shown forth, as the truth was proven, as falsehood was absolved, as wisdom was presented, as Christ awarded: thus we declare, thus we assert, this we preach Christ, our true God…This is the Faith of the Apostles. This is the Faith of the Fathers.  This is the Faith of the Orthodox, this is the Faith which has established the Universe!”
 
                On 16 April 2017, the Church celebrated Easter/Holy Pascha. It was a common date for Orthodox & Roman Catholics…the next, not occurring, until 2025.  My prayer is that the “Uncreated Light” of the Resurrection, the yearly “Miracle of Orthodoxy” on this common date, will prove to our Spiritual Leaders that UNITY MUST BEGIN NOW!  Celebrating Easter on different dates is disunity and a horrible scandal!  Let this common date for Easter/Holy Pascha be the start of healing for the Church of Christ…so ”that all may be ONE!”
​ 

Spiritual Leaders
Who can Change
the World...
If they Walk Together in Faith
Professing the Nicene Creed
of "...One, Holy, Catholic
and Apostolic Church..."
Being "Orthodox" in the
unchangeable Deposit of Faith.
Being "Catholic" in witness
​to all people of the Earth

                                                                                                         INTRODUCTION

            If you're a “good” Roman Catholic, Orthodox Christian or even a Protestant brother or sister…saw the cover and picked up this book…I'm sure you’re asking yourself: “what's this all about?” 
 
            After all, it isn’t every day you see the Pope of Rome bending in humility before the Ecumenical Patriarch of the Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church!  Yes, the “official” name for Eastern Orthodox Christians show they are a Catholic Church!  And, what about UNITY …after fifty years of discussions & concessions…has it brought us any closer to fulfilling Christ’s mandate, that, “all may be One?”
 
So, keep reading…I assure you, writing from a strict "catholic perspective," the contents of this book will challenge you and be an awakening experience. These pages contain Truths we’ve believed, both East & West, together, for over 1,000 years!  You can be sure, the devil has gone to great extent to stop the completion & distribution of this book…let alone, the long overdue letter to our Spiritual Leaders!
 
Let me be perfectly clear…the purpose of this book is NOT to make confrontational judgments or needless attacks on either Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox Catholics or anyone else.  I’m not here to accuse Spiritual Leaders of any fault.  After all, just being human makes us prone to mistakes: “we all fall short of the glory of God.”  But, even with that said, I’m sure I will offend a few individuals of both East & West and some will even call me a heretic!   Some, will refuse to accept that I’m simply presenting what has always been held, always believed & always taught by the UNDIVIDED…One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church.
 
The healing of the Christ’s Church is necessary now!  And, it’s too important for me or anyone else to be concerned about what people will think…“Blessed are you when men shall revile you and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you for My sake…rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in Heaven.” (Mt 5:11-12) 
 
    We’ve heard all our life, “united we stand, divided we fall” and more precisely, “…if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.” (Mk 3:25)  The Church was ONE for over 1,000 years and then there was a parting of the ways. History shows that departure from—and innovations to—the “Faith of the Apostles” caused the break. So, why not overlook our differences and be ONE as Christ demands?  If we search our hearts, we know the problems that exist: intense legalism in the West & unforgivable suspicions in the East! 
 
Despite differences, I believe we can all agree…the DNA of the “Faith of the Apostles” has not changed and the seamless garment of Christ can’t remain torn forever.  The separation of Rome & Constantinople must absolutely be healed. The Faith of our Spiritual Leaders must be fortified by the common Truths we hold and the Pope and Patriarch must “step out in Faith” and make the correct, if not radical move…to repair, heal and unite the ONE Body of Christ.               
            Everyday, it becomes more critical, that the ONE Church founded by Christ…the ONE Martyrs & Saints gave their lives for – the ONE which must be that clear, unwavering voice of Jesus in the world – must proclaim, even louder, His "Good News:”  the realities that there is something better than life on this Earth; that we are in fact citizens of Heaven; that through repentance our faults and our sins are forgiven without a trace…“I will not remember thy sins” (Is 43:25)…that there is unconditional love of a loving Father…that there is RESURRECTION to a world without end…and that there is Eternal Life in Heaven…with our loved ones and with HIM!
 
The ONE Church Christ founded is that voice to a world gone mad.  And, that Church is One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic.  It’s not exclusively Latin or Greek, it is universal for all men & women.  The Church Jesus founded is truly “Orthodox in Faith” & “Catholic in Communion.”  But to understand this, you must believe & accept, as Sacred Scripture says, that Jesus Christ is the one & only Cornerstone upon which the True Faith and His Holy Church is built. (Eph 2:20)
Sadly, in the eyes of many, the Church Jesus founded...the ONE True Church…remains separated.  And, it’s True!  The devil, for nearly 1,000 years, has prevented East & West from laying aside the few differences…and embracing the many same-beliefs…that both Orthodox & Roman Catholics have held together for centuries.
 
             Consider the present predicament: Can Christ’s Holy Church be a respected witness in the world, and expect to attract followers, when she contradicts herself?  We profess to be "Christians by our love,” (Jn 13:35) but, certainly, it's far from any love that allows many to persist in the scandalous situation we’re in...a scourge even greater than the Protestant Reformation: that the ONE True Church founded by Christ, from its birth in the East to its growth in the West, with its sainted patriarchs, popes and learned councils, remains to this day…not the ONE "Body of Christ" (1 Co 12:27) as prayed for by Our Lord…but as so-called separated brethren kept apart by harbored fears, misunderstandings, too much legalism & suspicion…and it has remained in this tragic unchangeable situation for nearly 1000 years!
 
            Fact is, before she was called the "Roman Catholic Church" or the "Eastern Orthodox Church" (be it Greek, Russian, Serbian, Antiochian, etc.) she was simply known as the Early Church that taught the "orthodox" doctrine, the “Faith of the Apostles” as received from Jesus Christ. Later, in the First Century, Saint Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, called the Church "catholic" or universal.
 
Since the pronouncements of Pope St. John Paul II and Vatican II confirmed the East & West as “Sister Churches” and, historically speaking, that the Mother Church of all Christianity was Jerusalem—where Our Lord lived and rose from the dead and where Christianity was born—it’s easier to understand that the other Early Churches of the East: Antioch, "where the disciples were first called Christians" (Acts 11:26); Alexandria, with her great Libraries of learning & Constantinople, with her Ecumenical Councils…along with Rome, in the West…were her Daughters.  
 
Thus, this "Catholic Church” described by St. Ignatius, being both East & West, together, confirmed the Canon of Sacred Scriptures and gave us the Holy Bible as we know it today. This same Catholic Church, both East & West, together, meeting in Ecumenical Councils, guided by the one Holy Spirit…and being Infallible…defined the "Deposit of Faith"…that is, the “Faith of the Apostles.”  And, this same One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church, both East & West, together, gave us the "Nicene Creed" the "Symbol of Faith"…voiced directly from God’s mouth thru the Holy Spirit!  The Church was Orthodox long before it was deemed “Catholic” by St. Ignatius.
           
            During high school and seminary days, I came to know about  the Eastern Rites and the Eastern Orthodox Church…the most important fact being…that all, East & West, together…possessed the same valid Sacraments and valid Orders.
           
Only after a lifetime of ministry, married life, dealing with "church politics,” serving in jurisdictions East & West…and a great deal of prayer…did I realize that the UNITY of Christ’s Church exists in Christ, Himself—in the Paschal Mystery, the Holy Eucharist—and that the TRUTHS held by East & West, together, confirm that His ONE True Church…may be separated…but it is NOT DIVIDED!
 
After the smoke of the Conclave cleared in 2013, with a new Pope for the Church of Rome...and an Ecumenical Patriarch being in unprecedented attendance at his installation...I knew it was time for them, as Pope St. John Paul II said, to "look truth in the eye!"
 
With Pope Francis confirming a "deep bond that unites the Church of Constantinople and the Church of Rome in faith, hope and love," and Patriarch Bartholomew's thrust to "speak the truth in love," it became more evident that these two Spiritual Leaders were the ones to welcome a new "Pentecost" to the world!  This would be the Pope and Patriarch who would finally affirm together, once and for all, that there is only ONE "Body of Christ," only ONE "Witness to Truth," and only ONE "Spouse of Christ" which is the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church…East & West…together!
           
            Jesus said, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life.  No man cometh to the Father, but by me." (Jn 14:6) Is it so difficult to understand what Our Blessed Lord is saying?  All truth begins and ends with Him.  Therefore, before the world was created, before the founding of any Church, before the Bible was written, before popes & patriarchs or councils…before all of it…JESUS CHRIST & HIS TRUTH ALWAYS WAS…and, God NEVER contradicts Himself.
 
So, despite sex scandals, financial woes, the resignation of a pope, a separated East & West for nearly 1,000 years and revolts of a Protestant Reformation – definitive, commonly held Truths remain in the Catholic Church…to answer dilemmas and prove it is ONE.  "…blessed are your eyes, because they see, and your ears, because they hear." (Mt 13:16)  For the TRUTH, held by the Apostles & their Direct Successors, is from the foundation of the ONE Church…before problems or perceived differences between East & West, before the Great Schism, before the Councils of Trent, Vatican I & II and even before the Orthodox Council held in Crete in 2016.
 
The West has a Pope that loves the poor, cherishes the Church and, through his daily homilies at St. Marta House, inspires us with his deep insights of faith and humility.  The East has an Ecumenical Patriarch who loves God with all his heart, who travels the world over fighting to save the environment, and desires reconciliation  based on love.  Both, desire a united affirmation of orthodox tradition & truth that has been passed down from the Early Church of the Apostles.
 
Now is the definitive time to fulfill over fifty years of dialogue which has resulted in the passing of more years and more dialogue.  Pope Francis, with Patriarch Bartholomew, must use their eyes and hearts to see the Truths that were initially held by both East & West, together…the Orthodox Catholic TRUTHS that were believed, held and cherished, in undisputed harmony, by an UNDIVIDED One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church for over 1,000 years.
 
The TRUTHS, recorded in this book, were understood by both East & West, together, as unquestionably undisputed and divinely inspired!  They are the concrete resolutions transmitted to the Church by God’s mouth, the All Holy Good and Life-Giving Spirit, through Sacred Scripture and by Holy Tradition confirmed by Ecumenical Councils which were held by all to be infallible in their teachings.  These TRUTHS are the keys to solving the vocation crisis, shortage of priests, fulfilling the role of women in the Church and the absolute remedies to heal the sorrowful rift of separation and unnecessary "misunderstandings" that continue to confuse and keep apart Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics and all of Christianity.
 
By understanding & acknowledging these TRUTHS, the Faithful of East & West, together, can become new witnesses to the world …fulfilling the New Evangelization…and prove to Protestants & non-Christians alike...that the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church is the One, True UNITED “Body of Christ.”
 
MOST IMPORTANTLY we present—for the first time ever—two authentic present day MIRACLES centered around Christ’s Resurrection from the dead on Easter Sunday…and…the Blessed Virgin Mary’s pleas for Unity of her Son’s Church.  For many Orthodox and Roman Catholics they are unknown:
 
1)  the miraculous events of “Our Lady of Soufanieh” that began in 1982 with apparitions & messages in Damascus, Syria from Jesus & the Blessed Virgin Mary…the miracles CONTINUE with many Holy Icons throughout the world exuding Holy Oil… and testifying to the messages…to end the Separations in the Church and return to a Common Celebration Date for Easter
 
2)  the “Miracle of Orthodoxy” the “Holy Fire” that takes place every year in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre at the Tomb of Christ in Jerusalem and—ONLY—on the Eastern Orthodox date of Holy Pascha/Easter…according to calculations mandated by the First Ecumenical Council of Nicæa in 325 AD

 
For Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox it should be easy to understand these miracles because they are within the Sacred Traditions both groups follow.  East & West both hold the Church of the Holy Sepulchre [Church of the Resurrection] as the actual site of Christ’s Resurrection.  Both honor the Blessed Virgin Mary as the Holy Mother of God, and her continued active work in the Church.  
 
Now, we must pray, to lay aside all suspicions and conceit, to put away all haughtiness & superiority attitudes…to walk in Faith!
Our Protestant brothers & sisters, must open their minds and hearts…trusting that “with God all things are possible!” ~  Accepting the fact that the historical New Testament Church that Our Lord personally founded, and which was born on Pentecost, existed for hundreds and hundreds of years before many of their groups were established!  The word “Catholic” is not a bad word and it does not mean, simply, “Roman Catholic” …rather, it designates the overwhelming, worldwide and universal acceptance of the original Orthodox “Deposit of Faith”…the “Faith of the Apostles!”

Jesus  Christ radically influenced  the course  of  mankind and                         
changed the face of the Earth.  Few can doubt that after nearly 2,000 years He continues to influence and change the hearts of men.  Everyday, His teachings of faith, hope and love make a difference and He does this in a world…transforming doubt, despair and hate.
           
Seminaries on every continent house countless volumes on the founding of Christianity, Church history and the Life of Christ.  All claim answers to deliver the world from her ills, and how to have a "personal relationship" with Jesus.  But, what has really happened is a great splintering of the Christian Church into thousands and thousands of denominations…holding diverse “truths” that have been reduced to a cafeteria style "pick & choose your own belief" system…and, with  countless ethnic congregations fighting for their specific heritages and many, reduced to community social clubs with crosses on top!
Even the "Nicene Creed," formulated by the Church at early Ecumenical Councils, was altered, although evidence shows that this change was contrary to Sacred Scripture and the mind of the Church.
 
            Certainly, Our Lord knew that Truth would be questioned and disputes would arise; so, He safeguarded His Church, which is the "Body of Christ," (1 Co 12:27) to be guided in Truth by the All Holy Good and Life-Giving Spirit…so individuals could encounter Him and have an "ongoing" encounter with Him unto the Ages of Ages. 
 
Divine Liturgy (Mass), the Holy Mysteries (Seven Sacraments) and the Holy Eucharist (the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in Holy Communion) are the source of these encounters!
 
            Although the "Nicene Creed" and “Apostolic Doctrines” were always accepted as "revealed Truth" from God the Holy Spirit, history confirms numerous & dangerous “detours” from the mind, heart and conscience of the Church.  Be that as it may, there remain the undisputed TRUTHS that were always held, believed & taught by the ONE Undivided Church. These TRUTHS will either be accepted and re-embraced today by East & West, together…to bind, heal and correct…or…continue to confuse & separate East & West, keeping Rome and Constantinople criminally estranged from one another.
 
What about the Real Presence of Jesus in the Holy Eucharist?  Isn’t it the same Immaculate Body & Precious Blood, Soul & Divinity that flows thru the veins of every Roman Catholic & Orthodox after receiving Holy Communion? What about Female Deacons?  Weren’t they ordained into Holy Orders?  What was their role?  With these topics, many of the Faithful are unaware of what was actually held, believed & taught by the Undivided Catholic Church! 
 
And, what are the facts concerning Apostolic Succession?  Perhaps the realities can solve the great shortage of priests throughout the world? What exactly are the positions and roles of the Pope of Rome, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople and the heads of the other Ancient Eastern Patriarchates?  And, what about the little known or acknowledged, Eighth Ecumenical Council, where East & West, together  condemned the “filioque” and other innovations?
What about that "pinch of yeast?"  Did you know that this "leavening" changed the history of the Church?  And, why haven't all Catholics, East & West, alike, heard about the present day messages from the Blessed Virgin Mary in Syria that condemn separations in the Church and calls for a common celebration date for Easter?  Why don't Catholics, East & West, know about the yearly "Miracle of Orthodoxy"…the “Holy Fire”…the Uncreated Light from the Holy Spirit…at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre…having been witnessed at the very Tomb of Christ in Jerusalem for twenty centuries? 
 
 We have mentioned just a few of the important topics that are addressed in this book.  And, it’s the first time they have all been gathered together in one volume.  Why are they unknown by many for so long?  That's not an easy question; and, we must never forget that the devil, who is the “author of confusion” & “father of lies” wants to keep these TRUTHS hidden from the eyes of Clergy & Faithful alike.
 
To be sure, everything that is anti-Christ does not want East & West together.  The devil wants to keep the so-called perception of division – THE GREAT LIE – that Christ’s ONE True Church is actually divided…alive!  In order to best understand the reasons for this misunderstanding, we must first realize that history is recorded from the perspective of the writer of that history.  It would be absurd to imply that either the Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Church intentionally kept TRUTHS quiet to mislead the Faithful.        
           
Today's age has brought about unfathomable crimes of "man against man" with ongoing wars, the continued rumors of war and a culture of death and moral decay that has its grasp on both young & old alike…on believers & non-believers as well.  And, with all the perils at hand, only be a UNITED  Church, East & West, together …a strong Catholic Church of Orthodox Faith…with One voice…can be the True witness as the "Body of Christ" to change the world.

 
            Thankfully, in all the chaos, there remains an abundant Light which is the answer; it is Truth that cannot be hidden by the darkness.  It is the Truth that Jesus Christ rose from the dead.  The Truth that we are no longer subject to sin and death.  And, that we, like Him, will rise & live forever!  It is the Resurrection that makes us Christian!
 
Jesus, is that True Light that enlightens the world; and, He empowered His ONE True Holy Catholic Church with all-Truth on that day of Pentecost because He promised, that "the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it" (Mt 16:18) and, that "I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world." (Mt 28:20)
 
Christ prayed for UNITY of His ONE True Church.  And, although, understood differently at different times by East & West perspectives, the Catholic Church He founded was firmly rooted and flourished for over 1,000 years.  Popes & patriarchs believed & taught the same Orthodox Faith at every time and in every place.

For the first 1,000 years there existed, “one Lord, one Faith and one Baptism”…the ONE True Church --  holding fast to the common TRUTHS in this book. It was not until the Great Schism of 1054 AD that the Church was plunged into darkness & estrangement from itself.  And, it was also during this time that…THE GREAT LIE…the perception of division was wrought by the devil, where he seeded errors & departures & innovations from these TRUTHS causing a split between East & West…and, later, causing further separations with the Protestant Reformation in the West.  
 Has this same perception of division held captive the Spiritual Leaders of both East & West for nearly ten centuries?  Has it literally blinded Popes & Patriarchs from their obligation to "stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle." (2 Thes 2:14)  Does the devil continue to bind the separated brethren, keeping them from UNITY?
 
From at least the Third Century, it has been the solemn duty of both the Popes and Ecumenical Patriarchs, from their Apostolic Sees of UNITY and LOVE, to preserve and defend the Truths of the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church…East & West, together… which is the ONE True Church that is “Orthodox in Faith” & “Catholic in Communion.”  To this very day…although seemingly divided…it remains the same Church founded by Jesus Christ & entrusted to His Apostles, to Pope Francis, to Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and to all Patriarchs and Bishops throughout the world who are the Direct Successors of the Apostles…in the valid Apostolic Succession.
           
            It can be concluded, that the Church cannot be truly divided or the Enemy has won and Christ's promises are to no avail.  If the Church is divided then the "gates of Hell" have prevailed; Christ is a liar and we have no hope.  Let’s pray to heal the tear, the “separation,” that has persisted between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches all these years.  Let’s start at real unity by coming together on the things that will not cause major upsets…such as celebrating Easter/Holy Pascha together and reciting the original Nicene Creed from Nicæa without alterations.  For, if we embrace Christ and accept anything less than what Christ established with His ONE True Church, then we all “fall short of the Glory of God.” (Rom 3:23)
 
            Sacred Scripture guarantees that Almighty God has always remained with His Church; therefore, it is the same All Holy, Good and Life-Giving Spirit Who enlightens the Orthodox Patriarchates & the Roman Magisterium.  It’s the same Holy Spirit, Who is ONE, and cannot be the cause of any separation!  Only the devil is the Author of Confusion…making us to believe in a so-called division that doesn’t  really exist…remember, God NEVER contradicts Himself!
            Both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches rightfully claim to be established by Jesus Christ.  Both rightfully claim to celebrate their birthday on Pentecost.  Both rightfully claim to have a valid Priesthood. Both rightfully claim their Bishops have valid Apostolic Succession directly from the Apostles.  Both rightfully claim to have Seven Sacraments (Mysteries) instituted by Christ to give grace.  Both rightfully claim to have given the world the Sacred Scriptures.  Both rightfully claim to possess the “Real Presence” of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist.  And, although both have slightly different perspectives of the same Orthodox & Catholic Faith they received from the Apostles…both are equally correct in their claims!
 
            In 1965, upon the banks of the Jordan River, Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I, took it upon themselves to meet in the Holy City of Jerusalem and proclaim to the world the lifting of the excommunications and anathemas between the Eastern and Western parts of the Catholic Church.  They did this without synodal or ecumenical approvals but as motu proprio…on their own personal initiatives…as Chief Shepherds of the flocks entrusted to them.
 
            Both men took it upon themselves to begin the work of an authentic New Evangelization for East & West and of "re-teaching" the reality of the Church's unity: being the ONE "Body of Christ." 
 
By their words and example, Pope Paul VI & Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I, together, showed the genuine "catholicity" of the East & West and rightly called each other "Sister Churches."  Later, Pope St. John Paul II would refer to Orthodox East & Catholic West as the "right & left lungs" of the ONE Catholic Church.  This re-affirming of Truth is what the thrust of the New Evangelization is all about.  These Spiritual Leaders began what now must be completed.
 
            Again, in 2014, Pope Francis and Patriarch Bartholomew met on the same bank of the Jordan River to commemorate the 50th Anniversary of the lifting of the anathemas.  They later met in Jerusalem and prayed together before the Tomb of Christ...perhaps a foreshadowing that the yearly—“Miracle of Orthodoxy”—which takes place in Christ’s Tomb, will be instrumental for the UNITY of the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church?
In 1967, after Vatican Council II, Blessed Pope Paul VI stated very clearly & emphatically, "the pope, as we all know, is undoubtedly the gravest obstacle in the path of ecumenism."
 
Later, Pope St. John Paul II asked for help in finding "a way of exercising the primacy which, while in no way renouncing what is essential to its mission, is nonetheless open to a new situation."  Pope Francis has added, "we have made little progress in this regard.  The papacy and central structures of the universal church also need to hear the call to pastoral conversion.  The Second Vatican Council stated, ‘like the ancient patriarchal churches….’”
 
In 2013, Pope Francis said in his first Apostolic Exhortation,  that he must, "think about a conversion of the papacy…as Bishop of Rome, to be open to suggestions which can help make the exercise of my ministry more faithful to the meaning which Jesus Christ wished to give it and to the greatest needs of evangelization."

 
            It’s my sincere prayer that henceforth, from Holy Easter, 16 April 2017, our Holy Pascha…being a common celebration date of Easter for both East & West, together…that Pope Francis and Patriarch Bartholomew will, in fact, be enkindled by the Uncreated Light of the “Holy Fire”…to perpetually confirm a common date for Holy Pascha/Easter and unanimous use of the Nicene Creed without the “filioque”…taking firm steps to Solemnly Proclaim the UNITY of the ONE CATHOLIC CHURCH!
 
The collection of historic & verified Truths contained in this book presents inerrant Sacred Scripture, Holy Traditions, Infallible Teachings of Ecumenical Councils & Church Fathers…along with the words of Jesus Christ…to reveal the TRUTHS held for centuries by both Popes & Patriarchs of the ONE True Church. 
 
As such, this One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church truly remains ONE & UNDIVIVED…from its very foundation!  The NICENE CREED, being the key to maintaining the Orthodox beliefs ...and "Real Presence" of Christ Himself, in the Holy Eucharist, being the Catholic [universal] answers for our UNITY.
 I sincerely pray this book will fortify both Pope Francis & Patriarch Bartholomew …reminding them of the common Truths …giving them the strength needed to complete the task of reconciliation started by their beloved predecessors Blessed Paul VI and Athenagoras I...to finally fulfill the Divine Will of Christ and His prayer that, "they all may be one, as Thou, Father, in Me, and I in Thee; that they also may be one in us." (Jn 17:21)
 
Bottom line is…TRUTH is like Love…it never disappears… never goes away…it’s simply misplaced.  Both Eastern Orthodox & Roman Catholics, together, believe and profess the same True Faith…and, the same Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist …but interpret, understand and practice the Faith in different ways.
 
            Authentic unity will never happen until the Pope & Patriarch take the crucial steps necessary for the healing of the Church of Christ!  So, now, once and for all, and for the sake of UNITY, let Pope Francis and Patriarch Bartholomew "be not afraid." (Mk 5:36) 
 
            The Early Ecumenical Councils have spoken…Vatican II has decreed, even Jesus and Our Blessed Mother have pleaded from their recent messages!  With this, Popes & Patriarchs have made solemn intentions…but, still no UNITY!  The scandal of separation between East & West grows each day…giving a horrible example to the world.
 
            Pope Frances speaks solely for all the Bishops and Faithful of the West, i.e. the Roman Catholic Church.  He alone can make a decision that binds the West.  For the East, it is quite different.  Because, according to  the Early Councils, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew holds only a place of honor for the numerous autonomous Orthodox Patriarchates and he cannot make a binding decision for the whole.
 
            It should be easy to implement a common date of Easter and sole use of the original wording of the Nicene Creed:  The West simply concedes to the common held beliefs of the first thousand years…that, which all the Eastern Orthodox still hold.
 
            After all the discussion is said and done, the question to pose is this: What is most important for the sake of UNITY between the Eastern Orthodox & Roman Catholic Churches…that we both possess Jesus Christ, the “Source & Summit” in the Holy Eucharist or that we acknowledge universal jurisdiction under a single patriarchate?

 
Knowing the only correct answer to the previous question, let a humble Pope Francis and Patriarch Bartholomew pray and make intercession to forgive all past faults and the mutual  ignorances that has nurtured the near thousand years of confusion and separation.
 
            Let their Faith be truly enlightened and their commitments be strengthened by the miraculous descending of Uncreated Light…the “Miracle of Orthodoxy” the “Holy Fire” at the Tomb of Christ.           
 
Then, emerging from nearly 1,000 years of separation, let their humble submission to the common TRUTHS—as exemplified by the beautiful photograph on the cover of this book—bring us all to a new Pentecost…where the Holy Church of Jesus Christ will be completely healed…and then, Solemnly Proclaimed…as the ONE and ONLY “Body of Christ”…One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic!
 
"We have seen the True Light, We have received the Heavenly Spirit;
+ We have found the True Faith,
Worshiping the Undivided Trinity:
+ For He hath saved us."
 …from the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom

Same Immaculate Body...Same Precious Blood...East & West!
Same Body, Blood, Soul & Divinity
for both Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox
Jesus Christ already UNITED
​His One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church

​CHURCH OF ROME HAS ANSWER FOR UNITY
“THE RATZINGER SOLUTION”
 
It’s a great blessing for Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI to be with us for the common celebration date of Easter in 2017!  As the illustrious Theologian Professor Joseph Ratzinger, he gave the best solution for unity of the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church:
 
“Rome must not require more from the East with respect to the doctrine of the primacy issue than had been formulated and was lived in the first millennium.  When Patriarch Athenagoras I, on July 25, 1967, on the occasion of the Pope’s visit to Constantinople, designated him as the successor of St. Peter, as the most esteemed among us, as one who presides in charity, this great church leader was expressing the essential content of the doctrine of the primacy as it was known in the first millennium. Rome need not ask for more.  Reunion could take place in this context, if on the one hand, the East would cease to oppose as heretical the developments that took place in the West in the second millennium and would accept the [Roman] Catholic Church as legitimate and orthodox in the form she had acquired in that development, while on the other hand, the West would recognize the Church of the East as orthodox and legitimate in the form she has always had.”
 
Richard Mattiussi, in his 2010 Doctoral Dissertation “The Ratzinger Formula,” explained how this could be a plausible catalyst for the unfolding dialogue between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches on Conciliarity and Primacy…
 
Earlier, Pope St. John Paul II had insisted that the Catholic Church “breathe with two lungs”…East and West alike! Perhaps this provisional two systems (Lungs) approach would allow for a dual way of exercising a reconfigured Roman Primacy: one mode of operation for the West and one mode of operation for the East as was maintained during the first millennium.
 
For a reunion to actually take place, Orthodoxy demands from Rome, the Latin sister church, and the Eastern Catholic sister churches in communion with Rome, to see a mirror reflection of the Orthodox churches by was of a reform, reconfiguration and restoration.  That is, Rome needs to guide the Latin sister church and Eastern Catholic sister churches to undergo a very consistent, intentional and gradual transformation in order for Orthodoxy to recognize itself in the Catholic Church (of the West).  The Eastern Catholic sister churches must eventually be transformed into their Orthodox counterparts, while Rome and the Latin sister church will have to shed all non-essential elements from their ecclesial life that impede full communion with the Orthodox.
 
Moreover, the Eastern Catholic sister churches must fully restore their traditions in order to convince the Orthodox how serious Rome is about unity.  For example, the choosing of their own bishops, optionalizing celibacy for candidates to the presyterate, and allowing for a global jurisdiction by the six Eastern Catholic Patriarchal synods and four Major-Archiepiscopal synods to meet the pastoral needs of their respective churches around the world without any interference from the Roman Curia.
 
Thus, we come to the following CONCRETE PROPOSALS that essentially draw upon the first millennium experiences of the undivided Church.  The ultimate goal for both East & West would be a mutual recognition of “Orthodox Faith” within one fully united “Catholic Church” simultaneously coexisting with two Lungs breathing in unison in the essentials of the Faith:
 
1. One Easter:  Primarily as a sign of unity, the Catholic and Orthodox Churches should jointly work towards devising a “Common Date” for the celebration of Easter/Holy Pascha.  It must be noted that Rome has permitted for pastoral reasons that certain Latin and Eastern Catholics to celebrate on the same date in various locations where there is an Orthodox majority.  The dating of Easter/Holy Pascha should follow the norms laid down at the Ecumenical Council of Nicæa in 325 AD.  Hence, Easter/Holy Pascha would be celebrated on a) the first Sunday following the full moon following the actual Vernal [Spring] Equinox, b) using astronomical calculations based on the Jerusalem meridian following the actual date of the Equinox, and c) Easter/Holy Pascha must always follow the Jewish Passover.
 
2. One Creed:  For the sake of unity, the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, both Eastern & Western Rites, should recite only from the original Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed of 325/318 AD without the filioque [and from the Son] clause as was done in the first millennium.  Pope St. John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI and even Pope Francis made it a practice to recite the Creed without the filioque clause at particular Liturgies when the Ecumenical Patriarch, Eastern Catholic or Orthodox bishops were present.
 
3. Reverse the Schisms:  The anathemas delivered between Rome and Constantinople in 1054 AD were against individuals and the East & West parts of the Church were never excommunicated from each other.  Roman Catholics and Orthodox once again consider each other in their relationship to the mystery of the Church as “sister churches” and it is inconsistent that Rome be referred to as the “mother” church.  It must also be understood that so-called “Uniates” [Eastern Christians that transferred to the West] were not returning home when they went under the jurisdiction of the Pope…their homes were the ancient Eastern Patriarchates from where they originally came…many of which were established before the Church of Rome.
 
4. De-Latinization:  Eastern Rite bishops under Rome need to pastorally and prudently de-Latinize their churches in Liturgy, catechesis, and particular law.  [Latinization essentially means a willful or involuntary incorporation of customs, disciplines and traditions from the Latin sister church into the particular Eastern Catholic sister churches such as: Western customs (a proliferation of statues instead of icons), Western spiritualities (specifically Western meditative and contemplative methods instead of Eastern, Western traditions like the Latin Liturgical vestments and titles of honor for the clergy such as “Monsignor,” Western disciplines (mandatory celibacy for the priesthood), Western theology (the interpolation of the filioque clause in the Creed), the Latinization of the Eastern Liturgies and training in seminaries, and finally the mico-management of the Eastern Catholic sister churches [in union with Rome] by the Vatican (Roman) Congregation for the Oriental Churches.
 
5. Global Jurisdiction:  The goal should be for the Eastern Catholic Patriarchal and Major-archiepiscopal synods to globally regulate the ecclesial lives of their churches and conduct legitimate missionary activities…without having to seek any permissions of the local Latin bishop or be managed by the Oriental Congregation or some other Vatican office.  The famous phrase of Pope St. John Paul II should be applied to Eastern Catholics – “become who you are!” Nothing less will suffice.
 
6.  Indulgences:  The long standing and at times controversial practice of Rome granting indulgences especially in the Eastern Catholic sister churches needs to be suspended for an indefinite period of time until a common understanding and an ecumenical resolution is reached between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches on this matter.  For the sake of unity, are indulgences so essential to the Faith that they could not at least be provisionally suppressed for an indefinite period of time until the Holy Spirit leads the Church to a common ecumenical understanding?
 
7. Optional Celibacy for Candidates to the Priesthood:  Although this is a very painful issue to some bishops, priests and laity who are either for or against “any change,” the reinstitution of optional celibacy for those seeking ordination to the subdiaconate, diaconate and priesthood as it existed in the first millennium and should have always been maintained in the Eastern Catholic sister churches in full communion with Rome needs to be honestly addressed.  The reasons are as follows: First, if a man is truly called to the priesthood and not celibacy, why does the Vatican canonically consider the sacrament of marriage to be “an impediment to ordination” and impose it on the Eastern Catholic sister churches.  Secondly, optional celibacy existed even as part of the Roman Tradition in the first millennium.  The so-called exegesis that claims all the apostles were celibate is at best nebulous.  Thirdly, in dealing with the priest shortage, why not ordain qualified “permanent” deacons to the priesthood.  Fourthly, re-instituting optional celibacy would only prove to the Orthodox that there really aren’t two classes of priests, one celibate ad the other married, but one priesthood regardless of one’s marital status.
 
8. Restoration of the Order of the Sacraments of Initiation:  The Catholic communion of churches (both the Latin and Eastern Rite sister churches) should return to the practice of celebrating all three Sacraments of Initiation: Baptism, Confirmation/Chrismation and the Holy Eucharist together regardless of the age of the recipient at the time of their baptism.
 
9: Other Doctrinal Issues:  The following doctrinal issues that exist between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches must be fully addressed between the sister churches:
 
•  Original Sin, Guilt, Temporal Punishments, and Purgatory (Catholic) vs. an (Orthodox) understanding of Original Sin and Eschatology…the part of theology concerned with death, judgment, and the final destiny of the soul and of humankind;
 
•  The indissolubility of marriage and the annulment process (Catholic) vs. the ecclesiastical recognition of a couple who have civilly divorced (Orthodox);
•  (Catholic) teaching on birth control vs. the lack of an official (Orthodox teaching) on this subject;
•  The mysteries of the Blessed Virgin Mary’s Immaculate Conception, Assumption-Dormition and Maternal Mediation.
 
For the sake of establishing a lasting unity as full sacramental communion, several possible scenarios may be entertained.  Rome will either: 1. abort certain doctrines, expressions and/or disciplines entirely, which is unlikely; or, 2. maintain her teaching(s) and revise the language (expression) of a particular teaching (i.e., revise the scholastic articulation and reincorporate a more patristic articulation); or, 3. maintain her teaching(s) and utilize a theological articulation from another Eastern sister church and translate that expression into Latin; or, 4. Maintain her teaching(s) and recognize the Eastern expression of the very same teaching as distinct and complementary to her own, hence, as orthodox.

" In the long history of the Church, the presiding
hierarch of the universal Church was the bishop of Rome.
After Eucharistic communion with Rome was broken,
canonically the presiding hierarch of the Orthodox
Church is the archbishop of Constantinople."
A Response to the Text on Primacy of the Moscow Patriarch
by Metropolitan ​Elpidophoros, Prof. of Theology, University of Thessaloniki

EAST & WEST UNITY
ACCORDING TO VATICAN COUNCIL II
 
A Conference was held on the 40th Anniversary of the Promulgation of the Conciliar Decree on Ecumenism.  The intervention and re-reading of the document was instrumented by Cardinal William Kasper, President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.  These are excerpts from the decree read anew after Forty Years…
 
On 21 November 1964 the Decree on Ecumenism Unitatis Redintegratio was solemnly proclaimed by the Second Vatican Council. Already in the introduction we find the statement: “Christ the Lord founded one church and one church only; division openly contradicts the will of Christ, scandalizes the world and damages the holy cause of preaching the Gospel”. “The restoration of unity among all Christians is one of the principal concerns of the Sacred Ecumenical Second Vatican Council.”
 
Unitatis Redintegratio states that the Eucharist both signifies and brings about the unity of the church. Later it says of the celebration of the Eucharist by the Orthodox Churches: “Through the celebration of the Eucharist of the Lord in each of these churches the church of God is built up and grows in stature, and through concelebration their communion with one another is made manifest.” Wherever the Eucharist is celebrated is the church.
 
This means: Every local church celebrating the Eucharist is church in the full sense, but it is not the whole church. Since there is only one Christ Jesus and only one Eucharist, each church celebrating the Eucharist necessarily stands in communion with all other churches. The one church exists in and of the local churches, and the local churches exist vice versa in and of the one church.
From the start East and West received the one Gospel in different ways and developed different forms of liturgy, spirituality, theology and canonical law. But in the basic sacramental-Eucharistic and episcopal structure, however, they are in agreement.
 
Therefore the Council speaks of relationships like those between local churches as sister churches. This formulation, which is left rather vague in the Decree on Ecumenism, was taken up and further developed by Pope Paul VI and the Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I in the Tomos Agapis.
 
Restoration of full communion presupposes careful consideration of the various factors involved in the division and recognition of the legitimate differences. The Council determines that the differences are more often to be considered mutually complementary rather than in fact conflicting. Therefore it declares that the “entire heritage of spirituality and liturgy, of discipline and theology, in the various traditions, belongs to the full apostolic and catholic character of the church.”  In order to restore unity one must therefore not impose any burdens beyond that which is strictly necessary (Acts 15:28).
 
The essential problem in the relationship between East and West is the Petrine office. Pope John Paul II has issued an invitation to a fraternal dialogue on the future exercise of the Petrine office. It is not possible in this context to enter into the complex historical questions raised here or the current possibilities for reinterpretation and re-reception of the dogmas of the First Vatican Council. It must suffice to mention that a symposium conducted by the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity in May 2003 with the Orthodox churches resulted in openings on both sides.
 
“Ecumenical activity cannot be other than fully and sincerely Catholic, that is, loyal to the truth we have received from the Apostles and the Fathers and in harmony with the faith which the Catholic Church has always professed”
 
The Decree was a beginning. Nevertheless it has exerted an enormous influence both within the Catholic Church and ecumenically, and has profoundly transformed the ecumenical situation in the course of the last forty years.
 
Doubtless Unitatis Redintegratio has also left some questions open, as well as encountering objections and undergoing further development. But we should not on account of these problems overlook the rich fruits which this Decree has borne. It has initiated an irrevocable and irreversible process to which there is no realistic alternative. The Decree on Ecumenism points us on the way forward into the 21st century. It is the command of the Lord to follow this path, with moderation, but also with courage, with patience and above all with unshakeable hope.
 
In the end ecumenism is an adventure of the Holy Spirit. Therefore Cardinal Kasper finishes with the words which also conclude the Decree: “And hope does not disappoint, for God’s love has been poured forth in our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.” (Rom 5:5)

​A SINCERE ATTEMPT AT UNITY BETWEEN
MELKITE GREEK CATHOLICS & ORTHODOX
 
            There have been numerous attempts by Eastern Rite Catholics to restore authentic unity with the Orthodox…none more dramatic as that reported in the Archives of the National Catholic Reporter…
 
MELKITES TAKE INITIATIVES TOWARD UNITY
 
“The Melkites have been in the forefront of Catholic efforts to achieve unity with the Orthodox, even if at times they have placed themselves further out than Rome is willing to go. Melkite Patriarch Gregory II Youssef Sayour attended the first Vatican Council (1869–70), where he opposed the definition of papal infallibility and left the council without signing the decree.
When forced to sign later on, he insisted on adding a provision drawn from the Council of Florence, the 15th-century effort at Catholic-Orthodox unity. That provision called for the preservation of the rights and privileges of the Eastern patriarchs. It's worth keeping in mind here that the Orthodox do not deny the Pope a primacy of honor but do deny his universal jurisdiction over the Church. But what the Melkites are best known for nowadays it what is often referred to as the “Zoghby initiative.” Archbishop Elias Zoghby, born in Cairo in 1912, proposed in 1975 a “Project of Double Communion” in which the Melkite Eastern Catholics of the Patriarchate of Antioch would rejoin the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch while at the same time staying in communion with Rome.
 
Archbishop Zoghby was motivated in part by the thought that overall unity between the Catholics and Orthodox would take too long to achieve without such a bold move. He wrote that “millions of faithful are born and die in a fragmented and divided Church, in a state of separation and dissidence. Meanwhile, the ecclesiastical bureaucracy spins its wheels in discussing doctrinal issues in their congregations and sub-commissions. God only knows where this will end.” Rome reacted negatively to Archbishop Zoghby's proposal, saying that unity could not be achieved on a local level but had to be accomplished globally. But the archbishop pressed on, writing what he described in 1981 as a “shock book,” Tous schismatiques? (“Are we all schismatics?”), which presented his ideas.
 
In 1995 Zoghby presented the following statement to the Melkite synod of bishops as a possible statement on unity:
 
‘Profession of Faith:
I. I believe everything Eastern Orthodoxy teaches.
II. I am in communion with the Bishop of Rome as the first among the bishops, according to the limits recognized by the Holy Fathers of the East during the first millennium before the separation.’

The profession of faith was signed by 24 of the 26 bishops and presented to the Melkite patriarch (then Maximos V) and the Greek Orthodox patriarch of Antioch, Ignatius IV.
The following year the Melkite synod prepared a proposal for unifying the Catholic and Orthodox patriarchates of Antioch. It said the reunification “does not mean a victory of one church over the other, one church going back to the other or the melting of one church into the other. Rather, it means putting an end to the separation between the brothers that took place in 1724 and led to the existence of two separate independent patriarchates and returning together to the unity that prevailed in the one Antiochian Patriarchate before the separation.”
Concerning the position of the Pope, the Melkite leaders noted it remained to be discussed by the Joint International Commission between the Catholic and Orthodox churches. Quoting from the Second Vatican Council and from Pope John Paul II's encyclical “Ut Unum Sint” (That All May Be One), the Melkite fathers said the relations between East and West in the first millennium should be the inspiration for those discussions.
In its response to Archbishop Zoghby's initiative, the Roman Curia repeated the earlier objections. Curial officials also said that the Church's doctrine on papal primacy had undergone development since the time of the first millennium and that the doctrine had to be held in its entirety. They cited Vatican I and Vatican II in this regard. Rome said that while the exercise of primacy is a legitimate subject for discussion, it could not be resolved in isolation from the rest of the Church.
The Orthodox have also given a cool response to Archbishop Zoghby's initiative, saying that unity of faith must precede intercommunion.
The current Melkite patriarch, Gregory III, has pressed on. In 2001, in the presence of the Pope during his visit to Syria, Patriarch Gregory declared his wish to celebrate Easter according to the Julian (“old”) calendar so that Catholics and Orthodox could celebrate together. The patriarch said the proposal caused a “tremendous ovation” from the crowd but clerical opposition caused it to fail.
He vowed to continue pressing the case for a common Easter celebration.”  -  Article by Wesley Young, July 21, 2002

"...Catholics and Orthodox are not enemies
but brothers.  We have the same Faith, and
especially the Eucharist.  We are divided by
some disagreements concerning the Divine
Constitution of the Church of Jesus Christ.
The persons who were the cause of these
disagreements have been dead for centuries.
Let us abandon the old disputes, each in his
own domain, let us work to make our brothers
good by giving them good example.  Later on,
through traveling along different paths, we
shall achieve union among the churches to
form together the true and unique Church
of Our Lord Jesus Christ."  Blessed John XXIII

RECONCILLIATION & HEALING THE SCHISM
EFFORTS OF POPES & ECUMENICAL PATRIARCHS
 
            Throughout 2016, with the “Jubilee of Mercy” in the West & The Great and Holy Council in the East, both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches engaged in major attempts for unity within their perspective jurisdictions and for growth in the Church. This list was sent to me as a gift by His All-Holiness Bartholomew…
 
The official meetings of the Primates of the Churches have always been ecclesiastical events of great importance, for the reinforcement, and hopefully, the restoration of the unity of faith in the nexus of love. Such visits are in accordance with the commandment of the Divine Founder of the Church, our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
The Ecumenical Patriarchate, with its open and ecumenical spirit, developed a series of ecumenical initiatives of historical importance in the well-known Encyclicals of 1902, 1904 and 1920. These encyclicals aimed at the unity of all Christians in the communion of faith & sacraments. The initiatives of the Ecumenical Patriarchate have led to a Theological Dialogue of the Orthodox Church with the sister Roman Catholic Church "on equal terms."
 
It has been the goal that beyond all other fraternal gestures, the mutual visits of Popes to Constantinople and Ecumenical Patriarchs to Rome have marked a new era in the relations between the two Churches. It has helped in the understanding of the people of God, that there be effort, from both sides, for the achievement of the unity, so "that all may be one," according to the words of the Lord in His High Priestly Prayer. (John: 17)
 
THE VISITS OF THE POPES OF ROME TO CONSTANTINOPLE DURING THE FIRST MILLENNIUM
 
During the first millennium, there were no visits of the Primate of Constantinople to Rome, because New Rome had become the capital of the Empire.
 
The visit of Pope Agapetus of Rome to Constantinople (536)
 
In 536, Pope Agapetus of Rome accompanied by five bishops, visited Constantinople on a diplomatic mission for the Ostrogoth King Theodahad of Italy.
 
The visit of Pope Vigilius of Rome to Constantinople (547)
 
Vigilius, who was a Papal representative in Constantinople before his election as Pope, ascended the Papal Throne of Rome with the assistance of the Empress Theodora. Pope Vigilius came to Constantinople in 547 during a period of theological upheaval. He returned again in 552, but died before he could return.
 
The visit of Pope Constantine of Rome to Constantinople (711)
 
The Papal Throne was not invited officially and did not participate in the Quinisext Ecumenical Council, which was convened for the institution of Canons. Pope Constantine went to with an entourage of clergy and laity went to Constantinople, where he was welcomed with great honors. He then departed for Nicomedia, where he met with Emperor Justinian II. Pope Constantine recognized under these terms the Quinisext Ecumenical Council, and returned to Rome in 711.
 
THE EFFORTS FOR UNIFICATION OF THE TWO CHURCHES AFTER THE SCHISM (1054)
The journey of Patriarch Joseph of Constantinople to Italy (1438-1439)
 
The Emperor of Byzantium John VIII Palaiologos headed the mission of the Orthodox that would discuss the issue of the reunification of the Churches in the Council of Ferrara-Florence (1438-1439). Among the members of this delegation was Patriarch Joseph who was accompanied by many hierarchs. During his meeting with the Pope in Ferrara the protocol that demanded kissing the foot of the Pontiff was not followed, and so they exchanged the kiss of peace standing. The main goal of the Orthodox delegation in this Council was to accomplish the union of the Churches without surrendering in matters of faith. Nevertheless, even from the preliminary discussions, the Orthodox were divided in two groups: the ones who were in favor of the union and those who were against it. This division grew even more after the transfer of the Council to Florence.
 
Patriarch Joseph was hesitantly following the unionist policy of the Emperor, who was interested mainly in securing military aid from the West, in order to save the state from the Ottoman threat. The participation of Patriarch Joseph in the work of the Council was limited, because he suffered from dropsy, whereas most of the Orthodox bishops refused to surrender in matters of faith. The Emperor, watching this situation, was worried about the outcome of this Council and he pressured the bishops for a conciliatory signing of the union. In the end, the Synodical members of the Eastern Church, with the exception of Mark of Ephesus, Eugenikos, came together in the residence of the ill Patriarch and signed the document of the unification (3 June 1439). After a few days, but before the Council of Florence came to an end, the ill Patriarch Joseph passed away and was buried in the Church of Santa Maria Novella. The so-called Union of Florence was never accepted in the East.
 
The first contacts of Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I with the Roman-Catholic Church.
 
The Patriarchy of Athenagoras I (1948-1972) is a milestone in modern church history. This Patriarch from Epirus, Greece with his discernment, his diligence, hard work and the spirit of love that distinguished him, gave new inspiration to the ecumenical mission of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Besides his primary interest for the improvement of the relations of all Orthodox Churches, he worked with intense zeal and dedication for the rekindling of the relations of the Orthodox with the other Churches.
 
From the illness of Pope Pius XII that led to his death on October 9, 1958, and through the entire reign of Pope John XXIII, Patriarch Athenagoras I expressed his friendly intentions, his fraternal feelings and his genuine interest for the rapprochement of the two Churches. Alongside the numerous exchanges of letters, there had been frequent mutual visits in Constantinople and Rome of the members of Committees for the promotion of the issue of unification.

The relations between the two Churches began to make slow but firm steps of progress. When Patriarch Athenagoras I was informed about the dire state of the health of Pope John XXIII, he sent a telegram (30 May 1963) wishing for a fast recovery. The passing away of the elder Pope John XXIII of Rome deeply saddened him. Paul VI, who ascended the Throne of Rome after Pope John XXIII, continued the efforts for better relations between the two Churches. The Patriarch was informed also officially by a Papal delegate, (9 December 1963) about an upcoming pilgrimage of the Pope to Jerusalem. The Patriarch wrote to the Pope (26 December 1963), telling him of his desire to meet with him in Jerusalem. With a telegram to the Patriarch (30 December 1963), the Pope expressed his joy about their upcoming meeting.
 
The Meeting of the Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I with Pope Paul VI in Jerusalem (5-6 January 1964)
​

The Primates of the two Churches met in an atmosphere of joy and excitement on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem, where they exchanged the kiss of peace. Patriarch Athenagoras I in addressing Pope Paul VI during his visit to the Delegation of the Holy See to the Mount of Olives (5 January 1964) described their meeting as historical and blessed, and he added: "the Christian world lived for centuries the night of division. Its eyes have become heavy by looking at the darkness. May our meeting here become the twilight of a shining and holy day, in which the Christian generations to come, will receive the sacred body and blood of our Lord from the same Cup, in love and peace and unity, praising and glorifying the one Lord and Savior of all."


In his reply, Pope Paul VI during his visit to the Patriarchal residence in the Mount of Olives (6 January 1964) referred to the unrealized wish of the Patriarch for a meeting with his predecessor, Pope John XXIII due to the untimely death of the latter.  He highlighted the fact that their present meeting bore witness to the will "that brings us to the very skillful task of overcoming the discords and removing obstacles; for it is this will, to follow steadily the way that is acknowledged by all, that leads towards concord and reconciliation."
 
“And the Brethren shall dwell together as one” 
 
(Deuteronomy 25:5)

After these auspicious ecclesiastical events, Pope Paul VI wrote a letter to Patriarch Athenagoras I (13 July 1967) expressing his desire to visit the Phanar "in order to strengthen the bonds of faith, love and friendship." The Patriarch welcomed with excitement this historical decision, and the Pope went to Constantinople on 25 July 1967. 

​In his address to Patriarch Athenagoras, in the Patriarchal Church, he noted: "In the light of our love to Christ and in our fraternal love to one another we discover even more the deep identity of our faith, and the points in which we still disagree, must not prevent us from comprehending this deep unity." 
 
In his reply, Patriarch Athenagoras, underlined as their main goal: "to join that which is divided, with mutual ecclesiastical actions, wherever that might be possible, affirming the common points of faith and rule, directing thus the Theological Dialogue to the beginning of a wholesome community, in the most foundational of faith and of the devout and structural freedom of theological thought, that has been inspired by our common Fathers, and of the variety of local traditions, as it has been pleasing to the Church from the very beginning."
 
The visit of the Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I to the Church of Rome (26-28 October 1967)
 
Following this historical and successful visit of the Pope to the Ecumenical Patriarchate, Patriarch Athenagoras I notified the Pope with a letter (6 October 1967) of his desire to visit Rome.

​(It began with Patriarch Athenagoras and continued to the present day with Patriarch Bartholomew with Pope Benedict)

One Lord, One Faith
One Baptism...
Let us Solemnly Proclaim
the UNITY of the Catholic Church!
​"...that all may be ONE"

In the common declaration of the two Church leaders that was issued at the end of the Patriarch's visit to Rome (28 October 1967), it was stressed that "while recognizing that in the journey towards the unity of all Christians there is still a long way to go, and that between the Roman-Catholic and Orthodox Churches there still exist points to be clarified and obstacles to be overcome before arriving at the unity in the profession of faith which is necessary for reestablishment of full communion, they rejoice at the fact that their meeting has played a part in helping their Churches to make a further discovery of themselves as sister Churches."

​For the first time in recorded history, the East & West showed the “equality” of true “brotherhood” to the world.  Both Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I sat on Episcopal thrones that—for the first time—were of equal design and equal height.
 
The visit of Pope John Paul II of Rome to the Ecumenical Patriarchate (29-30 November 1979)

On 30 November 1979, the feast day of the Holy and Glorious Apostle Andrew, the First-Called, and also Feast Day of the Throne of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, Pope John Paul II of Rome, of blessed memory, together with his entourage, visited the Ecumenical Patriarchate and attended the Divine Liturgy that was celebrated in the Patriarchal Cathedral. The Pope was welcomed by Patriarch Dimitrios of blessed memory, together with all the Synodical and local Hierarchs, as well as with other Hierarchs from abroad.
 
In the Joint Declaration of the Pope and the Patriarch, which was issued in the Phanar on 30 November, after the end of the discussions of the two Primates and with the participation of members of the two Commissions on the Dialogue, they stress3ed their gratitude to their Predecessors, Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras I. They stated that the Theological Dialogue does not aim only at the restoration of full communion between the two sister Churches, Roman-Catholic and Orthodox, but also at the unity of the entire Christian world.

The visit of the Ecumenical Patriarch Dimitrios to the Church of Rome (3-7 December 1987)
 
To reciprocate the visit of Pope John Paul II of Rome to the Ecumenical Patriarchate on 29-30 November 1979, Patriarch Dimitrios visited the Church of Rome from 3 to 7 December 1987. His stay in Rome affirmed the will of the Patriarch and of the Church in Constantinople to strengthen the relations from both sides and the bonds of love for reconciliation and unity.

This visit was not simply one of etiquette. It was an historic meeting of the Primates of the Churches of the East and West, as well as a message that was addressed to the entire world. It coincided also with the anniversary of 1200 years from the convening of the 7th Ecumenical Council in Nicæa in 787 that led to the triumph of the Orthodox faith.
 
The Pope and the Patriarch, together from the Balcony of Blessings, addressed a greeting to the people who had gathered on St. Peter's Square.

After his election and enthronement on the Patriarchal Throne of Constantinople, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew visited the Church of Rome with his entourage from 27 to 30 June 1995, in order to participate in the festivities of the Feast Day of the Throne of Rome. The Patriarch was welcomed by a numerous delegation of Pope John Paul II of Rome, of blessed memory.
 
During his stay in the Church of Old Rome, the Ecumenical Patriarch visited the Community of Saint Egidio, the Basilica of Santa Maria in Trastevere, the Basilica of St. John of the Lateran, as well as the homonymous Pontific University. He visited also the French Seminary, where he stayed during his Post-Graduate studies (1963-1966).
 
On 29 June, the Feast Day of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, the Ecumenical Patriarch attended together with his entourage, the festive Divine Liturgy that was celebrated by the Pope, in the Basilica of St. Peter. After the reading of the biblical passages, the two Primates, recited the Creed in Greek without the addition of the Filioque. In the evening of the same day, in the residence of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in the Tower of St. John, the two Primates signed a Joint Declaration on the end of the visit of His All Holiness to the Pope.
 
In this Declaration, they commended the initiatives of their Predecessors, of blessed memory, Patriarch Athenagoras and Pope Paul VI, and their meetings in Jerusalem, and later on in the Phanar and in Rome for the lifting of the old anathemas, the peace of the Churches, and reconciliation; they also referred to the mutual visits of Pope John Paul II and Patriarch Demetrios for the encouragement of the Dialogue of love and truth, which was proven very fruitful. It was therefore possible for this dialogue to continue in an effective way and to proclaim that the two Churches recognize each other as Sisters, jointly responsible for the preservation of the One Church of God, in faith to the divine plan, especially in the matter of unity.
 
The Second Visit of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to the Church of Rome (23-25 January 2002)
 
On 23 January 2002, His All-Holiness, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, together with His entourage, visited Rome once again. The following day, 24 January, he participated in the Day of Prayer for Peace, organized by Pope John Paul II of Rome. This Prayer Day took place in Assisi, and among the participants were His Beatitude, Patriarch Ignatius of Alexandria, and His Beatitude, Archbishop Anastasios of Albania, as well as representatives of many other Orthodox Churches and numerous representatives of many denominations and religions. During this event, the Ecumenical Patriarch prayed for peace in the world and gave a speech on "Testimony to Peace." On 25 January, the Ecumenical Patriarch had a private meeting with the Pope.
 
The Third Visit of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to the Church of Rome (28 June - 2 July 2004)
 
The third visit of His All-Holiness, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to the Church of Rome took place after the official invitation from Pope John Paul II, of blessed memory, to participate in the Feast Day of the Throne of the Church of Rome, and to celebrate the 40th Anniversary from the historical meeting of their predecessors in the Holy Land. In the evening of 29 June, the Ecumenical Patriarch, together with his entourage, attended the Divine Liturgy that was celebrated by the Pope, in honor of the Firsts among the Apostles, Peter and Paul in the square of the Basilica of St. Peter. The two Primates exchanged the kiss of peace and blessed the faithful who were gathered there.
In the morning of Wednesday, 30 June, the official bilateral discussions of the Delegations of the two Churches took place. His All-Holiness, expressing a Pan-Orthodox request, asked the Pope for the return of the Holy Relics of the Holy Patriarchs and Great Teachers of the Undivided Church, Gregory the Theologian and John Chrysostom to the Church of Constantinople, a request that was granted during the fourth visit.
 
The Fourth Visit of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to the Church of Rome (26-27 November 2004)
 
On Friday, 26 November, His All Holiness, the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew traveled, together with his entourage, to the Church of Rome in order to receive, by the Primate of the Roman-Catholic Church, Pope John Paul II, of blessed memory, the Holy Relics of the two Holy Hierarchs, Great Teachers of the Undivided Church, and His Predecessors on the Throne of the Holy and Great Church of Christ in Constantinople, Gregory the Theologian and John Chrysostom. The Sacred shrines of the two Holy men were kept in the Venerable Church of the Holy Apostles in Constantinople until 1204, when they were removed and taken away by the Crusaders and were brought first to Venice, and later on to Rome, to be safeguarded in the Venerable Church of St. Peter.

On the morning of 27 November, during a fitting ceremony in the Basilica of St. Peter, the Pope himself, of blessed memory, handed over the Holy Relics of the two Holy Fathers to His All Holiness for their return to their home, after the passing of eight whole centuries. The Holy Relics, on their journey from Rome to Constantinople, were accompanied by the Ecumenical Patriarch and his entourage, together with an official Pontific Delegation, headed by Cardinal Walter Kasper, who attended the Feast Day of the Throne of the Ecumenical Patriarchate on 30 November.

The Journey of His All Holiness, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to the Church of Rome for the funeral service of Pope John Paul II of Rome (7-8 April 2005)
 
Late in the evening on Saturday, 2 April 2005, Pope John Paul II of Rome, fell asleep in the Lord, after a long illness.
 
The same evening the Ecumenical Patriarchate issued an official Statement on the passing away of His Holiness. His All-Holiness, together with His entourage, went to Rome in the evening of Thursday, 7 April, in order to personally attend the following day the funeral service for His Holiness, with whom he had met four times in the last decade and had cooperated closely to promote relations between the two Churches.
 
The Patriarch, after arriving at the airport, went straight to Saint Peter's Basilica, where he prayed in front of the deceased, who was lying in state for the people to pay their last respects to the Pope of blessed memory. The Patriarch placed on the body of the Pope a cross of white flowers.
 
The Visit of Pope Benedict XVI of Rome to the Ecumenical Patriarchate (November 29 - December 1, 2006)
 
In November of 2006, the official visit of His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI of Rome to the Phanar, during the Feast-day of the Throne of His All-Holiness the Ecumenical Patriarch, continued this radiant tradition of the past decades.  Pope Francis and Patriarch Bartholomew have also continued this tradition.

YES. POPE FRANCIS!!!
"With a Solemn Proclamation...
​...all may be One"

His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI continued the work of his predecessors, initiating this visit shortly after his enthronement on the Apostolic Throne of Rome, after the official invitation of His All-Holiness, the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, to attend the festivities on November 30, the Feast Day of the Holy and Glorious Apostle Andrew the First-Called, the Feast Day of the Throne of the Holy and Great Church of Christ in Constantinople.

This visit to the Ecumenical Patriarchate, the leading Church in the Orthodox world, of His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI of Rome, who is a profound Theologian and a renowned University Professor and who knows well the Orthodox Church and Theology, constituted a point of hope for the reinforcement of the climate of mutual trust between the two Churches, as well as for the successful continuation and outcome of the Theological Dialogue which aims at the unity of the Churches, when the Lord will grant it.
 
“…and the Brothers shall dwell together as one…”  (Deut 15:5)
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew attends Interfaith Peace Summit hosted by Pope Benedict XVI in Naples (21 October 2007)
 
His All-Holiness was invited by Pope Benedict XVI to attend the 3rd interfaith peace summit, which was held in Naples. Previous summits were in Assisi by Pope John Paul II (1986 and 2002). 
 
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew visits Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican (6 March 2008)

On the occasion of the 90th anniversary of the Oriental Pontifical Institute, where His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew completed his doctoral studies in canon law, the Ecumenical Patriarch was invited to address the faculty and students of the institute on the subject of "Theology, Liturgy and Silence." He also visited Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican, where he held private conversations and joint prayers in the papal chapel. 
 
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew visits Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican (28-30 June 2008)
 
On the occasion of the official inauguration of the Pauline Year, His All-Holiness attended the vesperal service at the abbey of St. Paul Outside-the-Walls. 

Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew participated in the XII Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops at the Sistine Chapel (18 October 2008)
 
For the first time in history, at the invitation of the Pope of Rome, the Ecumenical Patriarch addressed the Synod of Roman Catholic bishops in the Sistine Chapel at the Vatican. The subject of the address by Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew was: "The Word of God in the Life and Mission of the Church." 
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew attends Interfaith Peace Summit hosted by Pope Benedict XVI in Assisi (27 October 2011)
 
His All-Holiness attended and addressed the 4th interfaith peace summit, which was hosted by Pope Benedict in Assisi.

The Visit of His All Holiness, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to the Church of Rome on the Occasion of the 50th Anniversary of Vatican Council II (10-11 October 2012)


In October of 2012, His All-Holiness, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew traveled, together with his entourage, to the Church of Rome on the occasion of the 50th Anniversary of Vatican Council II. At the invitation of the Pope, His All-Holiness addresses the crowds at St. Peter's Square.
 
The Journey of His All Holiness, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to the Church of Rome for the inaugural mass of Pope Francis (19-20 March 2013)
​

"In anticipation of the day in which we will
​finally take part in the Eucharistic Feast..."

His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew becomes the first Ecumenical Patriarch from the East to ever attend the installation of a Pope in the West.
 
The Apostolic Pilgrimage of Pope Francis and His All-Holiness, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to Jerusalem to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the historic meeting between Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras (25-26 May 2014)
 
Now once again, Pope Francis and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew will meet in Jerusalem. This meeting of the venerable Primates of the leading Sees of Christendom has great significance

Great Significance, because on the one hand, because it constitutes the unanimous recognition of the fruitful Dialogue of Charity for the relations of the two Churches, and on the other hand, because it lights, through the validity of their exemplary authority, the way of the official Theological Dialogue for overcoming the traumatic experiences of the past. This common course in the way of unity is a command of the divine Founder of the Church, our Lord Jesus Christ, and it is the common mission of the venerable Primates of the two Churches.

​A Joint Declaration was issued to mark the 50th Anniversary of the Lifting of the Anathemas by His Holiness Pope Paul VI and His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras…
 
“Like our venerable predecessors Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras who met here in Jerusalem fifty years ago, we too, Pope Francis and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, were determined to meet in the Holy Land "where our common Redeemer, Christ our Lord, lived, taught, died, rose again, and ascended into Heaven, whence he sent the Holy Spirit on the infant Church".[1] Our meeting, another encounter of the Bishops of the Churches of Rome and Constantinople founded respectively by the two Brothers the Apostles Peter and Andrew, is a source of profound spiritual joy for us. It presents a providential occasion to reflect on the depth and the authenticity of our existing bonds, themselves the fruit of a grace-filled journey on which the Lord has guided us since that blessed day of fifty years ago.
Our fraternal encounter today is a new and necessary step on the journey towards the unity to which only the Holy Spirit can lead us, that of communion in legitimate diversity. We call to mind with profound gratitude the steps that the Lord has already enabled us to undertake. The embrace exchanged between Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras here in Jerusalem, after many centuries of silence, paved the way for a momentous gesture, the removal from the memory and from the midst of the Church of the acts of mutual excommunication in 1054.
 
This was followed by an exchange of visits between the respective Sees of Rome and Constantinople, by regular correspondence and, later, by the decision announced by Pope John Paul II and Patriarch Dimitrios, of blessed memory both, to initiate a theological dialogue of truth between Catholics and Orthodox.
 
Over these years, God, the source of all peace and love, has taught us to regard one another as members of the same Christian family, under one Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, and to love one another, so that we may confess our faith in the same Gospel of Christ, as received by the Apostles and expressed and transmitted to us by the Ecumenical Councils and the Church Fathers. While fully aware of not having reached the goal of full communion, today we confirm our commitment to continue walking together towards the unity for which Christ our Lord prayed to the Father so "that all may be one" (Jn 17:21).
 
Well aware that unity is manifested in love of God and love of neighbor, we look forward in eager anticipation to the day in which we will finally partake together in the Eucharistic banquet. As Christians, we are called to prepare to receive this gift of Eucharistic communion, according to the teaching of Saint Irenaeus of Lyon[2], through the confession of the one faith, persevering prayer, inner conversion, renewal of life and fraternal dialogue. By achieving this hoped for goal, we will manifest to the world the love of God by which we are recognized as true disciples of Jesus Christ (cf. Jn 13:35).
To this end, the theological dialogue undertaken by the Joint International Commission offers a fundamental contribution to the search for full communion among Catholics and Orthodox. Throughout the subsequent times of Popes John Paul II and Benedict the XVI, and Patriarch Dimitrios, the progress of our theological encounters has been substantial.  Today we express heartfelt appreciation for the achievements to date, as well as for the current endeavors. This is no mere theoretical exercise, but an exercise in truth and love that demands an ever deeper knowledge of each other's traditions in order to understand them and to learn from them. Thus we affirm once again that the theological dialogue does not seek a theological lowest common denominator on which to reach a compromise, but is rather about deepening one's grasp of the whole truth that Christ has given to his Church, a truth that we never cease to understand better as we follow the Holy Spirit's promptings. Hence, we affirm together that our faithfulness to the Lord demands fraternal encounter and true dialogue. Such a common pursuit does not lead us away from the truth; rather, through an exchange of gifts, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, it will lead us into all truth (cf. Jn 16:13).
 
Yet even as we make this journey towards full communion we already have the duty to offer common witness to the love of God for all people by working together in the service of humanity, especially in defending the dignity of the human person at every stage of life and the sanctity of family based on marriage, in promoting peace and the common good, and in responding to the suffering that continues to afflict our world. We acknowledge that  hunger, poverty, illiteracy, the inequitable distribution of resources must constantly be addressed. It is our duty to seek to build together a just and humane society in which no-one feels excluded or emarginated.
 
It is our profound conviction that the future of the human family depends also on how we safeguard – both prudently and compassionately, with justice and fairness – the gift of creation that our Creator has entrusted to us. Therefore, we acknowledge in repentance the wrongful mistreatment of our planet, which is tantamount to sin before the eyes of God. We reaffirm our responsibility and obligation to foster a sense of humility and moderation so that all may feel the need to respect creation and to safeguard it with care. Together, we pledge our commitment to raising awareness about the stewardship of creation; we appeal to all people of goodwill to consider ways of living less wastefully and more frugally, manifesting less greed and more generosity for the protection of God's world and the benefit of His people.
 
There is likewise an urgent need for effective and committed cooperation of Christians in order to safeguard everywhere the right to express publicly one's faith and to be treated fairly when promoting that which Christianity continues to offer to contemporary society and culture. In this regard, we invite all Christians to promote an authentic dialogue with Judaism, Islam and other religious traditions. Indifference and mutual ignorance can only lead to mistrust and unfortunately even conflict.
 
From this holy city of Jerusalem, we express our shared profound concern for the situation of Christians in the Middle East and for their right to remain full citizens of their homelands. In trust we turn to the almighty and merciful God in a prayer for peace in the Holy Land and in the Middle East in general. We especially pray for the Churches in Egypt, Syria, and Iraq, which have suffered most grievously due to recent events. We encourage all parties regardless of their religious convictions to continue to work for reconciliation and for the just recognition of peoples' rights. We are persuaded that it is not arms, but dialogue, pardon and reconciliation that are the only possible means to achieve peace.
 
In an historical context marked by violence, indifference and egoism, many men and women today feel that they have lost their bearings. It is precisely through our common witness to the good news of the Gospel that we may be able to help the people of our time to rediscover the way that leads to truth, justice and peace. United in our intentions, and recalling the example, fifty years ago here in Jerusalem, of Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras, we call upon all Christians, together with believers of every religious tradition and all people of good will, to recognize the urgency of the hour that compels us to seek the reconciliation and unity of the human family, while fully respecting legitimate differences, for the good of all humanity and of future generations.
In undertaking this shared pilgrimage to the site where our one same Lord Jesus Christ was crucified, buried and rose again, we humbly commend to the intercession of the Most Holy and Ever Virgin Mary our future steps on the path towards the fullness of unity, entrusting to God's infinite love the entire human family.”
 
"May the Lord let his face shine upon you, and be gracious to you! The Lord look upon you kindly and give you peace!" (Num 6:25-26).
 
Pope of Rome
+ Francis
 
The Ecumenical Patriarch
+ Bartholomew of Constantinople
 
[1] Common communiqué of Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras, published after their meeting of 6 January 1964.
[2] Against Heresies, IV, 18, 5 (PG 7, 1028)

Same Christ...Same Church...Same Blessings...Same Holy Spirit...

His Holiness Pope Paul VI
​His Holiness Pope John Paul II
His Holiness Pope Benedict VIX
His Holiness Pope Francis
- with -
His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch DEMETRIOS
His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch ATHENAGORAS
​His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch BARTHOLOMEW

Pope John Paul II and Ecumenical Patriarch DEMETRIOS give the Blessing

Ecumenical Patriarch BARTHOLOMEW and Pope John Paul II at the Phanar in Constantinople

Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch DEMETRIOS at Vatican

Ecumenical Patriarch BARTHOLOMEW and Pope John Paul II at Vatican

Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch ATHENAGORAS in St. Peter's Basilica

Ecumenical Patriarch BARTHOLOMEW and Pope Benedict VIX at Vatican

His Holiness Benedict VIX and His All-Holiness BARTHOLOEW in the Sistine Chapel

His Holiness Francis and His All-Holiness BARTHOLOMEW and His Beatitude Patriarch THEOPHILOS III of Jerusalem

Pope and Patriarchs kissing the Stone of Unction at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem

UNION OF EAST & WEST – THE QUESTIONS
FROM AN EASTERN CATHOLIC’S PERSPECTIVE
 
Dr. Anthony Dragani is a Professor of Religious Studies at Mount Aloysius College in Cresson, Pennsylvania.  He is an Eastern Catholic and lectures on Spirituality and Ecumenism.
 
In dealing with Eastern Orthodox Christians, it is Vatican policy to place as few obstacles as possible in the path to reunion. Currently, the Catholic Church is seeking reunification with the Orthodox based on the model of the first millennium Church. Pope John Paul II, writing about an eventual Orthodox/Catholic reunion, says the following…
 
“In its historical survey the Council Decree Unitatis Redintegratio has in mind the unity which, in spite of everything, was experienced in the first millennium and in a certain sense now serves as a kind of model… If today at the end of the second millennium we are seeking to restore full communion, it is to that unity, thus structured, which we must look.” (Ut Unum Sint, no. 55)  These are a few of the topics discussed in Professor Dragani’s “Questions & Answers” found on his website east2west.org:
 
In 1054, what were the reasons listed for the excommunication of the Eastern Orthodox Church?
 
The bull of excommunication only excommunicated His All-Holiness Michael Cerularius, the Patriarch of Constantinople.  It was not intended to be a blanket excommunication of the entire Eastern Orthodox Church.
 
The “official” reasons listed on the bull of excommunication were:
 
1. Simony, the selling of Church offices, which was actually a major problem in the West at the time as well.
 
2. Re-baptizing Latins, which was a false charge.
 
3. Allowing priests to marry, which technically speaking, doesn’t happen in the Orthodox Church. Married men are ordained as priests, but once ordained, priests cannot marry.
 
4. Removing the Filioque from the Nicene Creed… this charge is particularly incredible, as the papal legate Cardinal Humbert (who composed the bull) appears to have been unaware that the Filioque wasn’t in the original text of the Nicene Creed as formulated by the early Ecumenical Councils.

 
Unfortunately, when compiling this bull the Cardinal demonstrated a tragic ignorance of Eastern Christian customs, which resulted in a schism that has never been healed.
 
Even after the Fourth Crusade, the Council of Florence almost reestablished full communion between East and West. What went wrong then? Do you know any interesting details and personalities of that Council?
 
The Council of Florence was largely a missed opportunity. Most of the Orthodox participants at the Council were not there out of a burning desire for Christian unity, but because their empire was about to fall to the Muslims. The Byzantine Emperor hoped that by establishing reunion with the Catholic Church that the western nations would send military aid.
 
Thus, the reunion was one of political expedience. Because of this, the Orthodox representatives readily agreed to everything proposed by the Latin representatives. There was no real theological discussion, and no issues were resolved. Nor could there be, for most of the Latin representatives were schooled in scholastic theology, and addressed the Council in Latin, using scholastic terminology that the Orthodox were completely unfamiliar with. According to the accounts that I have read, the Orthodox delegates sat there in bewildered silence, completely unable to comprehend what the Latins were talking about.
 
The Council itself was really doomed from the very start. As soon as the Orthodox delegates arrived, they were greeted with a demand by Pope Eugene IV: the Patriarch of Constantinople had to get down on his knees and kiss the feet of the pope. This outraged the Orthodox Patriarch, who refused to comply. After a tense standoff Pope Eugene eventually relented, but from that point on things were sour.
 
Most of the Orthodox delegates wanted to just get the reunion over with as quickly as possible, so that they could secure help for their people. However, one Orthodox Bishop – Mark of Ephesus, wanted a real theological dialogue to take place. He believed that there were serious theological controversies that had to be discussed, and he was appalled that his fellow Orthodox bishops put political expedience over issues of faith. After the Council was over, and reunion was officially proclaimed, the Orthodox bishops returned home. Upon his return Mark of Ephesus wrote vehemently against the Council, calling it a “false union,” and he stirred up public opinion against it. However, the Orthodox leadership remained in full communion with Rome right up until Constantinople fell (the promised military aid from the West never materialized). When the Muslims took over the city, they appointed Orthodox bishops who were opposed to the union, and it was officially dissolved.
 
In Professor Dragani’s humble opinion, one of the major reasons that the union failed was that it was a union from the top down. The common folk were not supportive of it, and in many cases bitterly opposed it. For a genuine reconciliation to occur, it must be from the bottom up. When Orthodox and Catholic Christians come to recognize one another as brothers and sisters in Christ, they will be willing to work through the issues and reunite as one Church. 
 
Aren’t Orthodox Christians schismatics since they refuse to submit to the Pope?
 
Professor Dragani concurs with the judgment of Colin Donovan, EWTN’s Vice President for Theology, who addressed this issue in his FAQ on Heresy and Schism:
 
“It was thus common in the past to speak of the schismatic Orthodox Churches who broke with Rome in 1054. As with heresy, we no longer assume the moral culpability of those who belong to Churches in schism from Rome, and thus no long refer to them as schismatics.”
 
Moreover, as the Orthodox and Catholic Churches move towards reconciliation, I don’t see how it is particularly helpful to label them as “schismatic.”
 
I believe that it is best to follow the current teaching of the Magisterium and the example set for us by Pope John Paul II. He has spent a considerable amount of energy working towards reconciliation with the Orthodox Churches, and never once has he denounced them as “schismatics” or “heretics.” For us to begin hurling such derogatory names would be counterproductive, and on a large scale would sabotage his efforts.  If we are indeed faithful to the Holy Father, we must honor his wishes and address our Orthodox brothers and sisters with love and respect.
 
Does the Eastern Orthodox Church consider Roman Catholic Sacraments as valid?
 
Because the Eastern Orthodox lack a tightly organized Magisterium, it is difficult for them to speak with a single authoritative voice on certain theological questions. One of these questions is the validity of Catholic sacraments.
 
As a general rule, the Eastern Orthodox Church does not speculate on grace outside of Orthodoxy. Hence, the validity of Catholic sacraments is an open question for them. However, the vast majority of Orthodox Christians and theologians believe in the validity of Catholic sacraments. But there are also many Orthodox who deny that our sacraments are valid, and there also many who are indifferent to the question.
 
Is it licit for a Catholic (East or West) to receive the Eucharist in an Orthodox Church, and vice-versa? Can a Catholic fufill their Sunday obligation at an Orthodox Church?
 
The situation concerning intercommunion between Orthodox and Catholics is tricky. Following Vatican II, Pope Paul VI lifted all excommunications against the Eastern Orthodox. Likewise, Patriarch Athenagoras of Constantinople lifted all excommunications against Catholics. So, judging by this action, it would seem that we should be back in communion. But we aren’t. If we aren’t excommunicated from one another, but aren’t in communion, then what the heck is the status of our relationship?
 
As the matter now stands, many Eastern Orthodox bishops do not allow Catholics to receive the Eucharist. We should respect their discipline, and refrain from doing so. When there is no Catholic Church nearby, you can fulfill your Sunday obligation by attending an Eastern Orthodox Church without receiving the Eucharist.  In contrast, Eastern Orthodox Christians are welcome to receive the Eucharist in any Catholic parish, but only if their bishop allows them to do so.

Concerning the infamous conflict over the Filioque, it doesn’t appear to be the stumbling block that it once was. In 1995 the Holy Father asked the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity to reconsider the issue. At his request, they issued a marvelous document entitled: “The Father as the Source of the Whole Trinity – the Procession of the Holy Spirit in Greek and Latin Traditions.”
This document acknowledged the Eastern understanding of the Father as the source of the Trinity as being definitive for the Catholic Church. The Orthodox were concerned that Catholics claimed that the Father and Son BOTH were the source of the Trinity. This document puts that fear to rest.
 
In fact, the document goes so far as to state that the Creed WITHOUT the Filioque is the normative form of the Creed for the entire Catholic Church. It says:
 
“The Catholic Church acknowledges the conciliar, ecumenical, normative, and irrevocable value, as expression of the one common faith of the Church and of all Christians, of the Symbol professed in Greek at Constantinople in 381 by the Second Ecumenical Council. No profession of faith peculiar to a particular liturgical tradition can contradict this expression of the faith taught by the undivided Church,” (paragraph no. 2).

 
The Holy Father has warmly embraced this document, and has implemented it himself. Whenever concelebrating with Eastern bishops, or during ecumenical prayer services, the Holy Father always celebrates the Creed minus the Filioque.
 
Why don’t Roman Catholics go back to reciting the Creed in its original form?
 
If a western Church like the Anglican returns to using the Creed without Filioque, then it seems to imply that many Western Christians (Protestant and Roman Catholic) are professing the “wrong” Creed.  To say that the version of the Creed with the Filioque is the “wrong” creed would be incorrect. It is a legitimate variation of the same Creed that is particular to the Latin liturgical tradition.
 
When properly understood, the Filioque clause does not compromise the monarchy of the Father – the notion that the Father is the original source of the Son and the Spirit. Indeed, the Latin theological tradition has tended to emphasis the role of Son in the spiration of the Spirit while maintaining the Father’s monarchy. The Filioque clause expresses this Latin theological tradition, which is part of the heritage of the Latin Church. Many Roman Catholic theologians believe that to remove the Filioque from the Creed of the Latin Church would be to abandon an important part of the Latin theological patrimony.
 
Who started the fight over the filioque? Did Charlemagne really add it to the creed?
 
Concerning your question, it has been established that the Filioque was inserted into the Nicene Creed at the request of Charlemagne, over the vocal objection of the reigning Pope. It had previously been recited in parts of Gaul and Spain, but it achieved widespread use in the West through the efforts of Charlemagne. Numerous Popes opposed this addition, and attempted to maintain the original version of the creed for several centuries. Indeed, not a single Pope recited the Filioque until Pope Benedict VIII (1014-15).
 
Thus, when St. Photius protested the recitation of the Filioque in the Creed, he believed himself to be following in the footsteps of the numerous Popes who also opposed this addition.
 
I should also mention that some historians believe that Charlemagne added the Filioque to the Creed precisely in order to have an excuse for accusing the Byzantine Emperor of heresy. Since the Byzantine Emperor refused to recite the Filioque, he could be accused of heresy and therefore was not to be regarded as a legitimate Emperor by Charlemagne. This meant that Charlemagne alone was the sole true Emperor of the Christian world. Of course, since the Pope at this time also refused to recite the Filioque, this would also mean that he was a heretic by Charlemagne’s standards, wouldn’t it? Thus, Charlemagne painted himself into a sticky theological corner.
 
Do Eastern Catholics have to believe in the filioque?
 
Rome does not ask Eastern Catholics to abandon our unique theological tradition. In fact, Vatican II has asked us to preserve our theological traditions, which are part of the wealth of the entire Catholic Church. Therefore, Eastern Catholics are to maintain their traditional Eastern theology of the Trinity, which emphasizes the monarchy of the Father.
 
The filioque is part of the Latin theological tradition. Since we are in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Catholics believe that the filioque is a legitimate understanding of the Trinity, particular to the Latin tradition. In other words, it is a true understanding of the Trinity, equal and complementary with the Eastern understanding. While we do not express our understanding of the Trinity in this way, it is perfectly legitimate for the Latin Church to do so. The Eastern and Western understandings of the Trinity are different but complementary. So when push comes to shove, we believe that the filioque is true, but it is not how we express the mystery.
 
There is an interesting history behind this. In all of its dealings with the Eastern Orthodox Churches, the Roman Catholic Church has never asked the Orthodox to embrace the filioque as their understanding of the faith. On the contrary, Rome has only asked the Orthodox to acknowledge that it is not heretical. Unfortunately, for many centuries the Orthodox were unwilling to concede this. Some Orthodox Christians still remain so.
 
How can the Orthodox deny the clear scriptural evidence for Papal primacy?
 
Concerning the Orthodox view of the Papacy, it is far more complicated than it appears. Concerning the scriptural passages that you mentioned, the Orthodox actually believe in Papal primacy. They believe that Christ called Peter to be the first among the Apostles, and that his successor in Rome was gifted with a special charism of leadership. The Eastern Orthodox believe, however, that the Papacy began to misuse this power in the eleventh century. By claiming universal jurisdiction, they believe that the Papacy overstepped the primacy given to it by Christ.
 
German Roman Catholics were having numerous squabbles with the Eastern Churches during this period in history. Because the Germans had much easier access to the Pope’s ear due to geography, it appeared that the Popes favored the Germans over the Easterners. The situation reached an apex when Cardinal Humbert, a papal nuncio who was defending German interests, excommunicated the Patriarch of Constantinople without the knowledge of the Pope. In fact, the Papal throne was vacant when this happened. Nonetheless, the Eastern Orthodox felt betrayed by Rome, and became very suspicious of Papal authority. This was a very tragic event in Church history, and it is my hope that this terrible rift will soon be healed.
 
Would the Catholic Church agree that a key to ending the schism with the Orthodox is making clear that the Pope’s role as Vicar of Christ, as head of the Universal or Catholic Church, is different and completely separate from his role as patriarch of the Latin Church?
 
While not explicitly stating the separation of roles, this seems to be the direction that the Catholic Church is moving in. This is clear from the fact that the Catholic Church has been vigorously reaffirming the traditional rights and privileges of the Eastern Patriarchs. In the past fifty years we have been blessed to see the role of the Patriarch appreciated in the Catholic Church once again.
 
First, Vatican II proclaimed that that the Churches of the East “have the power to govern themselves according to their own disciplines, since these are better suited to the character of their faithful and better adapted to foster the good of souls” (Unitatis Redintegratio, n. 16; cf. Orientalium Ecclesiarum, n. 9). The Council went on to solemnly decree the following:
 
“By the most ancient tradition of the Church the patriarchs of the Eastern Churches are to be accorded special honor, seeing that each is set over his patriarchate as father and head. This Sacred Council, therefore, determines that their rights and privileges should be re-established in accordance with the ancient tradition of each of the Churches and the decrees of the ecumenical councils.” (Orientalium Ecclesiarum no. 9)
 
It seems that the Catholic Church is now exalting the role of the Patriarchs as heads of self-governing Churches, and is emphasizing the role of the Pope as one of assistance to the Patriarchs in preserving the unity of the Church. Only recently Pope John Paul II said the following to the Eastern Catholic Patriarchs:
 
“In their own territories and in the diaspora, the Eastern Catholic Churches offer their particular liturgical, spiritual, theological and canonical riches. You, who are their heads, have received from the Holy Spirit the vocation and mission to preserve and enhance this specific patrimony, so that the Gospel may be given in ever greater abundance to the Church and to the world. And it is the duty of the Successor of Peter to assist and help you in this mission.” (We Extend Our Arms in Brotherhood, no. 2)

​The role of the Pope, as head of the universal Church, is first and foremost to assure the unity of the Churches. Pope John Paul explains that “With the power and the authority without which such an office would be illusory, the Bishop of Rome must ensure the communion of all the Churches. For this reason, he is the first servant of unity,” (Ut Unum Sint, no. 94). The Pope has authority from Christ. However, this authority is not so that he can reign as a dictator or monarch, as non-Catholics sometimes think. Instead, this authority is given so that he can assure unity.
 
This new ecclesiology really isn’t new at all. In fact, this is the ecclesiology of the early Church. I believe that a strong emphasis on the rights of the Patriarchs, coupled with a proper understanding of the Papal ministry, will eventually end the schism. All in all, things are moving in a very good direction. I am especially grateful to Pope John Paul II, who has gone out of his way to make this happen. The man is truly a living saint.
 
Why are the Orthodox unwilling to accept papal authority?
 
In theory most Orthodox theologians accept the notion of papal primacy, but there is much debate over how it should be exercised. Pope John Paul II explicitly mentioned this in his encyclical “Ut Unum Sint,” and stated that he is open to a “new situation” with regards to how the papacy would function in a reunited Church.
 
I have recently visited a local Russian Orthodox monastery and attended one of their prayer services. They do insist that it is the Western Church that split from them in 1054. Which is the true Church?
 
You raise a very interesting question. According to the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Catholic Church split from them in 1054 AD. This is because, from an Orthodox perspective, the Pope of Rome began to make claims to universal jurisdiction, which the Orthodox interpreted as a departure from the faith of the Apostles.
 
This is a complicated issue. You see, the Roman Catholic Church believes in doctrinal development – that doctrines can grow and mature, expressing themselves in new ways. The Orthodox tend to reject doctrinal development, choosing to express the faith only in the language of the early Church Fathers. The Catholic awareness of Papal universal jurisdiction is a case of doctrinal development. In the early Church there were signs of this belief, but it was not clearly understood until later. When the Catholic Church became aware of Papal universal jurisdiction, the Orthodox were turned off by it. This is largely due to how it was presented to them.
 
The Catholic church has added so many new doctrines that were not even thought of in the early church such as the Immaculate Conception, Papal Infallibility, indulgences, purgatory and others. Who is right?  It seems the Orthodox Church is the original Church.
 
You need to understand the Catholic belief in “doctrinal development.” The Catholic Churches teaches that our understanding of the deposit of faith deepens over time, and in time new doctrines may be defined as a result. These newly defined doctrines are not discovered or invented, but rather are gleaned from the apostolic tradition. Thus, our understanding of the mysteries of the faith has advanced significantly since the tenth century.
 
Thus, throughout the first millennium there was no clearly defined doctrine of Papal Infallibility, the Immaculate Conception, etc. But the seeds of these doctrines were present. The Orthodox Church, in contrast, does not adhere to a theory of doctrinal development. Therefore, they have a difficult time accepting any doctrines that have been defined by the Catholic Church since the schism. You cannot conclude from this lack of doctrinal development that “the Orthodox Church is the original Church.” Such an outlook is too simplistic.
 
I’m Byzantine Catholic, but lately I’ve been feeling drawn to Eastern Orthodoxy. I feel like I’m stuck in the middle between Rome and Constantinople, and am very uncomfortable. What should I do about this?
 
The fact that you are feeling drawn to Orthodoxy is a sign that you are becoming “one of us,” for real.
 
I experienced this draw myself several years ago, with great intensity. I was advised by a certain subdeacon that ALL Eastern Catholics should experience a draw toward Orthodoxy, or else something is wrong. Although we are in communion with Rome, the Orthodox Church is our mother Church, from which we came, and we are supposed to feel a longing for her.
 
At any rate, I made no hasty decisions and remained in Eastern Catholicism. Today I know that I belong exactly where I am, and have no plans to ever become Orthodox. Yet where I am is admittedly NOT comfortable. The draw toward Orthodoxy never vanishes, because it is in reality the draw toward the fullness of our Eastern Christian tradition.
 
Christianity is not supposed to be comfortable. It is possible for Roman Catholics to feel comfortable with their separation from Orthodoxy, for most of them aren’t even consciously aware that the Orthodox exist. Likewise, it is possible for Orthodox Christians to become comfortable with their separation from Rome. But for us Eastern Catholics, we must live day in and day out with the discomfort of being separated from our mother Church. And this discomfort is the work of God, for it compels us to work toward unity.
 
Being Eastern Catholic isn’t easy. It is full of frustration, disappointments, and hardship. But somewhere within this is the cross of Jesus Christ. We get to share in a taste of the pain that Christ feels over the disunity of his disciples
 
While I am currently Byzantine Catholic, I am about to become Orthodox. Historically the Latin Church has treated the Eastern Catholics very badly, and they continue to do so. I can’t take it any more, so I am leaving. Eastern Catholicism is a failed experiment. How can you remain Byzantine Catholic when you know the history?
 
The Byzantine Catholic Church is in communion with Rome, despite our differences. Nor are the differences as great as you seem to think. Unity does not have to equal uniformity. Indeed, this fact is expressed in the reality of the Trinity. God is three distinct persons, yet one God. In the same way, there can be great diversity within the Catholic communion of Churches.
 
You raise the history of the Latin Church being abusive to the Eastern Catholic Churches. Historically, there is truth to this claim. Throughout much of our history, many members of the Latin Church have attempted to remove our traditions, and turn us into Latin Catholics. At times, they have even used connections in the Roman Curia to accomplish this goal. But things are changing, and have changed significantly already! At Vatican II the Catholic Church officially recognized our traditions, disciplines, liturgy, and theology as being equal to that of the Latin Church. Since then, a great deal of energy has been spent restoring us to our original traditions. Much of the damage has been undone, and more is yet to be fixed. In fact, it is amazing how much progress has been made in less than fifty years!!!
 
Also, many of our Western Catholic brothers and sisters have developed a great respect for us. Many of them are very eager to learn about us, as is demonstrated daily on this new forum. We aren’t living in the 1920’s, my friend.
 
The biggest hindrance in our progress is ourselves. First of all, many of our priests were trained in the pre-Vatican II mentality that the Latin way is superior. Many of our older priests, and perhaps even some bishops, are convinced that we must become as much like the Latin Church as possible in order to be “fully Catholic.” Such clergy are a vanishing breed, and they will soon be replaced entirely with younger priests who are extremely eastern. Rome is very eager for us to restore our Eastern heritage, and is intervening when necessary to assure this. I even have it on good authority that Rome no longer opposes our restoration of a married priesthood in North America.
 
The second problem that is holding us back is our own bitterness! Yes, the Latin Church has been uncharitable with us in the past. But holding on to this bitterness, and even nursing it, is only harming ourselves. Resentment has a way of poisoning a person, and even paralyzing them. As long as we nurse bitterness and resentment against the Latins, and against Rome, we will assuredly destroy ourselves. Today, we are the masters of our own fate, and can determine whether or not we grow and flourish. We do not require a fiat from Rome or anyone else to do this. Likewise, we primarily have ourselves to blame for our failures.
 
In conclusion, I believe that the Eastern Catholic Churches exist for a reason. When you consider the major historical obstacles that we have faced, it is truly amazing that we even exist today. Surely God has preserved us, and has something magnificent in store for us. We have suffered intensely for the sake of Christian unity, and this has not gone unnoticed by Jesus. In the decades to come, the Eastern Catholic Churches have an opportunity to be a model of “Orthodoxy in communion with Rome.” With much help from the Holy Spirit, we can prove to the world that it IS possible to be in communion with Rome without having to abandon our Eastern Christian heritage. However, we must be willing to cooperate with God to make this happen.
 
Why does there seem to be so much hostility toward Latin Catholics by SOME Byzantines?
 
What you are referring to is what I call “Byzantine Bitterness.” Some Byzantine Catholics have a great deal of resentment towards the Latin Church. This isn’t very widespread, but it does exist in some quarters.
 
To understand the source of this hostility, it is necessary to look at history. First, you will only find such bitterness in North America. This is because of the very real abuse that Byzantine Catholics suffered when they arrived here. Allow me to give you some historical background.
 
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries large waves of immigrants came to the United States. Among these immigrants were numerous Latin and Byzantine Catholics. The only bishops established in the country were Latin bishops, most of whom were of Irish background. These bishops had never even heard of Byzantine Catholics before, and were shocked by our differences. They were especially revolted by our tradition of married priests, which they considered an abomination.
 
As more Byzantine Catholics arrived, we began building parishes and recruiting priests from Europe. Most of the priests that we were sent were married with families. This greatly angered the Latin bishops, especially the famous Archbishop John Ireland. The Latin bishops began a vigorous campaign to have our married priests expelled from the continent, and sent back to Europe. The Latin bishops had many friends and contacts in the Vatican. At the time, we Byzantine Catholics had no one in the Vatican to present our side of the dispute. Eventually, the Latin bishops managed to obtain a Vatican ruling that banned married Eastern priests in North America.
 
At this point all heck broke loose. Almost all of our parishes were served by married priests, and if they had to leave we would have had no priests. All of our parishes would have closed. Some of the Latin bishops proposed a solution: they would loan us Latin priests who would celebrate the Roman Mass in our parishes. Eventually, we would be fully assimilated into the Latin Church.
 
As you could imagine, this option was considered unacceptable. We Byzantine Catholics have a great love for our liturgy and traditions, and would rather die than part with them. For these immigrants especially, the Byzantine tradition was the only connection that they had maintained with their roots.
 
At this time the Russian Orthodox Church entered the picture. The Russian Orthodox were sympathetic to our sufferings, and offered to help. They would provide our parishes with priests, and life would continue as before. All of our Byzantine traditions would remain fully intact. The only catch was that these parishes would henceforth be considered Russian Orthodox, not Byzantine Catholic.
 
A large number of Byzantine Catholics took this option. Feeling deeply betrayed by Rome, and not wanting to be coerced into the Latin Church, they became Russian Orthodox. The majority of Byzantine Catholics in the United States became Russian Orthodox during this time. Only a minority were left in the Byzantine Catholic Church.
 
The large numbers leaving our Byzantine Church caught the attention of Rome. They realized that something had to be done fast. Thus, the Pope established a Byzantine Catholic hierarchy of bishops in North America. This angered many of the Latin bishops beyond belief. They were furious that they had to share America with Eastern Bishops. With our own bishops serving us, Byzantine Catholicism in the New World became more stable and secure. Nonetheless, the damage was already done. Families were painfully divided between Orthodox and Catholic lines. Legal disputes over parish property flooded the courts. And worst of all, we lost so many members that our Church became a gaunt shadow of its former self. Almost all of the Russian Orthodox and OCA Christians in North America today are descended from Byzantine Catholics.
 
Because of this horrible travesty, a great deal of animosity remained between Latin and Byzantine Catholics. This animosity lingered well into the 1960s. As recently as at Vatican II, a group of American Latin bishops attempted to have Eastern Catholicism banned in North America. Of course this attempt was quickly squashed.
 
Instead, Vatican II went on to affirm the equal rights and dignity of the Eastern Catholic Churches. Since then things have dramatically improved.

Perhaps, Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen knew something?
The Eastern Rites
May Be the Salvation for the
​Western Church...think about it...

Today the relationship between Latin Catholics and Byzantine Catholics is far better. Our bishops have a good working relationship. Unfortunately, a great deal of hurt feelings still remain.
 
In 1999 Cardinal William Keeler of Baltimore, on behalf of the Latin hierarchy, apologized to the Byzantine Catholic Church for the abuse we had suffered. This apology was very warmly received. Likewise, the Archbishop of Minneapolis expressly apologized for the actions of his predecessor, Archbishop John Ireland.
 
Let us pray that all of the residual wounds from this dispute are soon healed. Some Byzantine Catholics are having a hard time forgiving. Instead, they are paralyzed with bitterness. It is my fervent hope that they will eventually learn to forgive.
 
 What About Clerical Celibacy?
 
Today the Roman Catholic Church routinely ordains married men to diaconate. These men are in no way required to abstain from marital relations, yet all of the fourth century texts that the Cardinal sights call for absolute marital continence by deacons and their wives. Moreover, these same texts claim that this is part of the apostolic tradition. Also, in recent decades the Roman Catholic Church has ordained hundreds of former Episcopal clerics as Catholic priests. And again, these men are not required to cease sexual relations with their wives.
 
Likewise, the Catholic Church has officially recognized the full legitimacy of the Eastern tradition of a married priesthood. For evidence of this one needs to look no further than the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, which was promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 1990. Canon 373 authoritatively states that “the hallowed practice of married clerics in the primitive Church and in the tradition of the Eastern Churches throughout the ages is to be held in honor.” The legitimacy of the Eastern discipline is also affirmed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph no. 1580.
 
Thus, clerical celibacy is clearly a discipline that the Church has the authority to regulate and govern. This fact bears witness against it being a tradition “demanded by the apostles.” So is clerical celibacy “really necessary and indispensable to the priesthood?” The answer is a resounding no.


​BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CHURCH
 
“In the Beginning…” (Jn 1:1) Sacred Scripture is very clear about the origin and history of Our Blessed Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ: His Ministry, His Apostles & Disciples and the establishment of His Church.  From Palestine and out of the East was the birth of Christ, the Messiah, and His Church.
 
He began His ministry at thirty years of age, seeking out The Twelve to follow Him and making them “fishers of men!” (Mt 4:19)  He spoke with conviction and emanated love to all He met. In Him was all the power of the Godhead as He performed great miracles among the people…raising the dead, healing the sick and feeding the multitudes with a handful of loaves and fishes.
 
During His three years of public ministry He established a Church.  He made it clear that it was of supernatural origin…being “not of this world” (Phil 3:20).  He promised that the “gates of hell would never prevail against His Church.” (Mt 16:18)  He endowed The Twelve by the ”laying on of hands” (1 Tim 4:14) giving them equal power and authority to “go and do likewise.” (Lk 10:37)  He told them, “He who sees you, sees Me!” (Jn 12:45)
 
Throughout His life it became clear that He was the Emmanuel, “God with us.” (Mt 1:23)  He was eventually sought after and hunted down…and one of His very own betrayed Him with a kiss.
 
Before His capture and death, He gave The Twelve the most precious gift of Himself…in the Holy Eucharist…to be a perpetual memorial and reality of His love.  He gave them and their Direct Successors authority to forgive sins and authority over all “heaven and earth.”  (Mt 28:18) He instructed them to go out into all the world teaching, witnessing, “holding fast to the traditions that had been taught,” (2 Thes 2:15)  and baptizing all “in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” (Mt 28:19)
 
Finally, He prayed for UNITY and that the Church He founded would be “one as He and His Father are One.” (Jn 17:21) He promised that He would send the Paraclete, the Comforter, the All Holy Good and Life-Giving Spirit to “instruct the Church in all Truth.” (Jn 15:26)  And, that, “He  [Christ] would be with us until the end of the Ages.” (Mt 28:20)
 
At the foot of the cross, before His death, Our Blessed Lord, gave us His Holy Mother, Mary, when He said to St. John, “behold your Mother”(Jn 19:27) and to His Mother, “behold your son.” (Jn 19:27) She, along with His ever presence in the Church in the Holy Eucharist, the “breaking of Bread,” (Acts 2:42) would be the keys to UNITY and the holding together of Her son’s Church!
 
Fifty days after Jesus rose from the dead, on the Feast of Pentecost, the All Holy Good and Life-Giving Spirit would descend upon the Apostles, the Disciples and His Holy Mother…giving birth to His Church.  On that day the Holy Spirit came with a rush of wind, as “tongues of fire,” (Acts 2:3) and lighted upon the heads of those present. 
 
This “Holy Fire” or Uncreated Light, was reminiscent of the great Light that shown around Our Lord on Mt Tabor at His Transfiguration and the great Light present in the tomb at His glorious resurrection from the dead.  (This Uncreated Light is most assuredly the great power that left the impressions on the Shroud of Turin.)
 
In actuality, this “Holy Fire,” the Uncreated Light, has been present with the Church from Old Testament times: surrounding the Holy Mountain Sinai, shining from the face of Moses after receiving the Ten Commandments & meeting God on the Mountain, the Burning Bush, the cloud of Fire leading the Chosen People and New Testament accounts as well.  TODAY, it is found at Christ’s Tomb!
 
After Pentecost and the coming of the Holy Spirit…which we refer to as the “birthday of the Church,”…”many were converted and baptized” (Acts 8:12) and accepted into the Church, according to the Sacred Scriptures.  As Christ, from his childhood and youth, “grew in wisdom, age and grace” (Lk 2:52) so did His One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church….into the mystical Body of Christ. 
 
The Twelve Apostles, along with the Disciple Paul, went into all corners of the World to spread the “Good News” of Jesus Christ and His Holy Church.  Great witness was given by The Twelve to the one Truth that proved, beyond any doubt, the divinity of Christ and promise…His resurrection from the Dead!  (Although there have been many great teachers & prophets in the world, e.g. Muhammad, Buddha, Confucius, etc…none, ever, rose from the dead!)
 
Each of the Apostles gladly laid down their lives for this Truth of Christ’s bodily resurrection from the dead!  They were crucified, skinned alive, burned in oil, tortured beyond words and would not deny the truth that Christ had risen from the dead.  Certainly, no one dies for a lie!  This witnessing to Christ and His Truth continued with many martyrs thru the ages and even into our present day.
 
The four “marks” of the Church Jesus founded became more evident each day.  It was ONE…it was HOLY…it was CATHOLIC and it was APOSTOLIC!
 
Throughout the next 300 years, under countless persecutions by the Roman Caesars, the Church that Christ established would not be suppressed or denied.  The Apostles, their Direct Successors & followers, met in early underground cemeteries, the catacombs.  They met in private homes and continued in the “Breaking of the Bread.” (Acts 2:42)  They also developed ministries, Liturgies and specific Rituals for the Mysteries (Sacraments) as Christ had taught them.
 
Now, it was at Antioch that the “Disciples were first called Christians.” (Acts 11:26) There became an exact order & discipline in His Church. The first “Council was held at Jerusalem” (Acts 4:5) and there were Holy Orders within the Church: Bishops, Priests, Deacons and Deaconesses.  The Church became so “universal” that it was uniquely termed as “catholic” by Saint Ignatius in the First Century.
 
Five Patriarchates or “administrative centers” were established by the Apostles.  St. James was appointed as the first Bishop of Jerusalem. St. Peter was the first Bishop of Antioch…later, traveling with St. Paul, to become the first Bishop of Rome. St. Andrew [St. Peter’s brother] was the first Bishop of Byzantium [later to be called Constantinople] and St. Mark was appointed as the first Bishop of Alexandria. Eventually, the Five Patriarchates of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem and Constantinople emerged along with their distinctive Patriarchs as the “teachers” and “centers” of Christianity and of Christ’s ONE Holy Catholic Church.

A Timeline of Church History...the Five Patriarchates...
PERSECUTION AND PRESERVATION IN THE EAST
Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria
UPHEAVEL AND SEPARATION IN THE WEST
Rome
In the East, the Crusaders of the 1200's drove an even greater wedge between the East and West.
Then in 1453 Constantinople fell to the Turks and a new era of persecution began for the Christians
in Greece and the Middle East.
(In 1917 a similar fate came upon Orthodox Christians in Russia when atheistic Communists came to Power.)
In 1596 some in the East placed themselves under the Bishop of Rome in the West (Uniates).

---

Since Rome in the West was the largest city & capital of the Empire, the Bishop of Rome was given great honor.  Sacred Scripture attests that it was normal to go to him when there was a dispute over a teaching that had been given by Christ…to help interpret or explain.  He was looked upon as “first among equals” (Mt 10:2) like a Chairman of the Board. He was also admonished at times. This is attested to by Sacred Scripture and in writings of the Church Fathers.
Order and Orthodox Faith was maintained throughout the Catholic Church, and, as the Church was not diminishing but growing, Constantine the Great was converted and issued the “Edict of Milan” in 313 AD which made it “legal” to be Christian.  The Church came out of hiding and many former sanctuaries to the Pagan Roman gods were converted into Christian Temples.
 
Each of the Five Patriarchates governed itself.  The “Deposit of Faith”…the Faith of the Apostles…was given to The Twelve by Our Lord, enlightened by the All Holy Good and Life-Giving Spirit on Pentecost, and held as common belief by all. The historical Church, the original Belief, the first Christian Assembly…was “Orthodox” (literally: “rightly believing” or “straight believe”) in Faith and “Catholic” (literally: “universal”) in Communion.
 
Because of poor communication throughout the world….as the Early Church was established in the Middle East, Galicia, Europe, India, Egypt, etc…many different traditions & “liturgical rites” developed.  Each, being valid & correct interpretations of the SAME TRUTH & FAITH held by all…but from different perspectives.
 
One thing that was not uniform and remained terribly controversial & detrimental to Church order, was the celebration date for Holy Pascha [Holy Passover] in the East/Easter in the West…to commemorate the Resurrection from the Dead of Our Blessed Lord.  It was celebrated according to pious customs, differently and at different times, in different parts of the world.   
 
In addition to religious controversy, the Imperial City of Rome became a great moral decay under the Caesars; to correct this, the Capital of the Empire was moved to Byzantium in the East (later named Constantinople after the Emperor)…and was designated as the New Rome…according to the Ecumenical Councils.
 
In 325 AD, at the behest of all Five Patriarchs, Emperor Constantine called together the Spiritual Leaders of the world to hold the First Ecumenical Council.  One of it’s primary purposes was to establish a firm date for the common celebration of Holy Pascha/Easter.  Nicæa also formulated the first part of the Nicene Creed.  Well known Church Fathers attended this first great Council of the Church including St. John Chrysostom, Patriarch of Constantinople & St. Nicholas of Myra…loved fondly as Santa Claus.
 
Over the next 500 years, the Church, being both East & West, together, would hold Seven Ecumenical Councils (in truth, Eight Ecumenical Councils…addressed later in this book).  They would be inspired by the All Holy Good and Life-Giving Spirit to give all Truth to the Church…just as Our Blessed Lord had promised:
 
First Ecumenical Council – Nicæa, Asia Minor, 325 AD – Formulated the First Part of the Nicene Creed. Fought the Arian Heresy by defining the divinity of the Son of God, set the Easter Date.
 
Second Ecumenical Council – Constantinople, 381 AD – Formulated the Second Part of the Nicene Creed, defining the divinity of the Holy Spirit.
 
  Third Ecumenical Council – Ephesus, Asia Minor, 431 AD – Defined Christ as the Incarnate Word of God and the Blessed Virgin Mary as Theotokos [Mother of God].
 
Fourth Ecumenical Council – Chalcedon, Asia Minor, 451 AD – Defined Christ as Perfect God and Perfect Man in One Person.
 
Fifth Ecumenical Council – Constantinople II, 553 AD – Reconfirmed the Doctrines of the Trinity and Christ.
 
Sixth Ecumenical Council – Constantinople III, 680 AD – Affirmed the True Humanity of Jesus by insisting upon the reality of His Human will and action.
 
Quinisext Council (Trullo) – Constantinople, 692 AD – Completed the 5th & 6th Ecumenical Councils.
 
Seventh Ecumenical Council – Nicæa, Asia Minor, 787 AD – Affirmed the propriety of Holy Icons as genuine expressions of the Christian Faith.
 
Eighth Ecumenical Council – Constantinople IV, 879 AD – Condemnation of the Filioque Addition and Doctrine. Rejection of all Western innovations & claims of universal jurisdiction by the papacy.

​During this time, both East & West, together, held firm the understanding that Ecumenical Councils were a continuation of the Holy Spirit guiding the Church in all Truth…as begun on the original day of Pentecost…and…clearly taught by all the Church Fathers.  The Councils were the fulfillment of Christ’s promise (along with the Holy Eucharist) that He would be with His Church until the end of the Ages.  After prayer, deliberation and more prayer, the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils were always believed to be infallible as delivered by the very mouth of God to His Church.
 
  These Councils were attended by representatives of the Five Patriarchates (interestingly, no Pope of Rome ever attended) and neither East nor West, alone, could speak for the entire Body of Christ in matters of dogma or belief.  This fact was affirmed for over 1,000 years by Ecumenical Councils, the Holy Canons & Church Fathers.
 
The Creed was given by the All Holy Good and Life-Giving Spirit to the First Ecumenical Council in Nicæa, and completed in 381 at the First Council of Constantinople; it was continuously affirmed by all Councils afterward.  This was the unadulterated “Faith of the Apostles,” the consensus & mind of the Church!  It was fully ratified, by East & West, together, as the “Symbol of Faith,” the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed. 
The Nicene Creed
 
I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible;
 
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-begotten, Begotten of the Father before all worlds, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, Begotten, not made; of one essence with the Father, by whom all things were made:
 
Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and was made man;
 
And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried;
 
And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures;
 
And ascended in heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of the Father;
 
And He shall come again with glory to judge the quick [living] and the dead, Whose kingdom shall have no end.
 
And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, Who proceedeth from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, Who spake by the Prophets;
 
And I believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
 
I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins.
 
I look for the Resurrection of the dead,
 
And the Life of the world to come.    Amen.
 
Truths of the Nicene Creed were specific, many confirmed in Sacred Scripture, most especially, when Jesus said,  the Holy Spirit is, “the Spirit of Truth who proceeds from the Father.” (Jn 15:26)
 
The words & meaning of the Nicene Creed, as affirmed over & over again by Seven Ecumenical Councils and stated in the Holy Canons, were never to be altered or changed!  Not one “iota” was to change or there would be formal anathemas in Christ’s Holy Church.
 
To this end, there came an upset from Spain, which was part of the Western Church under the Roman Patriarchate, wanting the “filioque” clause (Latin for “and of the Son”) to be inserted into the wording of the Creed.  Pressure was given, and after a local Council in Toledo, held in 589 AD, many adherents to the Church of the West succumbed and unfortunately added the “new wording” to the Creed! 
 
Pope St. Leo III was so furious, he had Silver Tablets erected at the entrance of St. Peter’s Basilica with the original wording of the Creed…as given by God at the Ecumenical Councils, WITHOUT THE ADDED “FILIOQUE.”  The tablets were written in Latin and in Greek.  It must also never be erased from the memory of Christ’s Holy Catholic Church, that the Pope of Rome added this declaration on the tablets: "I, Leo, put these here for love and protection of Orthodox Faith." ( "Agreed Statement of the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation, 25 October 2003")

 
Remember, there was in fact an Eighth Ecumenical Council, where East & West, together, decried the “filioque” addition to the Creed!  And, although the formal declarations of this Council were seemingly, lost to history…they will be addressed later in this book. During this same time, the Kyivan-Rus’ Grand Prince, Vlodymyr, was to make a decision to convert his vast lands to Christianity.  Not only was this a crucial turning point for his local people, but by embracing his new faith…lead to the Christianization of all the Ukrainian, Russian, and Byelorussian peoples.
 
Prince Vlodymyr wanted to unite his people under one religion; so, in 988 AD he sent emissaries to examine the major religions of the day. There was Judaism, Islam and the Orthodox Faith of Christianity known as the “Catholic Church”…as headquartered at Rome in the West and at Constantinople in the East.
 
Almost immediately, Prince Vlodymyr discounted Islam and Judaism because he didn’t like the dietary restrictions.  His emissaries visited both St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome and Hagia Sophia (Church of the Holy Wisdom) in Constantinople. The Liturgy in the West was beautiful, but what impressed the Grand Prince the most, was the dazzling worship his emissaries described seen in the East, at the Great Church of Constantinople: “We knew not whether we were in heaven or on earth, for surely there is no such splendor or beauty anywhere upon earth. We cannot describe it to you. Only we know that God dwells there among men, and that their Service surpasses the worship of all other places. We cannot forget that beauty.”
 
So Vlodymyr chose to accept the Orthodox Catholic Faith, as practiced in the East, because of its beautiful worship.  It was also the religion of the most powerful, wealthy, and civilized of Russia’s border nations, the Byzantine Empire.  Byzantine Emperors Basil II & Constantine were so impressed with the Grand Prince, that they offered their sister to him as a bride with the condition that he be baptized into the Orthodox Faith.
 
The reader must remember that this acceptance of Faith by Prince Vlodymyr was done before the Great Schism of 1054.  After his conversion, and that of the entire  Kyivan-Rus,’ their accepted Christianity was called “Orthodox.” Throughout the Ukrainian and Russian lands they remain as “Orthodox Christians” to this very day! This is proof that the East under Constantinople was the Catholic Church…the Early Church…established from the time of Christ and His Apostles.  Of course, the Roman Patriarch and the West was also an integral  part of this one Catholic Church.
 
In 988 AD Prince Vlodymyr was baptized. He then ordered all the inhabitants of Kiev to appear at the Dnieper River for baptism or be considered enemies of the kingdom.  The Orthodox Catholic Faith was born in that region and continued to flourish.  998-1998 was “The Millennium of Orthodox Christianity in the Ukraine!”
Upon accepting Christianity, the Grand Prince’s lifestyle was clearly affected.  He built churches, he destroyed idols, abolished the death penalty, protected the poor, established schools and lived in peace with neighboring nations. On his deathbed he gave all his possessions to the poor.
 
Vlodymyr Sviatoslavich was ruler of Kievan Rus' from 980 to 1015 and is fondly remembered as “ St. Vlodymyr the Great – Equal to the Apostles!”  [By embracing Christianity, he paved the way for a Russian republic which became one of the most Orthodox Christian nations in the world: a land with a rich history of churches and monasteries, the birthplace of numerous revered saints and martyrs, with a cherished and super abundant legacy of liturgical music, sacred iconography and spiritual literature.]
 
Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, unrest continued to fester in Christ’s Holy Church over the addition of the “filioque” to the Creed and technicalities such as what type of bread to use for the Eucharist & over the appointment of a Patriarch for Constantinople. [Which procedure had already been decided and formulated by the Ecumenical Councils.] Nevertheless, tensions grew between the East & West resulting in the excommunications between the Cardinal Legate of the Pope of Rome and the Legate of the Patriarch of Constantinople. Historical date of the Great Schism is 1054 AD; however, the excommunications were only between the individuals and NOT between the East & West jurisdictions of the ONE Church!
 
Then came the Crusades (1096-1291), initially set out by Rome to aid the Byzantine Empire from attacks by the Muslims and for control of the Holy Land, but which gave horrible witness by being representatives of the Church of Rome…most regrettably, with the Sack of Constantinople in 1204 AD!  Horrible desecrations took place against the Holy Eucharist, Sacred Vessels & Holy Icons were pillaged and taken for use at St. Mark’s in Venice and to Rome.  These horrendous events created lasting memories that have been etched in the minds and memories of Eastern Orthodox & Byzantine Rite Catholics. [Byzantine/Eastern Rite Catholics are Orthodox who were formerly under the jurisdiction of an Eastern Orthodox Patriarch but converted to the jurisdiction of the Pope who is Patriarch of the West.]
Yes, the Sack of Constantinople was crucial in tearing down  UNITY of Christ’s Holy Church; what once had been the most Christian of all Cities, Constantinople...with a Church on every corner …was torn apart by the Holy Crusaders from the Church of Rome!  This developed into a horrible suspicion that continues today with many in the East and a reason for many not trusting reunion. 
 
The Early Church, East & West, together, as the Undivided Catholic Church, always held, believed & taught, for over 1,000 years, that Ecumenical Councils were the supreme teaching authority of the Church! 
 
Spiritual Leaders, whether the Pope of Rome as the Patriarch of the West, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople or any of the Patriarchs of the East, were selected by God to defend & promote the teachings of the Councils.  And, as held by all, only an Ecumenical Council could change something…no Patriarch, East or West, was above that of an Ecumenical Council!
 
Furthermore, the East always kept their understanding of beliefs as undefined “mysteries” of Faith and left it at that.  The West has always been very legislative & juridical [like that of the old Roman Empire] and had to “define” everything.  Sadly, even seen today, definitions lead to more definitions, causing further questions and misunderstandings.  [Just look at what Pope Francis faces every time he makes a seemingly controversial statement or does a liturgical practice…that IS in historical conformity to the “Faith of the Apostles” and the consensus & mind of the Church…but is deemed as contrary to the present day “defined” understandings of the West, e.g. divorced receiving Holy Communion & a study for Female Deacons.]
 
In 1517 AD, divisions occurred in the West causing protests known as the “Protestant Reformation.”  [This was never experienced in the East.]  Many times, reasons for protesting in the West came about because long held “beliefs” conflicted with newly issued “definitions.”  Similarly, the East continued to have problems with the West because beliefs that had been held by both East & West, together…and confirmed by infallible Ecumenical Councils …continued to be further defined!  It is rumored that Martin Luther, the well known Catholic priest who formally protested against the West, had written to the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople.  There’s no record of a response.  What difference could it have made?
 
Such “definitions” contained in new expanded proclamations by the West included: the Immaculate Conception & Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Purgatory, Merits of the Saints, Indulgences and the Infallibility & Primacy [Universal Jurisdiction] of the Pope, the Bishop of Rome. 
 
Again, these proclamations contained Truths that were already held, believed and taught by both the East & West, together.  Sacred Scripture, Church Fathers & Infallible  Ecumenical Councils had already spoken centuries before!  The West should not have made “further definitions” to already defined and accepted Truths.
 
Now, after nearly 1,000 years of East & West being separated, there has been an ongoing dialogue with attempts for healing and reunion of the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church of Christ.  

(The Nicean Creed is the SYMBOL OF FAITH given from the Mouth of Almighty God through the Ecumenical Councils)

There have been many fruitful meetings between Popes of Rome and Ecumenical Patriarchs.  Great stride came in 1964 with the meeting of Blessed Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I [who had been the former Greek Orthodox Archbishop of North America and flown to Constantinople/Istanbul for his Enthronement in 1949 on President Truman’s plane].

Today, we must rightly understand that the “lifting of the anathemas” by Pope Paul and Patriarch Athenagoras in 1964 paved the way for the Church to be ONE, once again.  Remember, it was Blessed Pope Paul VI who clearly stated after Vatican Council II, that the papacy was “the biggest stumbling block to ecumenism.”  He also declared his purpose to re-establish together full unity in legitimate diversity: “God has granted us to receive in faith what the Apostles saw, understood, and proclaimed to us.  By Baptism, ‘we are one in Christ Jesus’  (Gal 3:28) In virtue of the Apostolic Succession, we are united more closely by the priesthood and the Eucharist.”
 
Pope St. John XXIII stated, as the former Bishop Angelo Roncalli, in a letter to a young Bulgarian Orthodox Christian, that, “…Catholics and Orthodox are not enemies but brothers.  We have the same Faith, and especially the Eucharist.  We are divided by some disagreements concerning the Divine Constitution of the Church of Jesus Christ. [e.g. role of the Patriarchates, the Pope as “first among equals” and a more conciliar working for the Church]  The persons who were the cause of these disagreements have been dead for centuries.  Let us abandon the old disputes, each in his own domain, let us work to make our brothers good by giving them good example.  Later on, through traveling along different paths, we shall achieve union among the churches to form together the true and unique Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ.”
 
And, during Vatican Council II, as said to Cardinals & Observers from many other Churches, the “Good Pope John” emphasized, that, “…we do not intend to conduct a trial of the past; we do not want to prove who was right or who was wrong; the faults were on both sides.  All we want to say is: Let us come together.  Let us put an end to our divisions.  Some people want to complicate simple matters.  I want to simplify complicated ones.  I don’t know where we are going.  Let us simply follow day by day whatever the Holy Spirit asks of us.”
                                                               
Pope St. John Paul II, in his “Ut Unum Sint,” was clear about fulfilling Christ’s mandate, saying, “…believers in Christ, united in following the footsteps of the martyrs, cannot remain divided…
 
For centuries East & West lived the life of ‘Sister Churches,’ and together held Ecumenical Councils which guarded the Deposit of Faith against all corruption.  And now, after a long period of division and mutual misunderstanding, the Lord is enabling us to discover ourselves as ‘Sister Churches’ once more, in spite of the obstacles which were once raised between us.”
 
Certainly, by having such wonderful Saints, our advocates in Heaven, who have given their fruitful opinions while on Earth, it should encourage Pope Francis and Patriarch Bartholomew to accomplish what they must do to fulfill Christ’s mandate for unity.
 
As Vatican Council II further pointed out: “From their very origins the Churches of the East have had a treasury from which the Church of the West has amply drawn for its liturgy, spiritual tradition and jurisprudence.”  Great inspiration of different experiences were found in the first millennium, “the development of different experiences of ecclesial life did not prevent Christians, through mutual relations, from continuing to feel certain that they were at home in any Church, because prayer of the one Father, through Christ in the Holy Spirit, rose from them all, in a marvelous variety of languages and melodies; all were gathered together to celebrate the Eucharist, the heart and model for the community regarding not only spirituality and the moral life, but also the Church’s very structure, in the variety of ministries and services under the leadership of the Bishop, Successor of the Apostles.  The first Councils are a eloquent witness to this enduring unity in diversity.”
 
Pope Francis, in his first Apostolic Exhortation “Evangelii Gaudium” confirmed, that, “all revealed truths derive from the same Divine Source are to be believed with the same faith…what shines forth is the beauty of the saving love of God made manifest in Jesus Christ…” and “the papacy and the central structure of  the universal Church need to hear the call to pastoral conversion…like the ancient patriarchal churches…to the concrete realization of the collegial spirit.”  
 
These statements by revered Popes of Rome are what the “New Evangelization” is all about.  Meanwhile, the prerogatives of the papacy and “Primacy of the Pope,” which gives the Bishop of Rome universal jurisdiction over the entire Church, remain the greatest stumbling blocks for the East.
 
Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, as the illustrious Theologian Professor Joseph Ratzinger, gave this solution: “Rome must not require more from the East with respect to the doctrine of the primacy issue than had been formulated and was lived in the first millennium.  When Patriarch Athenagoras, on July 25, 1967, on the occasion of the Pope’s visit to Constantinople, designated him as the successor of St. Peter, as the most esteemed among us, as one who presides in charity, this great church leader was expressing the essential content of the doctrine of the primacy as it was known in the first millennium. Rome need not ask for more.  Reunion could take place in this context, if on the one hand, the East would cease to oppose as heretical the developments that took place in the West in the second millennium and would accept the [Roman] Catholic Church as legitimate and orthodox in the form she had acquired in that development, while on the other hand, the West would recognize the Church of the East as orthodox and legitimate in the form she has always had.” 

 There was never a doubt on the part of East & West, together, that the Bishop of Rome had a role of primacy.  For a whole millennium, Christians were united, as Vatican Council II said, in a “brotherly fraternal communion of faith and sacramental life…if disagreements in belief and discipline arose among them, the Successor of St. Peter would act by common consent as moderator.”
 
Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox are the same Church founded by Christ and equally possess the same reliance on Sacred Scripture, the same preservation of Holy Traditions, the same love and respect for the Mother of God and, most especially, we are nourished by the same Blessed Lord in the Holy Eucharist—this is what makes us all truly Catholic—for in Christ there is no East or West but only One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church! 
 
“And the Brethren shall dwell together as one…” (Deut 25:5)
 
With nearly 2 BILLION under their guidance, Pope Francis and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew are the two, who, with the help of Almighty God, can change the World if they will walk together in Faith: celebrating Easter/Holy Pascha at the same time…professing the same Nicene Creed of the  “…One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church…”  Being “Orthodox” in the unchangeable “Deposit of Faith.”  Being “Catholic” in witness to all peoples of the Earth!  Both at the one altar...serving the same Christ!
 
Healing and UNITY of East & West will happen, as we close our eyes to differences and open our hearts to the thousand years of reality, that we, together, are the ONE Church and always have been! 
 
Regardless of THE GREAT LIE the devil has perpetrated with his perception of division, Roman Catholics & Eastern Orthodox, both East & West, even today, hold, believe & teach the same Orthodox Catholic Faith…the same beliefs…but understood from different perspectives…different points of view….& described in two different ways.  It’s the same Faith but where different terminology is used.  I believe these different view points are the extent of any so-called division…and the sad realities of separation…that exists between us!
 
“Mend your ways, encourage one another, live in harmony, and the God of love and peace will be with you.” (2 Cor 13:11)
 
The growth and even existence of Christ’s Holy Church is in peril today, more than ever before.  With the rise of radical Muslims and atrocities in the Middle East from beheadings to torture…even Christianity totally wiped out in areas that were once predominantly Christian…it becomes more urgent for Christ’s Holy Church to be ONE, to speak as ONE and to worship & believe as ONE.  Only, when we finally submit to the mandate & prayer of Christ, that “all may be one” will we be the needed witness to change the world.
 
Former Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I, Pope St. John XXIII, Blessed Pope Paul VI, Pope St. John Paul II, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and the present Pope Francis and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew have demonstrated great efforts to witness the Truths of the Church and “walk together in their Orthodox Catholic Faith.” 
 
Pope Francis and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew have made great strides in bringing the Church together.  They have met on numerous occasions & made spiritual advancements greater then any others in the past.  Both have a strong Faith and are willing to “speak their heart” regardless of the rebuke from some of their followers.  We pray that the All Holy Good and Life-Giving Spirit shields them from any negative influence from some members of the “Curia in the West” and some of the other “Patriarchs in the East” who, because of blindness [and possibly fear], do not “see” a UNITED One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church. Some refuse to see Christ’s ONE True Church as being “Orthodox in Faith” and “Catholic in Communion!”
 
Thankfully, Pope Francis and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew realize their specific roles as Primates of “Charity” and “Unity.”  They fully realize that both of these charismas must work together for the UNITY that Christ demands.
 
Francis wants a return to simpler things.  He openly helps the poor.  He wants return of conciliar government in the Western Church. Bartholomew wants to heal the great division.  He wants to help other Easterners overcome centuries of suspicions and distrust of the West.
We have stressed the 1,000 year old reality of East & West, together: being in all truth, the ONE True Church established by Jesus Christ…holding, believing & teaching the same “Deposit of Faith” the “Faith of the Apostles”…being the Catholic Church! Now, as this book attests, the true “MIRACLE OF ORTHODOXY” breaks any impasse…the Uncreated Light of the All Holy Good and Life-Giving Spirit--the miraculous light of the Resurrection—is with us, physically, each year, at the Tomb of Christ!  It is ready to confirm Truth and to bestow renewed graces upon the Pope & Ecumenical Patriarch, upon both East & West, together…and finally bring to fruition the mandate and prayer of Jesus, that, “all may be one.”
 
The East & West recognize the validity of each other’s Sacraments.  It’s the same Christ, the same Holy Eucharist, the same Blood of Christ flowing through our veins when we partake of Holy Communion at the altars of Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox  Catholic Churches throughout the World! 
 
Christ is the “fullness of Truth”…He is “Truth” and the Holy Eucharist is Christ…the “source and summit” of our Faith. We are already ONE and no promulgation from Pope or Patriarch…no mandate…no Ecumenical Council can make us more unified than the very Body & Blood of the Lord already has!
 
We have the great Truth of the Same Lord, Same Faith and Same Baptism, we cannot allow the devil to keep East & West separated and against Christ’s will for East & West to be ONE again.
 
Just as the first Pentecost brought together the Faithful and united and birthed the Holy Church…the All Holy Good and Life-Giving Spirit can and will do this again for His separated Church of today.  The Holy Spirit will “enkindle the hearts of the Faithful” through Pope Francis and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to bring about a new “Pentecost” that will fall upon the Earth! 
 
We must remind ourselves that East & West, together, was the One True Church founded by Our Lord and remained so for 1,000 years as “the pillar and bulwark of the Truth.”  (1 Tim 3:15)   What we call today, the “Eastern Orthodox Church,” comprises the Eastern jurisdictions or Patriarchates of the Church in the East, i.e. Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria & Constantinople, that were in full communion with the Church in the West.  The West was Orthodox in Faith as well, but more commonly called “Roman Catholic.”
 
We emphasize again the workings of the All Holy Good and Life-Giving Spirit and the Uncreated Light…the “Miracle of Orthodoxy”…the “Holy Fire” …which takes place every year in the Church of the Resurrection, the Holy Sepulchre, in Jerusalem on Holy Saturday just before Holy Pascha/Easter. [for nearly 2,000 years the miracle occurs only on Orthodox Easter, following the original determination date by the Council of Nicæa.]  This is the great annual MIRACLE that showers the Holy Church of Christ and confirms the date of Holy Pascha!  This is the “Great Miracle of the Orthodox Faith” that places Tongues of Fire upon our Spiritual Leaders!
 
Both Francis and Bartholomew have been chosen by Almighty God to be His humble servants.  They alone can make the decision …to be filled with the All Holy Good & Life-Giving Spirit and emerge strong and dedicated (like Moses coming down from Mount Sinai) to once and for all lay aside all the differences of separation and proclaim to the world the healing of Christ’s One Holy Catholic Church…East & West, TOGETHER!
​

Words of a Saint...
​"...Catholics and Orthodox are not enemies
but brothers.  We have the same Faith, and
especially the Eucharist.  We are divided by
some disagreements concerning the Divine
Constitution of the Church of Jesus Christ.
The persons who were the cause of these
disagreements have been dead for centuries.
Let us abandon the old disputes, each in his
own domain, let us work to make our brothers
good by giving them good example.  Later on,
through traveling along different paths, we
shall achieve union among the churches to
form together the true and unique Church
of Our Lord Jesus Christ."

JESUS FOUNDED ONLY ONE TRUE CHURCH
           
There’s no doubt that Jesus established a Church that would be in the world for all ages…
 
"Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am?  Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God.  And Jesus answering said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven.   And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."  (Mt 16:15-18)
 
            Our Lord established His Church so that each individual could have a personal relationship with Him and with each other:
 
            Sacred Scripture confirms that as members of His Church we  "are the body of Christ" (1 Cor 12:27).  In the words of His closest followers, we are to be one "for perfecting of the saints, for the word of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Until we all meet into the unity of faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God" (Eph 4:12-13).  We are to be that Body of Christ "where there is neither Gentile or Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian nor Scythian, bond nor free" (Col 3:11).  We are to be at peace with our brothers and sisters "as the elect of God" (Col 3:12) "bearing with one another and forgiving one another…even as the Lord hath forgiven you, so do you also" (Col 3:13). We are to "above all these things have charity, which is the bond of perfection.  And let the peace of Christ rejoice in our hearts, wherein also you are called in one body: and be ye thankful." (Col 3:14-15)
 
            The Apostles taught there is only "one Lord, one faith, one baptism. One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all" (Eph 4:5-6).  That for safety and salvation believers should remain as one Body of Christ "until we all meet into the unity of faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God…unto the fullness of Christ: That henceforth we be no more children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the wickedness of men, by cunning craftiness by which they lie in wait to deceive" (Eph 4:13-14).    
 
            Jesus promised to give His Church the Holy Spirit: "And I will ask the Father: and He shall give you another Paraclete, that He may abide with you forever: The spirit of truth…he shall abide with you and be in you" (Jn 14:16-17).  His promise was fulfilled on Pentecost:
"And when the days of the Pentecost were accomplished, they were all together in one place: And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a mighty wind coming: and it filled the whole house where they were sitting.  And there appeared to them parted tongues, as it were of fire; and it sat upon every one of them" (Acts 2:1-3).  [His promise continued with the Ecumenical Councils of the Undivided Church.]
 
            Thus, being filled with the Holy Spirit, the Apostles went forth to spread the "Good News" of Jesus Christ into all the land.  St. Paul confirmed, throughout his great missionary journeys, that the Church was “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone,”  (Eph 2:20) and instructing the brethren to “stand fast: and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word or by our Epistle.”  (2 Thes 2:14)
 
            Jesus Christ, the only Son of God and Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, established only ONE CHURCH.  He was alive and with his Twelve Apostles…ordaining them to His Sacred Ministry, establishing the valid Apostolic Succession & giving us the greatest of gifts: His Immaculate Body & Precious Blood in the Holy Eucharist!
 
            He instructed them very carefully: “Abide in Me, and I in you.  As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me.  I am the vine, you are the branches, He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.”  (Jn 15:4-5)  And, Christ prayed for His Church, “that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me…I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved me.”  (Jn 17:21,23)
 
There is no doubt that Jesus Christ founded only ONE True historical Church; and, it was founded between 30-33 AD. 
 
The ONE Church that Jesus personally established is recorded throughout the New Testament and in secular history: this Church was born on Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came down as “tongues of fire” (the Uncreated Light) to enlighten the Church and its Spiritual Leaders with strength, truth and power…this Church conducted the first Council of Jerusalem…this Church was the historical Church that was defended by Emperor Constantine and given freedoms to exist and grow by his Edict of Milan in 313 AD…this Church conducted the Seven Great Ecumenical Councils, where, Christ’s promise to send the All Holy Good and Life Giving Spirit was fulfilled, and all Truth was revealed to His ONE True Church.
 
            Jesus specifically promised, that, “the gates of hell” would not prevail against His Church…and, that it would exist until “the end of the ages!”   Therefore, the historical “brick & mortar” Church He founded…must still exist today…in unbroken continuity…from the day He established it…nearly 2,000 years ago!
 
            There has never been any justification to accept that the True Church, built on the rock of St. Peter, needed to be “restored” or returned to “Apostolic Christianity” due to any a great “falling away.”   And, it’s equally inconceivable & totally un-Scriptural to believe that the ONE Church Christ personally established simply disappeared! 
 
Furthermore, it only makes sense, that if one wants to be a sincere Christian, then, wouldn’t one want to be a part of that ONE True historical Church that Jesus Christ personally established?
 
It’s not enough to simply have a strong faith in Christ and be committed to the Bible alone; because, the ONE True Church established by Jesus was founded long BEFORE THE BIBLE!  The ONE True Church was historically in existence from the day Pentecost; it’s the True Church that codified [authorized] the Sacred Books and gave us the Bible and held to the Sacred Traditions [as mentioned by St. Paul] upon which all of Christianity is based.
 
 Therefore, one can’t say the Baptist Church was established by Christ…no, it was founded by John Smyth in 1605; or that the Methodists were established by Christ…no, they were founded by John Wesley in 1739; or that the Seventh Day Adventists were established by Christ…no, they were founded by Ellen White in 1860; or even that the World Wide Church of God was established by Christ…no, it was founded by Herbert Armstrong in 1933, and so on.
 
Some of the more well known Christian churches, along with their founders, with date & place of origin, are listed here:

 + Orthodox/East & Roman Catholic/West, together! +
Catholic                      Jesus Christ/Judea                 33 AD                
Lutheran                     Martin Luther/Germany           517   
 Mennonites                Menno Simons/Switzerland    1525
Swiss Reformed         Swingli/Switzerland                 1532     
Anglican                     King Henry/England                 1534  
Calvanism                   John Calvin/Switzerland        1536  
Presbyterian               John Knox/Scotland               1560  
Baptist                        John Smyth/Holland               1605  
Dutch Reformed         Michaelis Jones/Netherlands 1628
Quaker                       George Fox/England              1647 
Amish                         Jakob Ammann/Switzerland   1693  
Methodist                   John Wesley/England             1739
Moravian                    Count Zinendorf/Germany      1727
Congregational           John Wesley/England             1744
Brethren                      John Darby/England               1828
Latter-day Saints        Joseph Smith/USA                  1830
Seven Day Adventist  Ellen White/USA                     1860
Salvation Army           William Booth/England           1865
Jehovah’s Witness      Charles Russell/USA             1870
Christian Science       Mary Baker Eddy/USA            1879
Pentecostal                 Charles Parham/USA             1900
WW Church of God   Herbert Armstrong/USA           1933
Unification                 Sun Myung Moon/S Korea       1954
 
If you truly want to be a good Christian by following Jesus Christ, then you must be in the ONE True historical Church that Our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ personally established!
 
Among the 40,000 Christian denominations, only the Catholic Church, East & West, together, exists … historically …since being founded by Jesus. “Orthodox in Faith” & “Catholic in Communion!” Every other Christian church is an offshoot of the Catholic Church.  
 
That’s a Fact! If you visit the Holy Land today, you will find vibrant Christian communities that have existed since the Third and Fourth Centuries!  These churches and their congregations are in well know cities of Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Nazareth, Bethany etc…totally Eastern in their practice of liturgical rites and customs…under the jurisdiction the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem…which they always have been.  They have existed long before any Western influences by the Pope or the Roman Patriarchate and before any innovations to the “Nicene Creed” or the Orthodox Catholic Faith  were introduced after the Great Schism in 1054 AD.
 
To experience the committed faith of a truly persecuted people, look at Orthodox Christians in Russia and the Ukraine…more than 140 MILLION!  It’s nothing for families, with their children, to walk in the deep snow of winter for miles, and then stand for a 3 to 4 hour Divine Liturgy.  This is in a church building that has no pews and no air conditioning!  Parishioners refuse to be late!  There are no complaints or excuses…only regret and sorrow if unable to attend!
 
There is no “falling away” from the teachings of Jesus or His Church in these formerly Communist countries!  Their faith, worship and belief is that of the ONE True Church founded by Christ.
 
Jesus said His Church would be “the light of the world.” He then noted that “a city set on a hill cannot be hid” (Mt 5:14).  This means His Church is a visible/universal “Catholic” in communion.  It must have characteristics that clearly identify it & distinguish it from other churches.  It is changeless and thus “Orthodox” in Faith.  His Church will never be destroyed and never fall away from Him.
 
To know that you are in the ONE True Church founded by Jesus, you must see the four chief marks or qualities of His Church: 
 
Jesus established only ONE Church “so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one another” (Rom 12:5)…there’s only ONE Body of Christ manifest in UNITY by the Holy Eucharist “for we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread.” (1Cor 10:17)…and not a collection of differing church bodies. “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into the one body-whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves of free-and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.” (1Cor 12:13)
 
  Sacred Scripture says the Church is the “Bride of Christ” (Eph 5:23-32).  Jesus can have but one spouse.  His Church also teaches just one set of doctrines, which must be the same as those taught by The Twelve. “Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” (Jude 3).  This is the unity of belief to which the Scripture calls us. “Only let your conduct be worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of your affairs, that you stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospels.” And, “fulfill my joy by being likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. (Phil 1:27, 2:2).
 
“For as many of you as were baptized in Christ have put on Christ.  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”  (Gal 3:27,28)
 
Yes, Jesus founded only ONE True Church and through the Holy Eucharist and the Mysteries (Seven Sacraments), He has given us the medicine to heal the divisions that plague us.  Let those of us who were raised and nurtured as Eastern Orthodox Catholics or Roman Catholics rejoice, for we have found the True Faith!  For those who were not raised in the Church founded by Christ, we pray, they come to know Him and the Truths of His Catholic Church…”And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”  (Jn 8:32)
 
There is only ONE BODY…Jesus Christ is not decapitated!
 
As far as this separation between East & West, Jesus said, “I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life; no one comes to the Father but by Me.” (Jn 14:6)  He also fulfilled His promise to send the All Holy Good and Life Giving Spirit…”But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my Name, he will teach you all things.”  (Jn 14:15)  ALL OF THIS WAS DONE THROUGH THE ECUMENICAL COUNCIS OF THE UNDIVIDED CHURCH!
 
We again acknowledge that the greatest scourge of Christianity, is the separation of East & West in the Holy Church …which, East & West, together, constitute the ONE Body of Christ.
To be divided or to call ourselves Separated Brethren doesn’t make any sense if we really examine the Truths of our Faith.  There’s only ONE Body of Christ, and He’s not decapitated!
 
I affirm again and again…if both East & West possess a Valid Eucharist…then it’s the same Jesus Christ dwelling in the tabernacles of every Roman Catholic & Eastern Orthodox Church throughout the world!  It that’s TRUE, then we must affirmatively say the following:
 
When we receive Holy Communion…it’s the same Precious Blood flowing through my veins and as in yours! He’s the same Jesus Christ…the same “Way, Truth & Life”…and there’s no Pope or Patriarch, no Ecumenical Council, no Mandate or Apostolic Exhortation that can unite us any greater than that!
 
The Church founded by Jesus Christ, since the time of the Apostles, is—and has always been—“Orthodox” in Faith and “Catholic” in Communion!

 
Now, it’s time, for the Pope of Rome and the Ecumenical Patriarch of the Great Church of Constantinople to bring the East & West back into fully believing the fundamental Truths, as revealed by the Ecumenical Councils of the Undivided Church. 
 
These are the true Catholic Answers needed to unify and heal the Church of Christ.  This way, the ONE Body of Christ can be a witness to the world. 
 
If those of us with the Truth of Christ’s “Real Presence” in the Holy Eucharist remain separated…and our House remains out of order…how can we ever expect to welcome our Protestant brothers & sisters and others back Home again? 

​Finally, let us never forget, that we have a Holy Mother in Heaven who is constantly praying & interceding for us before the throne of her Divine Son: “How beautiful is the [Church & Domestic] family whose emblem is unity, love and faith.  It’s path is My path and My Mother is its support”  (Words of Our Blessed Lord, given through Our Lady of Soufanieh 26 November 2004.  More on this apparition later in this book.)

"The Church that Jesus
adopted is One Church,
because Jesus is One,
He who has divided it
has sinned and he who
has rejoiced in its division
has also sinned."
Our Lady of Soufanieh - Damascus, Syria 1983

​“TRUE FAITH” MUST BE ORTHODOX
 
The Church established by Jesus Christ was founded in the “Greek” world…it was the “Ekklesia”…from the Church Fathers to the Ecumenical Councils…in the East…it was Greek.
The Faith of the Early Church was referred to as being “ortho-doxa” or “Orthodox” which translated means “rightly believing,” “straight belief,” “right worship” or “straight praise.” 
 
The term was used in the Third and Fourth Centuries of the Church…remembering, that, for the first 1,000 years, when both East & West were together, the Christian belief was universally understood to be “Orthodox in Faith” and “Catholic in Communion.”
 
Hence, long before St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, called the Early Church “Catholic,” the Faith was always “Orthodox!”
 
Is it surprising to hear this?
 
Great semantical problems exist and it is that which has caused so much contention and confusion through the centuries.  In our present day, when one refers to “the Catholic Church,” to many, it means nothing more than the Roman Catholic Church, centered in the Vatican, under the Pope of Rome. 
 
And, to make it even more confusing, the reason Churches of the East were called “Orthodox” after Rome and Constantinople split was because they maintained the “right belief” or “true worship” that was held by BOTH East and West before the separation!  Why would they be called anything different?  They retained the Orthodox Faith!
 
Sadly, you don’t hear it stated that way?
 
Most people just don’t realize that “the Catholic Church,” refers to that historical body which was established personally by Our Lord and made up of equal parts from both Eastern and Western jurisdictions.  It remained that way for over a thousand years.  Of course, there were always differences but they were always worked out with the Faith remaining ONE.
 
After the Great Schism of 1054 AD, and the West was called the Roman Catholic Church…in its Roman Canon of the Mass, the word “catholic” was used meaning “universal” and the word “orthodox” was used meaning “believers of the true faith:”
in primis, quae tibi offerimus pro Ecclesia tua sancta catholica: quam pacificare, custodire, adunare et regere digneris toto orbe terrarum: una cum famulo tuo Pap nostro N. et Antistite nostro N. et omnibus orthodoxis atque catholicae et apostolicae fidei cultoribus.
 
We offer them for your holy catholic Church, watch over it, Lord, and guide it; grant it peace and unity throughout the world. We offer them for N. our Pope, for N. our bishop, and for all who hold and teach the catholic faith that comes to us from the apostles.

 
In the 1962 Missal of Pope St. John XXIII the English was a more exact translation and included the word “orthodox”:
 
in the first place we offer Thee for Thy Holy Catholic Church to which vouchsafe to grant peace, as also to preserve, unite, and govern it, throughout the world, together with Thy servant ____, our Pope, and____, our Bishop; and all orthodox believers and confessors of the Catholic and Apostolic Faith.

 
Fact is, the word “orthodox” was always part of the “official” Latin wording of the ancient Tridentine Roman Canon and in the Latin of the Novus Ordo Mass of Blessed Pope Paul VI in Eucharistic Prayer I; but, it was very rarely translated into English as “Orthodox!”  Was this part of the devil’s perception of deception?
 
Whether East or West, there’s nothing wrong about calling our Catholic Faith what it really is…and that is, “Orthodox!”  You hear the word “orthodox” used more & more, and most especially by Senior Apologist, Jimmy Akin, and Dr. David Anders, in [Roman] Catholic Media on Mother Angelica’s EWTN.
 
We’ve already discussed the True Church established by Christ as being ONE and, being truly “rightly believing” or Orthodox. The Catholic or “Universal” Faith is further confirmed by the remaining three chief marks or qualities of Christ’s Church:
 
By His grace Jesus makes the Church HOLY, just as He is holy. “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish.” (Eph 5:25-27)  This doesn’t mean that each member is always holy.  Jesus said there would be both good and bad members in the Church and not all the members would go to Heaven. 
 
“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in Heaven. 
 
Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in your name? And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.” (Matt. 7:21–23). 

What if I told you this truth?
When the Ecumenical Councils of Nicea and
Constantinople formulated the "Nicene Creed"
and gave us this "Symbol of Faith"...and when
we profess to believe in "One, Holy, Catholic
and Apostolic Church"...it was not meant to
mean the Roman Catholic Church...for the
Patriarchate of the West was one of the
five Ancient Patriarchates.  Rome's status
as it is today was not yet present in that early date.
In line were Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem & Alexandria.
The Councils made it clear that the Holy Church was
"Catholic" meaning it is "universal"
​and throughout all the world!

Jesus’ Church is called CATHOLIC ("universal" in Greek) because it is his gift to all people.  “And they sang a new song, saying: ‘You are worthy to take the scroll, and to open its seals; And have redeemed us to God by Your blood out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, and have made us kings and priests to our God: and we shall reign on the earth.” (Rev 5:9-10)
He told his apostles to go throughout the world and make disciples of "all nations."  Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”  (Matt. 28:19–20).
 
So, the Church Jesus established was known by its most common title, the “Catholic Church," at least as early as the year 107, when Ignatius of Antioch used that title to describe the ONE universal Church Jesus founded. Ignatius was a disciple of St. John the apostle.
 
Although there are distinct differences in how the same Truths are perceived & practiced…for 2,000 years the Catholic Church, both East & West, together, has carried out the mission of preaching the good news that Christ died for all men & that He wants all of us to be members of His universal family…”and if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” (Gal 3:28)
 
The Church Is APOSTOLIC. “Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone.”  (Eph. 2:19–20) The Church Jesus founded is apostolic because he appointed the Apostles to be the first leaders of the Church, and their Direct Successors were to be its future leaders.
           
The Apostles were the first bishops, and, since the First Century, there has been an unbroken line of Catholic bishops faithfully handing on what the Apostles taught the first Christians in Scripture and Oral Tradition.  “And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to  faithful men who will be able to teach others also.”  (2 Tim 2:2)
 
Jesus assured the Apostles and their Direct Successors, the Popes, Patriarchs and the Bishops, that, "He who hears you hears Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me." (Luke 10:16). Jesus promised to guide his Catholic Church into all truth…which is  “rightly believing” or Orthodox…on the day of Pentecost! 
“I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.  However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.”  (John 16:12–13)
 
1)         For over 1,000 years, the Catholic Church, East & West, together, held intact the fullness of Christ.  She professed the same Creed, the same “Symbol of Faith,” and maintained this “rightly believing” ORTHODOX FAITH in the face of almost indescribable persecution and suffering. 
 
2)         Within the gates of the Early Undivided Catholic Church, East & West, together, was maintained the totality of the New Testament Faith…the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church.
 
3)         Since the Great Schism in 1054 AD, the East, by the  mercy of God, has never reduced or diminished, never added to or altered the “Deposit of Faith” as transmitted by Christ to the Apostles…and, because of this, she has to this very day been officially called, the “Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church.”
 
4)         We pray for all Catholic Bishops—both Eastern Orthodox & Roman Catholic, together—throughout the world who rightly “divide the word of Thy truth.” (2 Tim 2:15)  And, we pray for all those who hold, profess and seek the ORTHODOX CATHOLIC FAITH that comes to us from the Apostles.

CHRIST GAVE AUTHORITY TO HIS CHURCH
 
            After Jesus established His Church, He instructed His Apostles and Disciples with The Great Commission: “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.   Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you.” (Mt 28:18-20)  This was said to all of them so they could carry on the Christian Faith with authority.
 
            Over the course of three years, as Our Lord gathered The Twelve together, He taught them and transmitted to them the complete body of His oral teachings.  He did this with the command that they would share His teachings with others; and, He gave all of them the promise of Divine assistance in their ministry ”…and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the age.”  (Mt 28:20)
 
            Scripture confirms, throughout the entire New Testament, that Jesus set up His apostolic teaching to be guaranteed by His Divine Authority. Christ’s ONE True Church, was to be the guardian & interpreter of the Sacred Scriptures. 
 
This rightly believing “Orthodox” faith was entrusted to His Apostles & Disciples, and, through their greatest of missionary efforts and immense growth, His Church would be truly “Catholic” …  universal … throughout all the world.
 
            He taught them the way of truth by His works and deeds, by His example and through the rituals He implemented:  “This is  My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” (Lk 22:19); “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”  (Jn 20:23); “whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”  (Matt 18:18); “make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them.”  (Matt 28:19) for “I give you the authority to trample on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy.”  (Lu 10:19)
 
            So, just like we have the four marks or qualities of the Church, i.e. One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic, we also have the various rituals and Apostolic traditions that have been passed down as well.  For those not raised in the Church…and for some that have been…it’s hard to believe that through the “Laying on of Hands” our priests have been entrusted to do the supernatural!  

​Empowered, by the workings of the All Holy Good and Life-Giving Spirit, our priests can call down [the Epiklesis] that same Holy Spirit to change simple bread & wine into the Immaculate Body & Precious Blood of Our Lord, can witness & bless the union of one man and one woman to be husband & wife, can pronounce absolution & forgiveness for sins, can do all He has commanded his servants to do.  According to Sacred Scripture, it is only within the Church that Christ established—being “Orthodox in Faith” and “Catholic in Communion”—that we have His guarantee of authentic authority.
And, this authority that Christ gave to His Church, and carried on by The Twelve & their Direct Successors, exists without question because it comes form the very mouth of God, “He who hears you hears Me, he who rejects you rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me.”  (Lu 10:16)  

Christ is the revelation of God, “he who has seen Me has seen the Father,”  (Jn 14:9) and “before Abraham was, I AM”  (Jn 8:58)  He, Jesus Christ, is the Emmanuel, “and they shall call His name, Emmanuel, which is translated, ‘God with us’”  (Matt 1:23)  He is, as the “Symbol of Faith” proclaims, “Begotten of the Father before all worlds, Light of Light, Very God of Very God!”

"I must think about a conversion of the papacy
...more faithful to the meaning which Jesus Christ
wished to give it and to present needs of evangelization."
Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudiam

CHRIST IS THE HOLY EUCHARIST
HE IS “THE WAY, THE TRUTH & THE LIFE”
 
On that night before He was betrayed, He took bread and wine into His Hands and gave back to us the most precious gift of Himself…His Immaculate Body and Precious Blood …so that He would be Emanuel…”God with us.”
 
To have a proper understanding of the Church one must have a proper understanding of the Holy Eucharist…the “Breaking of the Bread”  (Acts 2:42)…and what it actually means! 
 
FACT IS: Without the Orthodox or “rightly believing” understanding of the Holy Eucharist there can never be the UNITY that Our Lord prayed for and that He desired when He established His Church.

 
Only in the ONE True Church will you find the proper understanding of what Christ meant when He gave us His Body & Blood, saying “do this in memory of Me”
 
From the very institution of the Holy Eucharist, Jesus made His words very clear.  He said “this is My Body”…”this is My Blood”  (Lk 22:19)…He never said “this is a symbol of My Body” or “this is a symbol of my Blood.”  Christ was very clear, saying, “I am the Living Bread which came down from Heaven.  If anyone eats of this Bread, he will live forever; and the Bread that I shall give is My Flesh…Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the Flesh of the Son of man, and drink His Blood, you shall not have life in you.  Whoever eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood has eternal life...For My Flesh is food indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed.  He who eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood abides in Me and I in Him.”  (Jn 6:51,53:56)
 
Later in St. John, as Jesus was trying His best to make things perfectly clear to His Apostles, many turned away…charging Him with trying to promote cannibalism.  They departed from Him!  Interestingly, He DID NOT go running after them and attempt to clarify what He was most emphatically teaching to them.  Jesus meant exactly what He said…and after the words of consecration [words of Institution] are said by a validly ordained Priest in the unbroken Apostolic Succession…and there is the calling down of the All Holy Good and Life-Giving Spirit [the Elpiklesis in the Divine Liturgy]…the simply bread and wine becomes the “Body, Blood, Soul & Divinity” of Our Blessed Saviour!
 
St. Paul instructed the Church at Corinth…“For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread.  And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is My Body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in My Blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of Me…
 
For as often as you shall eat this Bread, and drink the Chalice, you shall show the death of the Lord, until He come. Therefore whosoever shall eat this Bread, or drink the Chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the Body and of the Blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that Bread, and drink of the Chalice.   For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the Body of the Lord. Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep.”  (1 Cor 1123:30)  A mere symbol of His Body & Blood would not have had the power to cause sickness and death!
 
Ignorance and poor Christian education keep our Protestant brothers & sisters from a correct understanding of the Holy Eucharist. Many rely upon on the Bible alone [Sola Scriptura] without correct interpretation from the Church.  [i.e. only relying on the Bible without the Sacred Traditions that have been passed down intact through His One, Holy Catholic & Apostolic Church]  
 
Only the Church Christ founded has the promise of Pentecost and true interpretation, ”…when He, the Spirit of truth, as come, He will guide you into all truth…”  (Jn 16:13)
 
“Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you,”  (Jn 6:54)  and because of this importance, the Early Church warned about being apart from the ONE Church that Jesus founded. 
 
“Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic, he will not inherit the Kingdom of God.  If any man walk about with strange doctrine, he cannot lie down with the passion.  Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of His Blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons,” said St. Ignatius of Antioch in his Epistle to the Philadelphians.
 
And, to the Ephesians, “Come together in common, one and all without exception in charity, in one faith and in one Jesus Christ, who is of the race of David according to the flesh, the son of man, and the Son of God, so that with undivided mind you may obey the bishop and the priests, and break one Bread which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote against death, enabling us to live forever in Jesus Christ.” 
 
Vatican Council II document “Lumen Gentium” said it simply,
“that, the Apostles, by accepting in the Upper Room Jesus’ invitation: ‘Take, eat’…’Drink of it, all of you,’  (Mt 26:26-27) entered for the first time into sacramental communion with Him.  From that time forward, until the end of the age, the Church is built up through sacramental communion with the Son of God who was sacrificed for our sake: ‘Do this in remembrance of Me…Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.’  (1 Cor 11:24-25; Lk 22:19)  By these same words, with which Jesus instituted the Holy Eucharist, He also consecrated the first bishops & priests to offer the Eucharistic Sacrifice.
 
When Our Lord transformed the bread & wine into His Body & Blood, He made possible our communion with Him through the Holy Eucharist.  Through this institution, Christ made it possible for us to be one with Him.  We are never closer to Christ than in the Holy Eucharist.  There is no way He comes closer to us than in the Eucharistic Sacrifice and in His abiding presence in the Holy Communion [Sacred Mysteries] that reside in the tabernacles through the world.  For the most Holy Eucharist contains the Church’s entire spiritual wealth: Christ Himself, our Passover and Living Bread.  Through His own flesh, now made living and life-giving by the Holy Spirit, He offers life to men.”
​

"We have seen the True Light,
we have received the
Heavenly Spirit,
We have found the True Faith
Wosthiping the
Undivided Trinity
For He has saved us!"
...Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom

Pope St. John Paul II affirmed, “the Eucharist thus appears as both the SOURCE AND THE SUMMIT of all evangelization, since its goal is the communion of mankind with Christ and in Him with the Father and the Holy Spirit.”
 
Every time the Divine Liturgy is celebrated, the Holy Eucharist, because it is Jesus Christ in the Flesh, becomes a great unifying power!  St. Paul spoke about this when preaching to the Church at Corinth: “the bread which we break,, is it not a communion in the Body of Christ?  Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.”  (1 Cor 10:16-17)
 
Profound and perceptive are the words of the great Church Father, St. John Chrysostom who was Patriarch of Constantinople: “For what is the bread?  It is the Body of Christ. And what do those who receive it become?  The Body of Christ – not many bodies but one body.  For as bread is completely one, though made up of many grains of wheat, and these, albeit unseen, remain nonetheless present, in such a way that their difference is not apparent since they have been made a perfect whole, so too are we mutually joined to one another and, together, united with Christ.”
 
            Members of the Roman Catholic & Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church believe in “Apostolic Succession”…and because of this, our priesthood is the same and we have the same valid Holy Mysteries (Sacraments).  We cannot deny the absolute & irrevocable fact that after we receive Holy Communion IT IS the same Blood of Jesus Christ flowing through our veins!  IT IS the same Jesus Christ, the same Lord & Saviour, residing in the tabernacles on the Holy Altars of every Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Church in the world!
 
Again, because of this irrefutable Truth…the same Christ, the same Body & Blood…no Pope, no Patriarch, no Ecumenical Council, no Mandate or Decree can ever unite us more than how Jesus Christ Himself, in the Holy Eucharist, already unites us!

 
            If both Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics believe in the Holy Eucharist—that it’s the same Body, Blood, Soul & Divinity of Jesus Christ—then, indeed the Church cannot be divided because  Christ is ONE.  You cannot have the head here and the rest of the body there! Christ cannot be divided and He promised that the "gates of Hell would not prevail"…and never divide… His Church.

​

The Patriarch of Jerusalem proclaims:  "CHRIST IS RISEN!"

THE “HOLY FIRE” IN JERUSALEM
PROOF FOR THE EXACT DATE OF EASTER
 
Jesus Christ is truly our great Lord, God and Saviour! 
 
He promised that miracles would indeed abound throughout His Holy Church—as signs of Truth for all the ages!  Sadly, great & verifiable ones like those presented in this book have been hidden from so many…for too long.
 
Next to the Holy Eucharist, the “Holy Fire”—also called the “MIRACLE OF ORTHODOXY”—is the greatest present day miracle that can be accessed by individuals anywhere the world.  It has been documented by believers and non-believers alike, it has persisted over the denial of skeptics…even that of great spiritual leaders… and, it has withstood the scrutiny of scientific investigation and proven NOT to be a hoax or product of trickery! 
 
This annual Miracle is virtually…unknown in the West!
 
On Holy Saturday believers gather in great crowds in the Church of the Holy Resurrection (The Holy Sepulchre).
 
            On this day fire comes down from Heaven and puts fire on lamps in the Church.
 
            This great miracle is the Holy Light from Heaven!  It’s the same fire that descended upon the heads of the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Twelve Apostles on the first Pentecost!  It’s the same powerful radiant Uncreated Light that emanated from Christ’s Sacred Body at the moment of His resurrection from the dead…leaving His image on the famed Shroud of Turin!  It’s the same miracle that will give the strength and courage for Pope Francis & Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to…finally… and most solemnly…proclaim to all the world…the UNITY of the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church!

Haris Skarlakidis has best documented this miraculous phenomenon in his book “Holy Fire” The Miracle of Holy Saturday At The Tomb Of Christ…it is documented extensively…
 
            The descent of the “Holy Fire” at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre (or Church of the Resurrection as it is also known) each Holy Saturday is a magnificent and highly venerated event that has been taking place for more than one and a half millennia.
 
            The ceremony of the “Holy Fire” has taken place ever year for nearly fifteen centuries, at the same time, in the same manner, and at the same location…but is virtually unknown in the West!
            It draws ever-growing crowds of pilgrims to the Holy City each Easter season. The ceremony surrounding "The Miracle of the ‘Holy Fire’" appears to be one of the oldest recurring Christian ceremonies in the world.  From the fourth century AD all the way up to our own time, sources recall the ceremony.
 
            But what exactly happens in the Holy Sepulchre Church on Easter Saturday? Why does it have such an impact on the Orthodox tradition? And why does it seem as if nobody has heard anything about this miracle in Protestant and Roman Catholic countries when it in many ways is more stunning than many Western miracles?
 
            Fact is, the miracle still occurs today in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in much the same manner as medieval sources reported it. It is no coincidence that millions of believers consider this the holiest place on earth: theologians, historians and archaeologists believe it includes both Golgotha, the little hill on which Jesus Christ was crucified, as well as the "new tomb" near Golgotha that received Christ's dead body, according to the Gospel account. It is on this same spot that Christ rose from the dead.
 
            Since Constantine the Great built The Church of the Holy Sepulchre in the middle of the fourth century, the church has been destroyed many times. Crusaders constructed much of the church that we see today. Around Jesus' tomb was erected a little chapel with two rooms, one little room in front of the tomb and the tomb itself, which holds no more than four people. It is this chapel that is the centre of the miraculous events.
 
            Being present at the celebration fully justifies the term "event," for on no other day of the year is the Holy Sepulchre Church so packed than on Orthodox Holy Pascha or Easter Saturday!  If one wishes to enter it, one has to reckon with six hours of queuing, and each year hundreds of people cannot enter because the crowds are so large.
 
Each year, at noon on Holy Saturday, a light descends on the tomb of Jesus, the Holy Sepulchre, and ignites the vigil lamp (the holy oil lamp) in the tomb’s interior, while at the same time a blue incandescence from the same light diffuses throughout the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, illuminating the entire area and spontaneously igniting the hanging vigil lamps, other lamps and candles held by Faithful around the church.
 
This event has been recorded for at least seventeen centuries. All the testimonies are described, in an impressively unanimous manner, a fire or light that MIRACULOUSLY DESCENDS from the sky before the waiting crowd and lights a lamp inside the empty tomb of Jesus. At the same time, that very light emerges and surfaces from within the rock of the tomb.

 This light is identified with the supernatural Uncreated Light that radiated inside the tomb of Jesus during his resurrection. The Holy Light appeared for the first time during the resurrection of Jesus Christ, on the evening of Holy Saturday though it was the Sunday of Easter according to the calendar, most likely on the date of 5 April AD 33. Today, two millennia later, the same Uncreated Light continues to appear at the same place: inside the tomb of Jesus but also outside it, during the service of Holy Saturday.
 
The author, has been present at the service a total of fifteen times. During the first of these, in April 1998, while standing in a very dark area of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, exactly under Golgotha, when the “Holy Fire” appeared he saw a bluish white incandescence diffuse over the space and a candle held by a pilgrim ignited spontaneously before his eyes.

Certainly, the fact that a candle lights of its own accord is subject to different interpretations that depend on the personal judgment and faith of each person. Well intentioned disbelief in extraordinary “supernatural” phenomena is necessary and in complete agreement with the command of John the Evangelist that prompts us to “test the spirits, to see whether they are from God.” However, in the case of the Holy Light it is an event that is not extraordinary or temporary, but has unfailingly been repeated for seventeen centuries, in a manner that is historically recorded.
For many, the appearance of the Holy Light every Holy Saturday at the tomb of Jesus is a true miracle. For others it is not. Opinions diverge and they are all respected…the rite of the “Holy Fire” was and continues to be one of the greatest events in the Eastern Orthodox Church drawing thousands of the faithful to Jerusalem each year primarily from Orthodox countries.
 
Up to the first half of the thirteenth century, the  ENTIRE CHRISTIAN WORLD celebrated the Miracle and accepted its validity.  Even after the Great Schism in 1054 AD, the Roman Catholic Church continued to accept the authenticity of this Great Miracle and its representatives participated with solemnity.

 
In 1238, however, Pope Gregory IX, suddenly and without any particular reason, decided in a special decree to denounce the miracle’s authenticity and prohibit the participation of Latin clergy in it.  Since then, the rite has been maintained exclusively by the Eastern Orthodox Church as well as by the rest of the Eastern Churches (i.e. Armenian, Coptic, Ethiopian, etc.). 
 
The author’s study is essentially a fascinating journey in time which takes place through the narratives and testimonies of dozens of travelers, chroniclers, Crusaders, Christian pilgrims and Muslim historians who either experienced the miracle of the Holy Fire first hand, or were informed of it by other eyewitnesses.
 
They give us the ability to travel in our minds many centuries back and to trace the unfamiliar aspects of the most splendid celebration of Christianity: that of the resurrection of Jesus Christ and the descent of the “Holy Fire.”
 
Many of the narratives are so analytical and detailed that they mentally transport us to the location where the event takes place. Of great interest are also the testimonies of prominent Arabs and Persians.  These are of great importance as they come from Muslims, whose religion contravenes the acceptance of the miracle.
Also impressive is the fact that in some of the accounts the Muslims of Jerusalem, even though of a different faith, participated in the thousands in the ritual of the “Holy Fire,” accepted the authenticity of the miracle, and transferred the light with great reverence to their mosques and homes where they kept it burning throughout the entire year.

The first person to behold the Holy Uncreated Light and the risen Christ (AD 33):
 
On the day that Christ’s burial took place, on the evening of Holy Friday, the Evangelist Matthew mentions that present were “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, who were sitting across from the tomb” (Matt. 27:61). The following day, at the same hour, on the evening of Holy Saturday, Mary Magdalene and “the other Mary” were again outside the tomb. Matthew the Evangelist writes:
 
“On Saturday evening, when the first day of the week had begun, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.”  (Matt. 28:1–2)
 
Christ’s resurrection took place while the tomb was sealed and soon after an angel of the Lord rolled away the stone. At that hour, while darkness was falling, Mary Magdalene and the “other Mary” arrived at the tomb of the God-Man. Matthew makes mention of the “other Mary” two times. It is apparent that he knows who she is, but he leaves her identity indefinite.
 
So, who is this “other Mary”?
 
According to the opinion of many Church Fathers, there is no doubt that this person is the Holy Mother of Jesus. This position has been maintained by many saints, such as: John Chrysostom,  Ephrem the Syrian,  Ambrose of Milan, Romanos the Melodist, Patriarch Sophronius I of Jerusalem, Gregory Palamas and Nikodemos of Mount Athos. St Gregory Palamas, the most important ecclesiastical writer of the fourteenth century, says the following:
 
“The Theotokos [Mother of God] came to the tomb of the Son of God first of all, having Mary Magdalene with her… Indeed, the Theotokos received the good news of the Lord’s resurrection before all other people, as was right and just, and she was the first to see the Risen One and take pleasure in his divine speech… and she was the first and only one to touch his immaculate feet, even though the evangelists do not say all this clearly, not wanting to bring forward his mother as a witness, so as not to give cause of suspicion to the unbelieving… With the phrase ‘and the other Mary’ he certainly means the Mother of God... The message-bearing angel was evidently Gabriel himself.”
 
The Evangelist Matthew left the identity of the “other Mary” indefinite because he did not want it to seem that Christ’s resurrection was an account being spread by his Mother.
 
Christ entrusted the event of the Resurrection to the women who boldly approached his tomb and proved more courageous than men. He appeared first to the Virgin Mary and then to Mary Magdalene. On the night of the Resurrection, he appeared only to women and in this way honored and exalted womankind. Through Eve came the Fall of manking and sorrow, while through the new Eve, the Blessed Virgin Mary, came ascent and joy.
           
St. Sophronius I, Patriarch of Jerusalem, writes something exquisitely important about the Virgin Mary: that she was not simply the one who first saw the risen Christ, but that she was the only one who experienced entirely the event of his resurrection, as he emerged like the Sun from sunless Hades.  Sophronius writes:
 
“When you saw the Sun rising from the hidden places of Hades as a pillar of light, illuminating the reaches of the universe, you, All-pure Daughter, were flooded with divine joy.”
 
The Light of the Resurrection enlightened the vast universe, and the Virgin Mary was the only one who saw the risen Christ emerging like Light from the depths of Hades. She was the first to experience the great honor and the utmost joy, not only because she was the Mother of the God-Man or because she was all pure, but because not many hours before she had experienced the greatest pain, when she saw her Son crucified on the Rock of Golgotha.
 
When the aged St Symeon, the God-Receiver, held the divine child in his arms, inside the Temple in Jerusalem, he turned to God and thanked him that he was made worthy to behold the newborn Savior of the world with his own eyes. Immediately afterward he turned to the Virgin Mary and told her: “A sword shall pierce through thy own soul also” (Luke 2:35). As St Cyril of Alexandria says, the sword the Righteous Symeon was speaking of was “the sword that cut down the Holy Virgin, when she saw them crucifying Him who was born from her belly.”
 
In other words, it was the incomprehensible pain that passed through her heart. Therefore, she who felt the pain the most was allowed to rejoice first.  St Sophronius writes concerning the moment the Virgin Mary met her risen Son:
 
“She alone saw you before the other women, Christ, shining with splendor from the tomb: the Virgin Mary, the only one who heard ‘Rejoice.’”
 
Sophronius and the other Holy Fathers who remark on the Virgin Mary meeting the risen Lord do not speak so without reason, but they express a mystical knowledge as they are led by the Holy Spirit. The Virgin Mary did not simply see the Light of the Resurrection, but, as St. Gregory Palamas writes, became light herself:
 
“The Virgin Mary received the great joy of the Resurrection and became entirely light, since she had reached utmost purity.”
 
Christ rose from the dead when night began to fall on Saturday, 4 April AD 33, when the Virgin Mary arrived at his tomb. The God-Man waited for his mother’s arrival, just as she waited for Him to fulfill his promise: that he would arise on the third day. This is why immediately after the setting of the Sun, as soon as the third day began, Sunday, the Virgin Mary set out for the tomb, asking Mary Magdalene to accompany her. She could not have gone any earlier, since it was the day of the Jewish Passover and any going about was strictly forbidden by Jewish law. Nor could she have gone later, in the dark, not only because it wasn’t proper, but for another reason as well: the Virgin Mary could not be away from the tomb during the first hours of the third day, seeing as she knew of and awaited her Son’s resurrection.
 
Christ arose the moment his Mother arrived at the sepulchre and in this way honored the person dearest to Him and, through her, elevated the human race. This is what St. Gregory Palamas maintains when he writes: “The Virgin Mary arrived at the tomb when the earthquake was taking place and the stone was rolled away and the tomb was opened… In any case I think that it was for her that the life-bearing tomb opened, since it was for her first and through her that all which is in heaven has been opened to us.”
St Nikodemos the Hagiorite asserts the same thing: “For her alone the earthquake happened and the Archangel Gabriel—her usual minister and sustainer and herald—came down from the heavens and rolled away the stone from the door of the tomb.”
 
The risen Jesus Christ appeared to his mother as night fell, the hour that the last dissipating rays of the sun were going out. Deep in the evening, when the stars began to shine in the sky, after the natural Sun had set, the Sun of Righteousness rose, Who never sets. It was this Sun that the Virgin Mary was the first to meet.
 
This same Uncreated Light & miracle of Christ’s resurrection from the dead has remained with us throughout the centuries…
 
The “Holy Fire” is first mentioned in documents dating from the 4th century.  One of them, Eusebius of Caesarea’s “History of the Church,” talks about it in 188 AD, when Narcissus was Bishop of Jerusalem.  It seems there was no oil for the lamps for the Easter Vigil and water miraculously burned in the oil lamps.  This may or not be the “Holy Fire,” but it certainly could have happened in the tomb itself.
 
The tomb had been buried by Emperor Hadrian in 135 AD and remained buried under a temple to the goddess Venus, a 2nd century Roman temple and shrine.  In 326 AD St. Helena, Emperor Constantine’s mother, heard of the sad neglect of the holy sites in Jerusalem; and, at the age of 78, she journeyed to the Holy Land specifically to venerate the holy places and find the True Cross of Jesus Christ.  Upon finding the Cross and the site of the Holy Sepulchre, the Vigil Services resumed.  The site was located because it had never been forgotten by the Christians of Jerusalem.

 
The next mention comes from that same time and is much clearer.  Around 385 AD, Egeria, a Celtic noble woman from Spain, traveled to the Holy Land.  In the account of her journey, she speaks of a ceremony at the Holy Sepulchre of Christ, where a light comes forth from the small chapel enclosing the tomb, by which the entire church is filled with an uncreated light.  St. John Damascene mentions the phenomenon in 780 AD.
 
According to the codex of Milan, the “Holy Fire” not only illuminated the interior chamber of the tomb but almost the entire Church of the Resurrection:
 
“It is customary in the great and sacred church of Jerusalem, the Holy Resurrection, every Holy Saturday a new and heavenly light comes and lights the oil lamps on the life giving and divine tomb… Suddenly, not only the interior of the sepulchre but the entire Church of the Resurrection glowed from the light. The patriarch chanted this hymn [Joyous Light] aloud as a thanksgiving, and from that time until this day, each person repeats this hymn and chants to God: ‘O Joyous Light of the holy glory of the immortal, heavenly, holy, blessed Father, O Jesus Christ: We that come to the setting of the sun, when we behold the evening light, praise Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, God…’”
 
We will see this phenomenon, that is, this simultaneous illumination of the interior section of the sepulchre and the entire church, documented many times.
 
The monk Bernard lived in Bretagne in France in the ninth century. In 867 he left for Jerusalem along with two other monks, one Italian and one Spanish. The first stop of their journey was Rome, where they met with Pope Nicholas I. Next they went on to the port of Taranto and after thirty days at sea they reached the port of Alexandria. From there they continued for the pyramids of Giza and after a few weeks they reached Jerusalem.
 
Bernard recorded the most significant events of his journey in a Latin chronicle which was discovered and published by the French scholar Jean Mabillon in 1672. The chronicle is preserved in three manuscripts. Regarding the “Holy Fire” in Jerusalem the French monk has the following to say:
 
“But it is worth saying what happens on Holy Saturday, the Vigil of Easter. In the morning the office begins in this church. Then, when it is over they go in singing ‘Kyrie eleison’ till an angel comes and kindles light in the lamps which hang above the sepulchre. The patriarch passes some of this light to the bishops and the rest of the people, and each one has light where he is standing. This patriarch, Theodosius, was so renowned for the sanctity of his life that the Christian people dragged him out of his monastery, fifteen miles from Jerusalem, and made him patriarch over all the Christians.”
 
The account of the French monk contributed to Western Europe hearing of the oil lamps at the Holy Tomb that light by themselves. Soon after, one of these oil lamps would travel to its final destination being the royal palace in England.
 
The Bishop of Caesarea, Arethas (c. 860–944), was born in Patrae in Greece and was one of the most scholarly theologians of the Greek Orthodox Church. He was a scholar who loved antiquity and one of the most significant personalities of the intellectual flowering in Byzantium, the so-called Macedonian Renaissance. In one of his letters, written at the beginning of the tenth century and addressed to the emir of Damascus, he makes reference to the miracle of the “Holy Fire.” In his most valuable letter, Arethas writes:
 
“But also to this day, His sacred and true tomb works miracles every year on the day of Resurrection. Because once every lamp in Jerusalem is extinguished, where His Holy Sepulchre is located, the Christians make a lamp adorned and wrapped with fabric and red silk. And while the emir of Jerusalem is present near the Holy Sepulchre, with the entrance being sealed by him, and while the Christians are in the Church of the Resurrection chanting ‘Kyrie Eleison,’ suddenly lightning is produced and the lamp is lit with fire. And from this fire they receive and light [their lamps] once again, all residents of Jerusalem.”

 
The attestation of the Greek bishop is of great significance for two reasons: first, because he is the first witness to report that during the rite of the Holy Fire the Holy Sepulchre remained empty, once it had been sealed by a Muslim emir of Jerusalem; and second, because he is also the first witness to report that the Holy Fire descended in the form of lightning, which ignited the vigil lamp.
The Holy Fire is the 'miracle for unity' of God's people...
 
Many Muslims believed in the Orthodox miracle of the Holy Light from Jerusalem and the Resurrection of Jesus Christ!  The Dome of the Rock is considered to be the third most sacred mosque in the Muslim world after Mecca and Medina.  This construction was finished in the year 691 AD.  Under the dome is a rock from which Muslims believe their prophet, Mohammed, ascended to the heavens after his night journey to Jerusalem (Qur'an 17).  In the mid-tenth century the Muslim imam lit the lamps of this mosque with a flame from the “Holy Fire” every Holy Saturday.
 
All this took place in the first half of the tenth century, at a time when the Christian and Muslim worlds were in great conflict when the Muslim religion was very severe.  Considering the austerity of the Muslim religion' it seems unbelievable that the most significant miracle of the Christian world, which is associated with the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, was accepted by the Muslims of Jerusalem and celebrated with the official participation of the city's political and religious leaders.
 
The Arab jurist Ibn al-Qass was born at the end of the ninth century and died in 946. He had excellent knowledge of Islamic law and was the author of many theological works. Among these is the work Kitab dala’il al-qibla in which is recorded, for the first time, a highly significant description of the rite of the “Holy Fire:”
 
“On the Easter of the Christians, on Holy Saturday, the faithful exit from the place of the tomb in order to gather around the rock that is surrounded by railing. From there they look upon the tomb and all together they pray and kneel before the Almighty God, from the Morning Prayer until the setting of the sun. The emir and the imam of the mosque are also present. The sultan locks the door to the tomb. They all remain still until they see a light similar to a white fire which comes from the interior of the tomb. The sultan then opens the door and enters holding a candle, which he lights with this fire and then emerges. The flame of this lit candle does not burn. He gives it to the imam who transfers it and lights the lamps of the mosque. Once this candle has passed to three hands, then it burns and is transformed into a [regular] flame. Then they compose and deliver to the sultan a report verifying that the fire had come on such an hour and day.”

The report by Ibn al-Qass is very significant because it comes from a particularly devout scholar of Muslim law. As he records, the Muslim leaders of Jerusalem have absolute control of the rite. Present are the imam of the mosque, the emir and the sultan, who is the only one who holds the keys to the tomb.
 
During the ceremony the faithful pray and the Orthodox Patriarch embarks on the traditional invocation for the descent of the “Holy Fire” while remaining outside the tomb, before the entire mass of people.
 
Everything takes place in the open. The sepulchre is locked and empty. And suddenly a white light emerges from the interior of the tomb. It is the supernatural light that comes from the actual tomb itself. Then the sultan unlocks the tomb and enters to light his candle, and when he emerges he delivers it to the imam. The Muslims participate to such an extent and in such an official capacity, that one would think that the rite is theirs.
 
Of extreme significance is also the testimony that the holy flame does not burn. Ibn al-Qass fully distinguishes the light that appears in the tomb interior from the flame that is received by the faithful a few moments later on their candles. His report is exceptionally precise. He uses the specific Arabic words which mean “light” and the word which means “fire.” When the “Holy Light” appears it is deemed by the Muslims to be a divine white light that is not at all related to earthly fire. When, however, this divine flame spreads from candle to candle, after “three hands” as he states, in other words within a few seconds, the heavenly light becomes earthly. It is transformed from divine light to earthly fire.
 
When the sultan exits with the lit candle from the interior of the Holy Sepulchre, the flame of his candle does not burn. Ibn al-Qass uses the phrase which means “is not burned” or “does not burn.” According to Gamal al-Tahir there is no doubt that the meaning of the phrase is “the flame of the candle does not burn.”  This is the familiar phenomenon that the “Holy Fire” does not burn, which is still observed to this day.
 
On 18 October 1009, Fatimid Caliph Al-Hakin bi-Amir Allah ordered the complete destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Tomb of Christ as well as random arrests and executions of the Christians in Jerusalem.  This is the event that started the Crusades.  Al-Hakim, “…was aggrieved by the scale of the Easter pilgrimage to Jerusalem, which was caused specially by the annual miracle of the ‘Holy Fire’ within the Sepulchre.”
 
The Syriac historian and poet Ibn-al-Qalanisi (1070-1160), in his work History of Damascus, explains the reason that led al-Hakim to the destruction of the church in Jerusalem.  He mentions that every year, during the period of Easter, thousands of Christians from Egypt formed large caravans with camels and traveled from Cairo to Jerusalem to attend the “Holy Fire” ceremony.  The miracle’s fame had spread to the entire Muslim world and acted as a magnet that attracted thousands of Christians but many Muslims as well.
 
According to the narrative of al-Qalanisi, Caliph al-Hakim was informed that the miracle was a fraudulent trick of the Christians and in order to stop the large stream of pilgrims that left from his city he decided to level the church.  This is the one and only reason given by al-Qalanisi in his work History of Damascus.  The Syrian historian writes:
 
“It was the current custom of the Christians of Egypt to go every year to Jerusalem in great camel litters to celebrate Easter there in the ‘Church of Great Pilgrimage’…Al-Hakim requested of the missionary Qutekin al-Adudi, who was present at court, information on why the Christians went to that church.  Qutekin knew about the matter by reason of the frequent trips he had made to Syria and his frequent correspondence in al-Hakim’s name with the governors there. ‘This church,’ he told them, ‘is near the al-Aqsa mosque. The Christians are extremely devoted to it and go there every Easter form every land…They hang their lamps on the altar, and then by a trick they cause fire to appear…Those who see it imagine that the fire has come down from heaven and lit the lamps.’  When al-Hakim had heard this explanation, he summoned Bish ibn Sawar, the secretary, and ordered him to write to the prefect of Ramle and to Ya’kub the missionary agent and tell them to go to Jerusalem, go to the ‘Church of Great Pilgrimage,’ remove everything and demolish it.”
 
            Prior to the destruction, the Christians of Egypt learned of the caliph’s plans and notified the Patriarch of Jerusalem, who was able to remove all sacred relics from the church.  Al-Qalanisi states that the destructive craze was so great, that “the building was destroyed stone by stone.” The Arab chronicler Yahya ibn Sa’id makes mention of the huge destruction suffered at the Holy Sepulchre: Ibn Abi Zahis tried to destroy the Holy Sepulchre and to wipe out every trace of it, and so he smashed most of it and had it removed.”
 
            Al-Hakim’s men destroyed the ceiling of the cave of the tomb as well as the rock wall of the entrance, but they were not successful in demolishing the stone core of the tomb on which the body of Jesus was laid.  Two French chroniclers, Glaber and Ademar, give us valuable information.  Glaber says that, “the Muslims tried to destroy the raised burial stone that was in the tomb’s chamber with iron hammers but were unsuccessful.”  Ademar likewise says that, the al-Hakim’s men were not able to break the stone core of the tomb and that is why they set fire to it, but the rock “remained immovable and in one piece as though it were made of diamond.”
 
It was Al-Hakim’s purpose to destroy the name & memory of Christ by destroying the Tomb and everything related to it!  
 
In the year 1095, at the Council of Clermont in France, Pope Urban II officially declared the start of the First Crusade. His sermon took place in an outdoor area outside the walls of the city as there was no enclosed space that could hold the masses of people who had turned out.  Among those who attended was the French priest and poet Baldric (1050–1130), who at the time was abbot of Bourgueil Abbey. In 1107 Baldric was made bishop of Dol and, around 1108, he decided to include the speech of Pope Urban II in his work Historia Ierosolimitana. According to Baldric, Pope Urban declared at the Council of Clermont the value of the miracle of the “Holy Fire:”
 
“Of holy Jerusalem…This very city in which, as you all know, Christ Himself suffered for us, because our sins demanded…in that place…He died for us; there He is buried.  How precious would be the longed for, incomparable place of the Lord’s burial, even if God failed there to perform the yearly miracle. For in the days of His Passion [Holy Week] all the lights in the sepulchre and round about in the church, which have been extinguished, are re-lighted by divine command. Whose heart is so stony, brethren, that it is not touched by so great a miracle? Believe me, that man is bestial and senseless whose heart such divinely manifest grace does not move to faith!”

Pope Urban II, who today is honored by the title “Blessed” by the Roman Catholic Church, publicly declared the glory and validity of the “MIRACLE OF ORTHODOXY” the miracle of the “HOLY FIRE” in the most famous speech ever known in the medieval world!
At the end of August 1098, after a forty day siege, the Fatimids of Egypt, with the Vizier al-Afdal as their leader, leveled one section of the walls around Jerusalem with their catapults and assailed the city. The defeated Turks surrendered and began to flee. It was an inter-Muslim conflict between the Shiite Egyptians and the Sunni Turks.
 
The next Easter, the city’s new conqueror and king of Egypt, al-Afdal, decided to go from Cairo to Jerusalem in order to reinforce the city’s fortification, due to the Crusaders impending invasion. Moreover, he decided to participate in the service of the “Holy Fire.” Now that the city was in his possession it was an opportunity for him to see the famed miracle for himself. However, the reason for his visit was not at all good.
 
Ninety years after the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre by Caliph al-Hakim—who intended to put an end to the miracle of the “Holy Fire”—the new king of Egypt, imitating his predecessor, also planned on abolishing the miracle. Hoping to achieve his goal, on Holy Saturday 1099, the Vizier al-Afdal entered the tomb of Jesus and ordered that the wicks in all the oil lamps be replaced by iron “wicks.” This is exactly what a certain sultan did at the time when Athanasius I (929–37) was Patriarch of Jerusalem, also in order to put an end to the miracle, as were reported.  Now, a century and a half later, the same tactic was being repeated by King al-Afdal.
 
The events of that Holy Saturday in 1099 are written down in the Latin chronicle of an anonymous monk of the monastery of Monte Cassino in Italy. This chronicle, which according to Steven Runciman was written around 1130, was based on accounts from the First Crusade, as well as oral testimonies of French Crusaders.
 
The manuscript containing the account was discovered in the monastery of Monte Cassino by the French monastic scholar and historian Jean Mabillon, who is considered one of the founding fathers of the science of paleography. Mabillon gave the chronicle the title Belli Sacri Historia (History of the Holy War) and in 1687 he included it in his work Museum Italicum.
 
It is apparent that the person who recounts the events of the ceremony in 1099 was an eyewitness, since he recorded specific conversations and also mentions other eyewitnesses that attended the ceremony with him. Among them are three Roman Catholic Bishops and one Latin Saint, William the Hermit, who prayed for the accomplishment of the miracle. They were all captives of the Egyptian king who had brought them to Jerusalem from Cairo.
 
To this day the chronicle Belli Sacri Historia has not been translated into any language. The translation of the Latin excerpt was made by Professor Laurent Motte. The anonymous author writes the following:
 
“It was the time of the Great Lenten fast. And while the day of the feast of Easter had drawn near, the king [of Egypt] called the captives, whom we had mentioned earlier, and he told them: ‘I cannot believe that on the Saturday before Easter, this fire, as they tell me, ignites on its own the oil lamps in the tomb of the Lord.’ However, William the Hermit, his companions and other local Christians reassured him with great insistence that this was the truth. The king then answered them: ‘If this is the truth, which you insist it is, then I want these occurrences to be manifest in my pres- ence, before my eyes, so that the whole truth may be revealed, and on the condition that the oil lamps that are to receive the fire be prepared by me. Otherwise, never, and in no other way, will I believe that this phenomenon is real.’ William, his companions and the other faithful reassured [him] that this occurrence was due to the power of Christ and that this would soon be shown. And the king, when the feast of Easter drew near, ordered that on Holy Saturday the oil lamps be filled with oil and in them placed iron wicks, before his eyes. When the Christians learned that the king had placed iron wicks in the oil lamps, they were troubled and sank into the darkness of doubt and faithlessness. However, William the Hermit, a man of great faith and devoted to God, seeing that those around him did not have the courage of faith, spoke to them with words of hope and uplifted their spirits and faith. And while the rest of those present were praying to the Lord with more fervor than usual, so that, for the glory of his name, the oil lamps prepared by the king would light, suddenly, around the ninth hour, the fire came down from heaven, passed upon the oil lamps and lit all the metal wicks. And immediately, the flame began to burn with such brightness, it was as though the wicks were made of papyrus. This great miracle, which became manifest in such a divine manner, the [Egyptian] king accepted with infinite awe, and all the Christians, upon seeing it, sent up praise and thanksgiving to God.”
 
The account of this unknown writer is exceptionally detailed and it is obvious that it comes from a Latin cleric or Crusader who experienced these incidents— apparently one of the captives brought from Cairo. King al-Afdal accepted the miracle with “infinite awe” and, immediately after the ceremony, freed all the Christian captives, who then returned to the camp of the Crusaders. This means that the lighting of the metal wicks by the “Holy Fire” was something that became known straightaway in the ranks of the Crusaders, who, at that time, were prepared to launch their final attack on Jerusalem.
 
After the conclusion of the First Crusade, news of the incident spread throughout medieval Europe (chiefly France) from the Crusaders that returned to their cities. On account of this oral dissemination, the miraculous event that we just examined was recorded and is confirmed by two other writers of the period: the French Cardinal and poet Gilon, as well as the French historian Guibert—confirmation which has great worth for our investigation.

 
The Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, William I (Guillaume de Messines), was born in the town of Mesen in Flanders, Belgium. After he lived for many years as a hermit in the area of Tours in central France, he left in 1129 for Jerusalem with a group of pilgrims who were headed by Fulk, Count of Anjou.
 
In the spring of 1130, the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, Stephen, reposed, and the hermit clergyman William was chosen as his successor.  The quick assent to the patriarchal throne for a former Flemish hermit, who lived in Jerusalem for only a few months, is undoubtedly an unexpected turn of events.
           
The reason for this development is written in the Latin chronicle from the monastery of Fontaines-les-Blanches, which was completed around the year 1200 by Peregrinus, the seventh abbot of the monastery. This archive, which exists only in one single manuscript, has never been translated. The following passage was translated by Professor Laurent Motte. Abbot Peregrinus writes:
 
“At that time an event took place that is worthy of our memory. Indeed, the clergyman William, to whom we referred earlier, enlightened by divine inspiration due to the love in his heart, asked of the leader Godfrey and of the archbishop of Tours permission to travel to Jerusalem. And after he received it, he set off for what he desired. When the time arrived for the service of Holy Saturday before Easter, he moved towards the Lord’s tomb with the other faithful, desiring to participate in the accustomed miracle, during which the light that is sent by God on that day brought joy every year to those gathered together. And be- fore the eyes of all those present, who were full of joy and amazement, a candle held by a person there lit through the intervention of this divine virtue, and it began to shine. Nevertheless, since the authorities asked the person who he was and where he was from, he did not decline to answer. And he said that he was of French descent, that he had come from Tours and that he was a hermit from Fontaines. And since at around that time the [Latin] patriarch had died and the throne of Jerusalem was still empty, the clergy and the people, moved by such a great miracle, immediately and unanimously elected him patriarch.”
 
The hermit William, because of his virtuous and ascetic life, attracted the “Holy Fire.” The miraculous and spontaneous lighting of the candle he was holding in his hand, before the eyes of the other Roman Catholics, stood as the reason to first elect him as the abbot of the Latin brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre and later as Patriarch of Jerusalem. His unanimous and immediate election to these positions shows yet again the weight the miracle carried but also its great influence over the Faithful.
After Pope Urban II, William the Hermit and Blessed Richard of St Vanne, Peter the Venerable (c. 1092–1156) is the fourth individual who praised the miracle of the “Holy Fire” and was subsequently honored with a title of sainthood by the Roman Catholic Church. After his death he was declared a saint by his brotherhood and the people, but his name was not included officially in the list of saints. In 1862 Pope Pius IX restored the order and officially approved his sainthood, as it had been decided in the twelfth century. His memory is honored on 25 December.
 
Peter the Venerable was born to Raingarde in Auvergne, France and was the abbot of the monastery of Cluny. He was known for his wisdom and erudition and his works are included among the most important theological works of the twelfth century. Among these are included dozens of theological essays, letters, hymns and poems. In two of his works he makes reference to the miracle of the “Holy Fire.” The first, entitled Against the Inveterate Obstinacy of the Jews, was written around 1144 and no translation has been published. The translation that follows is by Dr. Demosthenes Georgobasiles. The French abbot writes:
 
“Not much time had passed and then a heavenly light shone in the darkness of the irreverent men, and from above a visible fire illuminated the earth on Holy Saturday, the day before Easter Sunday of the Resurrection, and the tomb of the Savior was radiant.”
 
Peter the Venerable makes reference to two miraculous events which were simultaneous: a light shone from the heavens and the tomb of Jesus radiated with a visible light.
 
His second work is entitled Sermo in Laudem Sepulchri Domini (Doxology at the sepulchre of the Lord) and is a sermon he pronounced in 1146 before the Pope of Rome. The French abbot writes:
 
“And so at the present time, O Lord, omnipotent Creator... You direct a fire to proceed from heaven to the grave of your Son, which only they respect and revere; with that same fire you set their hearts on fire with love for you; with its splendour do you enlighten them, now and forever. And since the perfidious enemies of your Christ disparage his death more than his other acts of humility, in adorning the monument of his death with a miracle of such light do you demonstrate how great is the darkness of error in which they are confined. While they despise his death above all, you honour the monument of his death above all; what they consider particularly shameful you prove to be especially glorious by means of so wonderful a sign… With a fire sent from heaven do you irradiate the grave in which your Son, offered as a sacrifice on our behalf, lay at rest.”
 
St. Peter the Venerable believes that the Heavenly Father directs the “Holy Fire” from the heavens to descend on the tomb of his Son, and with that same fire lights the flame of love in the hearts of his children. His writings extol highly the miracle’s magnificence. If only the leaders of the Roman Catholic Church in the subsequent centuries had safeguarded the words of the Latin saint.
 
Saladin, or Salah ad-Din (1138–93), is deemed one of the greatest heroes of the Islamic world. He was sultan of Egypt and Syria-Palestine and his empire extended from the Nile to the Euphrates River. He was born of Kurdish parents in northern Iraq and as a child demonstrated a great inclination towards religious studies.
 
In his personal life he consistently followed the principles of a moral and virtuous life that originate from the Islamic religion. He always adhered to treaties with his opponents and behaved with respect even to prisoners. According to his teacher and biographer, Ibn Shaddad, Saladin’s generosity and compassion were known even in the camps of his enemies. When a Frenchwoman, the wife of a Crusader, asked for his help so that her young daughter who had been abducted by the Muslims could be returned to her, Saladin immediately came to her assistance.
 
Ibn Shaddad in his work The History of Saladin makes a brief reference to the Holy Fire, stating the following: “This tomb is the centre of their pilgrimage and is the one on which they believe the fire descends each year at one of their festivals.”
 
Saladin managed to unite the Muslims of the Middle East, from northern Iraq to Egypt, and to turn them against the Crusaders. On 3 July 1187, the eve of the crucial Battle of Hattin, the King of the Crusaders, Guy de Lusignan, led approximately 20,000 Crusaders against Saladin through the desert west of the Sea of Galilee. His decision to fight in an unknown and hostile battlefield was equal to suicide. Saladin, after a feigned withdrawal, misled and trapped the Crusaders in the hot desert and, after first capturing the only source of water, managed in one night to exhaust them from thirst.  The next day he simply crushed an army that had already begun to collapse from exhaustion. It was the greatest defeat ever experienced by the Crusaders. After the battle Saladin took possession of the True Cross of Christ which the Crusaders transported with them. The Cross had been in the hands of the Latin bishop of Acre in Palestine who was killed in the battle.
 
Approximately 3,000 Crusaders escaped from the Battle of Hattin. Three months later these men again encountered Saladin, now at the walls of Jerusalem. After a prolonged siege, the fall of Jerusalem seemed inevitable and the city’s defender, Prince Balian of Ibelin, proposed that he hand over the city to the sultan under the condition that all residents be released. Saladin initially turned down the proposal. However, Balian ingeniously threatened that if Saladin did not accept the conditions he would kill all the Muslim prisoners and burn down all the Muslim shrines. Saladin, alarmed by the threat, finally accepted the terms under the condition that each resident of the city pay a monetary fine.
 
A large portion of the population paid the price and was freed. Approximately 11,000 residents of the city, however, could not pay the amount. Prince Balian offered to release the masses and stay as hostage until the money was collected. His offer was rejected. But when Saladin saw the miserable children and women who had lost their husbands in the Battle of Hattin, he changed his mind. The charitable behavior of the Kurdish leader toward the defeated Christians of Jerusalem is a rare example in military history. Historian Walter Besand and Oriental scholar Edward Palmer, in their book The History of Jerusalem, the City of Herod and Saladin, write:
 
“But Saladin was open to prayers from all quarters. The widows and children of those who had fallen at Tiberias came to him weeping and crying. When Saladin saw them weeping, he was moved with great pity; and hearing who they were, he told them to inquire if their husbands and fathers were yet living and in prison. Those who were his captives he ordered to be released and in those cases where it was proved that their husbands were dead he gave largely from his own private purse to all the ladies and the noble maidens, so that they gave thanks to God for the honor and wealth that Saladin bestowed upon them.”
 
When Saladin realized the wretched state of the thousands of city residents, he not only did not accept money but also financially assisted all unmarried women, widows and their underage children in a unique event in military history.
 
Over the following days the Crusaders undertook their great exodus from Jerusalem. The Latin patriarch carried with him all the priceless gold treasures. The Arab author Ibn al-Athir writes:
 
“The great patriarch of the Franks left Jerusalem taking with him treasures that in reality belonged to the churches, the value of which only God could estimate… The sultan was advised to annex all his possessions in order to use them in the defense of Islam. But he replied: ‘I shall not use guile against him’.”
 
The secretary Imad al-Din informed Saladin that the Latin patriarch carried with him gold treasures and jewelry that exceeded the value of 200,000 gold coins. The Muslims, faced with the sight of the gold treasures, could scarcely be restrained and just one simple nod from their sultan would have sufficed for them to crush the caravan of desolated Christians. But despite their suffocating pressure, the Muslim leader remained irreversible in his decision. Saladin was without doubt a worthy ambassador of his faith, but also of his Kurdish ancestry.
 
On 2 October 1187 the Muslim army entered Jerusalem ending 88 years of occupation by the Franks. By the official decree of Saladin himself, the possession of the Holy Sepulchre and Golgotha was once again restored to the Greeks. A contributing factor in this decision was his alliance with the Byzantine Emperor Isaac II Angelos. Among other things, Saladin’s decree states the following:
 
“…I hereby order the patriarch of the Romaioi [Greeks], who is here in Jerusalem, to oversee all the races of Nazarenes [Christians], that is, all those who come here, Armenians, Copts, Syrians, Nestorians and Franks and all other nations who are Nazarenes. He shall oversee the Qumamah [Church of the Resurrection] and the so-called tomb of Christ, he shall enter and receive the light from there and transfer it to all Nazarenes. And the Church [of the Resurrection] shall hereafter remain untouched and none of the Muslims shall dare convert it to a mosque, whereas the Nazarenes shall freely enter it. That is what I command and no Muslim shall dare to violate my command.”
 
By Saladin’s decree the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was essentially protected for all centuries to follow. No Muslim has ever dared to violate his decision.

 
Saladin’s first reference to the “Holy Fire” is also encountered in the decree. He already knew of the miraculous event celebrated each Holy Saturday by the Christians. Soon we will examine his second reference to the “Holy Fire,” which was formulated on Holy Saturday of 4 April 1192. On that day Saladin, as governor of Jerusalem, entered the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and officially participated in the rite of the “Holy Fire.”
 
This event is recorded in the two most important chronicles of the Third Crusade. The first, written in Latin, is entitled Itinerarium Peregrinorum Ricardi and was composed by the English monk Richard. The second chronicle, entitled L’estoire de la guerre sainte (The History of the Holy War), was written in Old French by the Norman chronicler Ambrose. Both works include the Crusade of the English King, Richard the Lionheart, and are dated 1200–22. They are both precious treasures for medieval history, as they are the only preserved chronicles of the Third Crusade (1187–92) written by eyewitnesses of the events.
In 1941, Jerome Hubert and John La Monte published an English translation of Ambrose’s History and expressed the opinion that “both works had their origin in a common source, now lost.”  Hans Eberhard Mayer, who produced a thorough, comparative analysis of both works, has deemed that the original Itinerary of Richard was written by an unknown English military priest who participated in the Third Crusade.  Let us move on to the narratives in both works and what Saladin experienced at the “Holy Fire” ceremony.
 
The Itinerary of Richard is a work comprised of six books and is preserved in nine manuscripts. Richard assures the reader that he personally participated in the Crusade and that many of the events he describes he had seen for himself. The English chronicler mentions the following:
 
“On Easter Eve [4 April 1192], Saladin, surrounded by his retinue, went to the venerable Lord’s sepulchre in Jerusalem. He went in order to discover the truth about the heavenly fire which customarily comes down by divine power on that day each year and lights a lamp. For some time Saladin and other Turks attentively watched the devotion of many Christian captives in shackles, as they beseeched God’s mercy with tears. Suddenly, before their very eyes, the divine fire came and lit the lamp! At once it began to burn brightly. When they all saw this the people were immensely moved. The Christians rejoiced and praised the greatness of God in loud voices, while the Saracens were stunned by such an obvious miracle, denying what they had seen and claiming that the fire was a crafty illusion contrived to fool them. Wishing to be certain on the matter, Saladin ordered the lamp which had been divinely lit to be put out. When it was put out, it was relit at once by divine action. The infidel ordered it to be put out a second time: again, a second time it was relit; a third time put out, a third time re-lighted. O great power of God. What can resist the invincible? No counsel avails against the Lord; no one can resist His Will. The Sultan was astonished and painfully moved by the sight of this miracle and the faith and devotion of the Christians. Inspired by a prophetic spirit, he declared firmly: ‘Without doubt, either I will soon leave this life, or I will lose possession of this city.’ The augury did not deceive him, for Saladin died during the following Lent.”
 
Contrary to all documentation and even the statements of his predecessor, Blessed Pope Urban II…Pope Gregory IX, in 1238 declared the non-authenticity of the miracle and forbad those faithful to the Roman Catholic Church to participate in the rite.
 
In a letter written on 9 March 1238 and sent to the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, Gerard de Lausanne, Pope Gregory IX states the following: “We understand that the canons of the sepulchre in Jerusalem say that fire from heaven descends into the sepulchre on Eastern eve... Indeed because the Lord, as we told them, does not need our lies, we order anyone who has presumed to believe this by our authority never to attend there again.”
 
Sadly, Pope Gregory IX forbids the participation of the Latin faithful in the “Holy Fire” ceremony, despite the fact that he has heard the canons of Jerusalem report that the “Holy Fire” descends from the heavens. In essence, the pope denounces the miracle without any particular reason and without the intervention of any particular event known to us that could have been used as probable justification.
 
The rite continued to take place just as it had in previous centuries and nothing has changed in relation to the past. The viewpoints of the two popes, Blessed Urban II and Gregory IX, concerning the miracle of the “Holy Fire” are entirely opposed and cannot coexist.
 
Fact is, this Great Miracle of Orthodoxy, the “Holy Fire,” still comes on this very specific day [the TRUE DATE OF EASTER/HOLY PASCHA—THE DAY OF RESURRECTION BY OUR LORD]  at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre…in much the same manner as we have seen documented by early Christians, chroniclers and other medieval sources.  It is ludicrous  to think that every Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem, who has participated in this ceremony for almost 2,000 years, would jeopardize his soul to perpetrate any kind of fraud!

“Miracle of the Split Column”
 
On Holy Saturday 1579, the Armenians paid the Turkish governor to obtain permission for their Armenian Patriarch to enter the Holy Sepulchre.  The Greek Orthodox Patriarch was standing sorrowfully with his flock at the exit of the church.  The Turkish governors forbad the Greek Orthodox Patriarch and the Orthodox faithful to enter the Church. 
 
The Greek Patriarch Sophronous IV was in his first year.  The Patriarch stood in prayer at the left side of the church doorway, near a column.  Suddenly, when night had already fallen, the column split vertically and flashed near the Greek Orthodox Patriarch.  The Holy Fire lept from its interior and lit the candles in the hand of the Patriarch.
 

An Arab emir named Tunom, was in the church courtyard in a minaret and saw the igniting of the column.  He realized the truth of the miracle of the “Holy Fire” and confessed to his co-religionists the power of Jesus Christ.  He leaped down from the top of the minaret but he was not killed.  The stones under him became as soft as wax and his footprint was left upon them. 
The Turks tried to scrape away the print but they could not; it remains there as a witness.  His confession caused his execution (beheading) and then his body was burnt.  Today he is venerated as an official holy martyr of the Orthodox Church. 
 
What the “modern day” Patriarchs of Jerusalem have to say about the “Holy Fire”…
 
Patriarch Damianos (1926):
 
“When through the grace of God I am honored with the task of receiving the Holy Fire from the tomb of the Resurrected Christ, the following happens to me: if I have a calm conscience and nothing is troubling me which could have the strength to overshadow my serenity and devotion to God, I am consumed by an inexplicable joy. As soon as I enter the Holy Sepulchre and open the holy book and read a few lines from the prayers, and raise the bunches of candles, then the holy lamp and the candles, ignite. If, however, tranquility of soul does not accompany me and I am not sufficiently prepared and devoted to God, I do not have that inexplicable joy. Then, as soon as I bend to enter the sacred tomb I see the sacred lamp is already lit.”
Three former Patriarchs in the long chain of those Greek
Orthodox Leaders who first receive the flame of the “Holy Fire”
 
That is what Patriarch Damianos said in the year 1926. At that point he had already served thirty times as head celebrant of the “Holy Fire” ceremony since he ascended the patriarchal throne in 1897. His statement that he had seen absolutely nothing is of particular significance. He made clear that his spiritual state affected the manner in which the Holy Fire appeared inside the tomb.
From around 11:00 AM till 1:00 PM, the Christian Arabs sing traditional songs in loud voices. These songs date back to the Turkish occupation of Jerusalem in the 13th Century, a period in which Christians were not allowed to sing their songs anywhere but in the Churches.  This is a major event in Jerusalem!  Schools are closed, streets are barricaded, bands march with the attending crowds:
 
            "We are the Christians, this we have been for centuries and this we shall be for ever and ever, Amen!" they sing at the top of their voices, accompanied by the sound of drums. The drum-players sit on the shoulders of others who dance ferociously around the Sepulchre Chapel. But at 1:00 PM the songs fade out, leaving silence-a tense and loaded silence electrified by the anticipation of the manifestation of God that all are waiting to witness. 

At 1:00 PM a delegation of the local authorities elbows through the crowds. Even though these officials are not Christian, they are part of the ceremonies. In the times of the Turkish occupation of Palestine they were Moslem Turks; today they are Israelis. For centuries the presence of these officials has been an integral part of the ceremony, as their function is to represent the Romans at the time of Jesus.
            The Gospels speak of Romans that went to seal the tomb of Jesus, so his disciples would not steal his body and claim he had risen. In the same way the Israeli authorities on this Easter Saturday come and seal the tomb with wax. Before they seal the door it is customary that they enter the tomb to check for any hidden source of fire, which could produce the miracle through fraud.
 
            Just as the Romans were to guarantee that there was no deceit after the death of Jesus, likewise the Israeli Local Authorities are to guarantee that there will be no trickery.   This is part of the ceremony and is carried out each year.

After the tomb has been checked and sealed, all people in the Church chant the “Kyrie Eleison.” At 1:45 PM the current Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem enters the scene. In the wake of a large procession holding liturgical banners, he circles the tomb three times and then stops in front of its entrance.
 
            Then the Patriarch takes off his liturgical “Episcopal” vestments, leaving upon himself only his white alba as a sign of humility and respect in front of the portent of God that he is about to witness. All the oil-lamps & candles have been blown out prior to the ceremony, and then all remains of artificial light are extinguished, so that the Church is enveloped in darkness.

Holding two large unlighted bundles of candles [two representing the Divine & Human natures of Christ and each bundle having 33 candles representing Christ’s earthly years on Earth], the Patriarch enters the Chapel of the Holy Sepulchre - first into the small room in front of the tomb and from there into the tomb itself.   Here the testimonies of the Patriarchs…
 
Patriarch Diodoros (1998):
 
Patriarch Diodoros occupied the patriarchal throne from 1981  to  2000.  During Holy Week 1998, a few days before Holy Saturday, he gave an interview about the Holy Fire ceremony to the Danish scholar,  Niels  Christian  Hvidt.  His interview was published in the Danish newspaper Berlingske Ti-dende,  as well as in a book by Hvidt entitled Miracles: Encounters between Heaven and Earth.

Patriarch  Diodoros,  upon  his death in September 2000, had held the patriarchal office for nineteen years and been present at the Holy Fire ceremony for sixty-three consecutive years. In his interview with the Danish professor he mentions the following:
 
“After all the lights are extinguished, I bow down and enter the first chamber of the tomb. From here I find my way through the darkness to the inner room of the tomb where Christ was buried in which I fall on my knees.  Here, I kneel in holy fear in front of the place where Christ lay after His death and where He rose again from the dead.  Here I say certain prayers that have been handed down to us through the centuries and, having said them, I wait. Sometimes I may wait a few minutes, but normally the miracle happens immediately after I have said the prayers. From the core of the very stone on which Jesus had lain an indefinable light pours forth. It usually has a blue tint, but the color may change and assume many different hues. It cannot be described in human terms. The light rises out of the stone as mist rises out of a lake; it almost looks as if the stone is covered by a moist cloud, but it is light. This light each year behaves differently. Sometimes it covers just the stone, while other times it gives light to the whole sepulchre, so that people who stand outside the tomb and look into it will see it filled with light. The light does not burn; I have never had my beard burnt in all the sixteen years I have been patriarch in Jerusalem and have received the Holy Fire. The light is of a different consistency from normal fire that burns in an oil lamp. At a certain point the light rises and forms a column in which the fire is of a different nature, so that I am able to light my candles from it.  When I thus have received the flame on my candles, I go out and give the fire first to the Armenian patriarch and then to the Coptic. Thereafter, I give the flame to all people present in the church… We experience many miracles in our churches, and miracles are nothing strange to us... But none of these miracles have such a penetrating and symbolic meaning for us as the miracle of the ‘Holy Fire.’ The miracle is almost like a sacrament. It makes the resurrection of Christ as real to us as if it occurred just a few years ago… I have been in Jerusalem since 1939 when I came to the city at the age of fifteen. I have attended the ceremony of the ‘Holy Fire’ for all these years, and have thus been a witness to the miracle sixty-one times. For me it is not a question of whether I believe in the miracle or not. I know it is true.”
 
This is the testimony submitted by Patriarch Diodoros at Easter 1998. His description is so detailed and revealing that there is no need for further comment.
 
            Bishop Christodoulos (1998):
Over the Easter period in 1998 Patriarch Diodoros was suffering from an illness and for the first time since he was in office was not able to carry out the Holy Fire ceremony alone. A few days after his interview with the Danish professor, on Holy Saturday, he was conveyed on a chair to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and then, once he reached the entrance of the Holy Sepulchre, he entered the monument’s antechamber seated in a wheelchair. As it was not possible for him to enter the tomb’s inner chamber on account of the narrowness of the entrance, he assigned the completion of the rite to the Bishop of Eleftheroupolis, Christodoulos Saridakis. The same also occurred in 1999.  In a conversation we had on 10 January 2010, he described in a particularly revealing manner all that he experienced in the interior of the sepulchre. A transcription of our dialogue follows:
 
            “Your Grace, is it true that on Holy Saturday in 1998 and 1999 Patriarch Diodoros assigned to you the responsibility of completing the rite of the Holy Fire?”
“It is true. Those years Patriarch Diodoros was quite ill and during the rite he remained in the antechamber of the sepulchre, seated in a wheelchair.”
“What happened exactly when you entered the interior chamber?”
“I immediately began reading the special prayer and when that was finished, I noticed that the tombstone had started to ‘perspire.’ As time went on the phenomenon became all the more intense and it was as if it was completely covered by liquid myrrh that came out of its interior. At the same time, along with the liquid myrrh, a very intense blue light appeared which covered the entire tomb- stone. At that moment the holy oil lamp miraculously ignited.”
“And is that when you lit the bundles of your candles from the lamp?”
“No, it was not necessary. I held the bundles of my candles over the tombstone, over the blue light, and they immediately ignited.”
“Was the Armenian representative also present in the aedicule antechamber at that time?”
“Of course.”
“And all that you saw, he saw as well?”
“He saw it all as well. He was a very good man; priest Rasmik, who is now in Australia. When the blue light appeared and the lamp ignited, he was kneeling in prayer exactly at the entrance of the interior chamber. He was privileged to see everything.”
“How long did the presence of the blue light last?”
“Not long.”
“One to two minutes?”
“Approximately.”
“Your Grace, at that moment, how did you feel?”
“These things cannot be described. You come into contact with God.”
“Thank you very much.”
“Go with God.”
 
            Twelve years after the events, Bishop Christodoulos spoke publicly for the first time about the miracle he experienced in the tomb of Jesus. His reference concerning the marble slab on the tomb, which had begun to “sweat,” is of particular interest, for the Armenian chronicler, Symeon Lehatsi, had said the same thing when he entered the tomb on Holy Saturday in 1616.
 
            Patriarch Irenaeus (2005):
 
Patriarch Irenaeus presided over the patriarchal see  from  2001  to 2005. In a conversation we had in June 2009, he described to me in an especially revealing manner what he experienced during  the  rite  while  patriarch. The most important part of our conversation runs as follows:
 
“Your Beatitude, does the miracle take place once you have completed the reading of the special prayer or during it?”
“Sometimes even during it.”
“What exactly takes place at that moment?”
“Suddenly the entire tomb fills with the Holy Light. It is a blue light. It is a shocking experience: beyond us. It is a blue fire that hovers. The entire tomb is filled with this fire… It is not easy for one to express.”
“How exactly do the bundles of your candles ignite?”
“At the moment when I lift the four bundles with the thirty-three candles, these immediately ignite from the blue fire that hovers and fills the space, which soon takes on the golden color of a regular fire.”
“Is it true that at that moment the Holy Fire does not burn?”
“Of course. The Holy Fire during those first moments does not burn at all. All the times I participated in the rite as patriarch not one single hair of my beard was burned. Unfortunately, however, there are some who mock the miracle, some of whom are even clerics. Just as there were once iconoclasts (those opposed to icons), so today there are the ‘Holy Fireclasts’ (those who oppose the Holy Fire). May God make them fit to repent and stop blaspheming holy things. The ‘Holy Fire’ is not simply a miracle. It is the miracle of miracles.”

Orthodox pilgrims consider the “Holy Fire” a great treasure
 
Patriarch Theophilos III (2009-Present):
 
The current Patriarch of Jerusalem, Theophilos III, was appointed the successor to Patriarch Irenaeus in August 2005. In a conversation we had in September 2009, he spoke of the miraculous nature of the rite as an unprecedented experience in his life. He also compared the miracle of the “Holy Fire” with the miracle of the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist.  Patriarch Theophilos says:
 
“What I can tell you about the rite of the ‘Holy Fire’ is that the power of faith is what causes the miracle. It is a soul stirring experience which one lives at that moment. And this experience is the same as the experience of the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist, during which the bread and wine are transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ. The experience of the Holy Fire is not easily described or explained with words. You feel like the ground is pulled out from under you. One understands how small and insignificant one is at that moment.”

The “Holy Fire” is not only distributed by the Patriarch, but spreads by itself.  It is emitted form the Holy Sepulchre with a hue completely different from natural light.  The blue flame appears in different places in the Church.  Believers claim that sometimes this miraculous and Uncreated Light spontaneously ignites candles, which they hold in their hands.  It flashes like lightning, and sometimes flies around the Church and lights the hanging lampadas [votive lamps] in front of the tomb.  Sometimes the “Holy Fire” lights the lamps in the upper chapel of Calvary as well.
 
For about a half hour after the “Holy Fire” appears, it is a cool flame that does not burn the face, beards, or hands.  You can see many YouTube videos of pilgrims “washing” themselves with the cool flame of the “Holy Fire”…look up: MIRACLE OF THE HOLY FIRE.

RUSSIAN SCIENTISTS PROVE
“HOLY FIRE” EVENT IS REAL – NO DECEPTION
 
At  Holy Pasha/Easter  2008,  the  Russian  Physicist  Andrey Volkov,  who is an Associate Professor in Mechanics of Materials, was appointed head of an official scientific mission which aimed at investigating the miracle of the “Holy Fire.” The project was organized by Professor Alexander Moskovsky, for the needs of a documentary dedicated to the role of miracles in religion.
 
On Holy Saturday 2008, around 09:00 in the morning, Andrey Volkov entered the Church of the Holy Sepulchre armed with the necessary equipment.
 
The basic instrument he used for his measurements was an oscilloscope which was connected to a laptop equipped with the appropriate software. He located himself approximately fifteen meters from the Holy Sepulchre and his basic priority was to record the phase of electromagnetic radiation at specific frequencies. The results of his measurements, as well as the conclusions that were extracted from them, were described by him one year later, on 21 April 2009, in the following interview he gave to the Russian newspaper Vera:
 
“Andrey Alexandrovich, why did you go especially to investigate the nature of the Holy Fire? Does this coincide with your scientific field?”
“For the last 12 years I have been working on so-called low heat plasma.”
“What is that?”
“The largest portion of the universe’s material is in a plasma state: the stars, the galactic clouds, the interstellar environment. It is a highly ionized gas… On Earth though, this is a rare phenomenon, which we learned to reproduce only fairly recently. For instance, in surgery they have started using scalpels made of a very thin plasma flow, which is heated up to about 5,000–7,000 degrees. This is high heat plasma, with which we can only cut through matter. But there is also low heat plasma, at approximately 40–80 degrees, which can heal wounds... Judging from the many descriptions, the appearance of the ‘Holy Fire’ is accompanied by the appearance of plasma, which externally is very much like low heat plasma. For example, it is known that for a certain period of time this fire does not burn the hands or face at all.”
“Are these plasma phenomena unique?”
“Yes, they are. In the laboratory we investigate low heat plasma only in a vacuum. It may also exist equally in the air but only under strictly defined conditions…. and under very high humidity.  However, over the Holy Sepulchre at Easter it is hot and the atmosphere is dry; there is no humidity which conducts electricity, and there is no source of potential variance and energy.”
 
According to the Russian Physicist, the plasma phenomenon, which is believed to take place in the interior of the church, is entirely inexplicable and without justification from a scientific standpoint. The high point for his measurements came when the “Holy Fire” appeared while the patriarch was enclosed in the sepulchre interior.

The unexpected measurement was recorded at 14:04 Jerusalem time (15:04 Moscow time). Approximately two minutes later, the Patriarch came out with the “Holy Fire”…proclaiming to the Faithful and to all the world that “Christ is Risen!”
According to the findings of the investigation, “There is no doubt that the appearance of this signal was caused by an electrical discharge, the strength of which is comparable to the radiation emitted by a oxy-fuel welding and cutting machine while it is operating. [perhaps the same discharge that produced the image of Our Lord on the Shroud of Turin]  Based on the measurements we can conclude that at the moment of the descent of the ‘Holy Fire,” one or many rather strong electrical discharges took place which are apparently the reason the candles were lit.
 
It had been a while since the patriarch of Jerusalem had entered the aedicule and the ritual had begun... And suddenly—there it was! It recorded a change in the radiation phase because of an unknown signal. This happened at 15:04. One fluctuation—and nothing else that was similar. And soon the patriarch of Jerusalem came out holding a lit candle.
 
The second inexplicable event is the electrical charge of the air which is apparent even without the equipment—many feel that during the coming of the ‘Holy Fire’ the hairs on their arms stand up... And then there is the last aspect we discovered—the appearance of the fire is accompanied by electrical discharge. This means that the appearance of the fire is an integral part of all of the incredible, entirely inexplicable phenomena that have an electrical nature. Is this not a confirmation of its miraculous nature?”

 
In April of 2012, a more recent article published the results of Andrey Volkov’s tests. The title of the article was “The Miracle of the Holy Fire” and appeared in the Russian journal Science and Religion (Наука и Религия). The article is written by Volkov and four other Russian scientists: Prof. Alexander Moskovsky, Prof. Pavel Florensky, Sergei Soshinskaya and Tatyana Shutova. The more important portions of this publication are presented here. The five scientists state the following:
 
“... For the first time in history, a strong radio pulse was recorded at the moment of the Holy Fire’s descent, emanating from the Edicule… We have come closer to describing this event, something majestic for all Orthodox Christians, as we have found further evidence that the miracle of the ‘Holy Fire’ is an actual occurrence and not a hoax or fraud, as some would like to believe...
Russian Journal Science and Religion documented the undisputed findings from the intense investigation of the “Holy Fire”
by five world renowned Scientists ~ April 2012
 
The authors of the article above make it clear that at the hour of the “Holy Fire’s” descent three obvious flashes were recorded on the spectrum of electro- magnetic radiation, which are understood as being the presence of electrical discharges. In their opinion, electrical discharges cause sparks as well as the lighting of the candles. Nevertheless, as the authors themselves say, similar measurements should be taken and be confirmed by other scientists as well.
 
Andrey Volkov’s research is of great interest and represents an entirely different approach to the miracle of the “Holy Fire.” In his view, the findings of his measurements are “a confirmation of the miraculous nature of the phenomenon.”
 
UPDATE: When the Edicule was being restored in 2016—after nearly 2,000 years—traces of the electromagnetic radiation were still detected by Scientists...proving THE RADIATION BURST OF CHRIST’S RESURRECTION MUST HAVE BEEN POWERFUL!!!

(The HOLY FIRE is taken by airplane and other transport to all corners of the world for the Holy Pascha/Easter Divine Liturgy)

“HOLY FIRE”…WITNESS TO ORTHODOXY
DELIVERED AROUND THE WORLD
 
The “Holy Fire” is passed among worshippers outside the Church and then taken to the Church of the Nativity in the West Bank town of Bethlehem, where tradition holds Jesus was born, and from there to other Christian communities in Israel and the West Bank.
Although the miracle of “Holy Fire” is broadcast and featured in News media throughout Europe and the Middle East, this Great “Miracle of Orthodoxy” remains virtually unknown in the West…most especially in the Americas!
“Pray for Peace for Jerusalem” is the fundamental and most ambitious peace building program of the St. Andrew Foundation in the Holy Land.
 
Every year on the eve of Easter, together with the Patriarch of Jerusalem, the foundation’s delegation prays for peace in the Holy Land.  Joining the initiative in previous years were Orthodox believers from Russia, Israel, Serbia, Romania, Poland, the Czech Republic, the USA and others.  Followers in these countries’ Orthodox churches also prayed for peace in the Holy Land.

On Holy Saturday, the foundation’s delegation traditionally takes part in the ceremony of the “Holy Fire” at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and brings the “Holy Fire” to the Patriarchal Easter Service, where it is handed directly over to Patriarch Kyril, at Christ the Saviour Cathedral in Moscow.  In 2014, the “Holy Fire” was first brought from the Holy Land to Rome.  A special capsule, in which the flame arrived from the Holy Land, was delivered by the end of the Easter Liturgy to the St. Catherine the Martyr Orthodox Church in Rome, and then by train to the St. Nicholas Orthodox Church in Merano, Italy.
 
In 2015, it became possible to follow the movement of the “Holy Fire” online.  Internet coverage of the charity event amounted to over a million people, for a total of 1,220,232 users.  According to a satellite tracking system, the northernmost point of delivery of the “Holy Fire” during “The Way of the Holy Fire” project was in Murmansk in northwest Russia, while the southernmost point was in Baku near the Caspian Sea.  The easternmost point was in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, and finally, the westernmost point of journey was in the capital of the fashion world, the Italian city of Milan.  The “Holy Fire” was not only in Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, but was also in the United States, Canada, Great Britain, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, the United Arab Emirates, and many other foreign countries.  In 2015, the “Holy Fire” was transported …like revered Dignitary…through the numerous border check points to 53 Russian and 11 international cities.

The highly sensitive transport and closely guarded delivery of the “Holy Fire” is broadcast over commercial television networks to many parts of Europe.  Orthodox Christians as far away as Bulgaria and Romania view the live events in Jerusalem, as religious leaders and government dignitaries accompany the miraculous “Holy Fire” to their respective countries for their Easter Services!
 
In 2015, the Foundation of St. Basil the Great, for the first time in history, brought the “Holy Fire” to Serbia! Excited reporters accompanied the “Holy Fire” to all corners of the Balkans!  At the airport in Belgrade, on a special flight from Jerusalem, the “Holy Fire” was met by representatives of the various Orthodox dioceses and a personal helicopter from film Director, Emis Kusturica, took the “Holy Fire” to the mountain areas of Bosnia and Herzegovina!
 
In the West, it’s difficult for us to understand the importance:  In the streets of the Serbian capital, an official government motorcade delivers the “Holy Fire” to the Cathedral of Saint Sava.  Through a corridor of soldiers, their National Guard, the procession makes its way to the Temple…there the capsule, containing the “Holy Fire,” is met by the Serbian Orthodox Patriarch Irinej and Serbian President Tomislav Nikolic…they are the first to light their candles from the “Holy Fire,” to enter the Cathedral and begin their Easter Services!  

In 2016, the “Holy Fire” from Israel arrived in Athens by airplane at 8:00 p.m. on Saturday, ahead of Easter celebrations in Greece.  The flame was received with the protocol reserved for Heads of State after Patriarch Theophilos of Jerusalem handed it to a Greek delegation led by Deputy Foreign Minister, Yiannis Amanatidis.  “It is a victory of hope and optimism, and our responsibility, to transform this into a creative force in the struggle we are all mounting for the rebirth of our homeland,” said Amanatidis upon receiving the “Holy Fire,” which was due to be flown to more than a dozen points around the country after being brought to Athens on a special flight.

 
NBC News reported that millions of Russian Christians also embraced the ritual.  “The ancient mystery of the ‘Holy Fire’ has risen to great prominence in the Russian Orthodox church in the years since its post-Soviet resurgence…there’s no denying the immense impact the ceremony has on Russian believers.  Experts say it highlights both the country’s return of faith after the fall of Communism and the tendency of its born-again believers to value rituals and miracles over spirituality.” 

“From a believer point of view, this is definitely a miracle, or at least an inexplicable occurrence,” said Father Andrei Posternak, who is on Russia’s delegation which delivered the “Holy Fire” this year.  It was also the first year that the “Holy Fire” was taken to Crimea, the former Ukrainian region that became a part of Russia in March 2014.
Fire and The Presence of God…
 
 The Orthodox Christians are not the only ones to associate light with the presence and activity of God. In the Sacred Scriptures, light often accompanies great miraculous works of God. About Moses' meetings with God on Mount Sinai the Bible says: "Mount Sinai was entirely wrapped in smoke, because Yahweh had descended on it in the form of fire…the smoke rose like smoke from a furnace and the whole mountain shook violently." (Ex 19:18)  Later in Exodus, it says: "To the watching Israelites, the glory of Yahweh looked like a devouring fire on the mountain top." (Ex 24:17)  After Moses had stood face to face with God, his face shone so powerfully that he had to cover it, lest the people get hurt. (Ex 34:29)

When Jesus was transfigured in front of His disciples on Mount Tabor, "the aspect of his face changed and his clothing became sparkling white." (Lk 9:29) Likewise, after Jesus' resurrection, the women met by the grave "two men in brilliant clothes." (Lk 24:4) Light and  the mighty works of God go hand in glove.
 
            The Church Fathers considered light to be a symbol of God, especially of God's love. Thus Gregory the Great (530-604) writes: "God is called light because he embraces the flames of his love-the souls in which he abides." In the same way, Orthodox Christians consider the Miracle of the “Holy Fire” a manifestation of God's power and of His presence.
 
            "We believe the flame to be holy", says Archbishop Alexios, "almost as a sacrament, ontologically related directly to God himself. The pilgrims move their hands back and forth over the flame and caress their faces with the hands that touched the flames."
Ecumenical Significance of the Ceremony…
 
The Miracle of the “Holy Fire” is important not only to the individual Christians whose faith it strengthens, but also because it plays a very important ecumenical role. The ceremony takes place every year on Holy Saturday, before Orthodox Holy Pascha/Easter [THE TRUE DATE OF EASTER CELEBRATED BY THE EARLY CHURCH], and is celebrated together with all Orthodox communities (e.g. Armenian, Russian and Greek Orthodox as well as Copts).
 
            In the Church of the Holy Sepulchre alone, there are seven different Christian Denominations, and all, except the Roman Catholics, take part in the ceremony.  However, for two hundred years following the Great Schism in 1054, the Miracle of the “Holy Fire” had such unifying power, that it kept East & West, together, celebrating the event together despite their differences.

           
Only after 1246, when Roman Catholics left Jerusalem with the defeated Crusaders, did the Miracle of the “Holy Fire” become a purely Eastern ceremony as the Orthodox Catholics remained in Jerusalem even after the Turks' occupation of Palestine.
 
            Metropolitan Timothy, who was the Jerusalem Patriarchate's representative to a recent ecumenical celebration of the opening of the Holy Doors of Saint Paul's Cathedral in Rome, said that the ecumenical and unifying power of the “Holy Fire” is quite exceptional.
 
            "Until the thirteenth Century the entire church celebrated the ceremony of the Holy Fire," he says. "Even after the Roman Catholics left Jerusalem with the Crusaders it has remained a unifying ceremony for those of us who stayed here, that is, for all the different branches of the Orthodox world.
 
            The flame first comes in a miraculous way from Christ to the Greek Orthodox Patriarch inside the Tomb. He gives it to the Armenian and Coptic metropolitans, who hand it on to the remaining communities and they in turn, spread it to their own people.
 
 From them it passes beyond the Holy Sepulchre to every corner of the Orthodox world. After the ceremony is over, believers from all Israel and Palestine carry it to the homes of their relatives. 

Pilgrims who come from far away make provisions, buying special oil-lamps with which they carry the flame to their countries. Olympic Airways helps the Orthodox to distribute the flame to many countries, especially to Alexandria in Egypt and to Russia, but also to Georgia, Bulgaria, and the USA.
 
            Each year we write letters of recommendation to the Israeli Ministry of Religious Affairs, which in turn assist pilgrims who carry the lanterns with the Holy Fire through customs and into their respective aircrafts. This is how important the spreading of the flame is to us. 

Faithful come from all over the World for the “Holy Fire”
 
            It is holy, and it keeps reminding us of how the one Holy Spirit is present in all the parts of the Body of Christ. Like blood being pumped by the heart into all members of a body, so the fire spreads from Jerusalem to all parts of the Orthodox community, reminding the faithful of the origins and unity of their faith. It has a tremendous unifying power to the Orthodox Faith," Metropolitan Timothy concluded. 
 
Unknown in the West …
           
One might ask the question why the Miracle of the “Holy Fire” is hardly known in Western Europe or throughout the Americas. In Protestant areas it may be explained by the fact that there is little traditional teaching regarding miracles; people don't really know how to approach them, and they don't take up much space in newspapers.
 
            The Roman Catholic Church, however, has a long tradition of miracles, so why is the Miraculous “Holy Fire” not better known among Catholics in the West? One important reason may be that the ceremony is performed only by Eastern Orthodox Catholics and only on Orthodox Holy Saturday preceding Orthodox Holy Pascha/Easter…as determined by the Council of Nicea in 325 AD.
           
The “Miracle of the Holy Fire” is a source of joy as it leads to greater unity of the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church! 

                                                 The "HOLY LIGHT" of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ

HOW THE DATE OF EASTER IS DETERMINED
 
For all who follow Christ, the celebration of Easter is par excel lance the greatest of all Feast Days!  But many times, East & West celebrate it on a different day.  Father Jon Magoulias, a Greek-Orthodox priest at the Annunciation Greek Orthodox Church in Modesto, California explains best…
 
So why do Orthodox Christians celebrate the Resurrection of Jesus Christ on a different date than Roman Catholics or Protestants?  While the issue is somewhat complicated, it may be summarized in the two factors at work that cause this conflict in dates:
 
1) The issue of the calendar; and
2) the adherence by the Orthodox to follow the early practices of the Christian Church.
 
The first factor, the calendar, has to do with the fact that the Orthodox Church continues to follow the Julian calendar when calculating the date of Holy Pascha (Easter). The rest of Christianity uses the Gregorian calendar. There is a thirteen-day difference between the two calendars, the Julian calendar being thirteen (13) days behind the Gregorian.
 
The other factor at work is that the Orthodox Church continues to adhere to the rule set forth by the First Ecumenical Council, held in Nicæa in 325 AD, that requires that Pascha must take place after the Jewish Passover in order to maintain the Biblical sequence of Christ’s Passion. The rest of Christianity ignores this requirement, which means that on occasion Western Easter takes place either before or during the Jewish Passover.

 
As a consequence of these two factors, the Orthodox Church usually celebrates Pascha later than the Western Churches – anywhere from one to five weeks later. This year both Roman Catholics and Orthodox celebrate Easter together.  Unless East & West return to a common celebration date, the next time will not be until 2025!
 
For many people this is a confusing and frustrating issue. Especially those of us who have families that are not Orthodox wonder why we have to celebrate this important holiday at different times. In order to better understand why we do, we will take a closer look at how the date of Pascha is calculated and also examine the issue of the calendar.
 
How the Date of Holy Pascha (Easter)
is Determined…
 
During the first three centuries of Christianity, there was no universal date for celebrating the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Churches in various parts of the world followed different traditions. Some Christians celebrated Pascha on the first Sunday after Jewish Passover and others celebrated the feast at the same time as Passover. In order to come up with one unified date for celebrating Pascha, the Holy Fathers of the First Ecumenical Council in 325 AD took up the issue. They devised a uniform formula for calculating the date of Pascha that was in line with the early traditions of the Church and the Biblical sequence of events. The formula is this: Pascha is to be celebrated on the first Sunday, after the first full moon, following the vernal equinox, but always after Jewish Passover. In order to ensure that there was no confusion as to when the vernal equinox occurred the date of the vernal equinox was set to be March 21 (April 3 on the Julian Calendar). This formula was universally accepted by all of Christianity, ensuring that Pascha was celebrated on the same day throughout the world. The Orthodox Church continues to follow this formula exactly as prescribed by the Council of Nicæa.
 
However, in modern times, the Western Church has rejected the part of the Nicene formula that requires that Pascha “always follow the Jewish Passover.” Western theologians (and, unfortunately, a few misguided Orthodox Theologians as well) now claim that this provision was never a part of the council’s intention, saying that it is not necessary for Pascha to follow the Jewish Passover. This is hard to understand since, by rejecting this provision of the council, they ignore that the celebration of Jesus’ Resurrection was celebrated at the same time from 325-1582, as well as the written witness of early Church historians and even earlier canons such as Canon VII of the Apostolic Canons which reads: “If any Bishop, or Presbyter, or Deacon celebrate the holy day of Pascha before the vernal equinox with the Jews, let him be deposed.”
 
The Calendar Issue…
 
In 1582 Pope Gregory XIII instituted a reform of the traditional Julian calendar. This new calendar, called the Gregorian calendar, was more astronomically correct and is the calendar used by most of the world today. As mentioned above, there is a difference of 13 days between the Gregorian and the Julian calendars.
 
Eventually, all of the Western Churches adopted this “New” calendar. The Orthodox Church, however, vigorously opposed the use of the Gregorian calendar. This resulted in the West and East celebrating all Church feast days on different dates, the Orthodox celebrations always falling thirteen days behind the Western.
 
In 1923, an inter-Orthodox congress was held in Constantinople attended by representatives of some, but not all, Orthodox churches. This congress made the very controversial decision to follow a revised calendar that was essentially the same as the Gregorian calendar, for all things except the celebration of Pascha, which continued to be calculated according to the original Julian calendar.
 
The result being that today we celebrate most feast days, like Christmas, Epiphany and the rest, at the same time as Western Christians and only Pascha and the feast days that are connected with it like Pentecost and the Ascension, are dated according to the Julian calendar and celebrated on different dates. For Orthodox, it is important to maintain the teachings and traditions of the Church intact and pure.

​THE “DIDACHE” – TEACHING OF THE TWELVE
 
Before Sacred Scripture was codexed, this was the original compilation of teachings followed by the Early Church.
 
According to The Catholic Encyclopedia of 1908, the Didache or “DOCTRINE OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES” is short treatise which was accounted by some of the Church Fathers as next to Holy Scripture. It was rediscovered in 1873 by Greek Orthodox Metropolitan Bryennios of Nicomedia, in the codex from which, in 1875, he had published the full text of the Epistles of St. Clement.
 
The Didache is mentioned by Eusebius after the books of Scripture (Church History III.25.4): "Let there be placed among the spuria the writing of the Acts of Paul, the so-called Shepherd and the Apocalypse of Peter, and besides these the Epistle known as that of Barnabas, and what are called the Teachings of the Apostles.” Hermas, Irenæus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Justin, Tatian, Theophilus, Cyprian, and Lactantius  seem to use the work.
 
I
 
1. There are two Ways, one of Life and one of Death, and there is a great difference between the two Ways.
2. The way of life is this:" First, you shalt love the God who made thee, secondly, thy neighbor as thyself; and whatsoever thou wouldst not have done to thyself, do not thou to another."
3. Now, the teaching of these words is this: "Bless those that curse you, and pray for your enemies, and fast for those that persecute you. For what credit is it to you if you love those that love you? Do not even the heathen do the same?" But, for your part, "love those that hate you," and you will have no enemy.
4. "Abstain from carnal" and bodily "lusts." "If any man smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him the other cheek also," and thou wilt be perfect. "If any man impress thee to go with him one mile, go with him two. If any man take thy coat, give him thy shirt also. If any man will take from thee what is thine, refuse it not," not even if thou canst.
5. Give to everyone that asks thee, and do not refuse, for the Father's will is that we give to all from the gifts we have received. Blessed is he that gives according to the mandate; for he is innocent; but he who receives it without need shall be tried as to why he took and for what, and being in prison he shall be examined as to his deeds, and "he shall not come out thence until he pay the last farthing."
6. But concerning this it was also said, "Let thine alms sweat into thine hands until thou knowest to whom thou art giving."

" All revealed truths derived from the same Divine Source
are to be believed with the same faith...what shines
forth is the beauty of the saving love of God
made manifest in Jesus Christ"
​Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudiaum

II
 
1. But the second commandment of the teaching is this:
2. "Thou shalt do no murder; thou shalt not commit adultery"; thou shalt not commit sodomy; thou shalt not commit fornication; thou shalt not steal; thou shalt not use magic; thou shalt not use philtres; thou shalt not procure abortion, nor commit infanticide; "thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods";
3. Thou shalt not commit perjury, "thou shall not bear false witness"; thou shalt not speak evil; thou shalt not bear malice.
4. Thou shalt not be double-minded nor double-tongued, for to be double-tongued is the snare of death.
5. Thy speech shall not be false nor vain, but completed in action.
6. Thou shalt not be covetous nor extortionate, nor a hypocrite, nor malignant, nor proud, thou shalt make no evil plan against thy neighbor.
7. Thou shalt hate no man; but some thou shalt reprove, and for some shalt thou pray, and some thou shalt love more then thine own life.
 
III
 
1. My child, flee from every evil man and from all like him.
2. Be not proud, for pride leads to murder, nor jealous, nor contentious, nor passionate, for from all these murders are engendered.
3. My child, be not lustful, for lust leads to fornication, nor a speaker of base words, nor a lifter up of the eyes, for from all these is adultery engendered.
4. My child, regard not omens, for this leads to idolatry; neither be an enchanter, nor an astrologer, nor a magician, neither wish to see these things, for from them all is idolatry engendered.
5. My child, be not a liar, for lying leads to theft, nor a lover of money, nor vain-glorious, for from all these things are thefts engendered.
6. My child, be not a grumbler, for this leads to blasphemy, nor stubborn, nor a thinker of evil, for from all these are blasphemies engendered.
7. But be thou "meek, for the meek shall inherit the earth;"
8. Be thou long-suffering, and merciful and guileless, and quiet, and good, and ever fearing the words which thou hast heard.
9. Thou shalt not exalt thyself, nor let thy soul be presumptuous. Thy soul shall not consort with the lofty, but thou shalt walk with righteous and humble men.
10. Receive the accidents that befall to thee as good, knowing that nothing happens without God.
 
IV
 
1. My child, thou shalt remember, day and night, him who speaks the word of God to thee, and thou shalt honor him as the Lord, for where the Lord's nature is spoken of, there is he present.
2. And thou shalt seek daily the presence of the saints, that thou mayest find rest in their words.
3. Thou shalt not desire a schism, but shalt reconcile those that strive. Thou shalt give righteous judgement; thou shalt favor no mans person in reproving transgression.
4. Thou shalt not be of two minds whether it shall be or not.
5. Be not one who stretches out his hands to receive, but shuts them when it comes to giving.
6. Of whatsoever thou hast gained by thy hands thou shalt give a ransom for thy sins.
7. Thou shalt not hesitate to give, nor shalt thou grumble when thou givest, for thou shalt know who is the good Paymaster of the reward.
8. Thou shalt not turn away the needy, but shalt share everything with thy brother, and shalt not say it is thine own, for if you are sharers in the imperishable, how much more in the things which perish?
9. Thou shalt not withhold thine hand from thy son or from thy daughter, but thou shalt teach them the fear of God from their youth up.
10. Thou shalt not command in thy bitterness thy slave or thine handmaid, who hope in the same God, lest they cease to fear the God who is over you both; for he comes not to call men with respect of persons, but those whom the Spirit has prepared.
11. But do you who are slaves be subject to your master, as to God's representative, in reverence and fear.
12. Thou shalt hate all hypocrisy, and everything that is not pleasing to the Lord.
13. Thou shalt not forsake the commandments of the Lord, but thou shalt keep what thou didst receive, "Adding nothing to it and taking nothing away."
14. In the congregation thou shalt confess thy transgressions, and thou shalt not betake thyself to prayer with an evil conscience. This is the way of life.
 
V
 
1. But the Way of Death is this: First of all, it is wicked and full of cursing, murders, adulteries, lusts, fornications, thefts, idolatries, witchcrafts, charms, robberies, false witness, hypocrisies, a double heart, fraud, pride, malice, stubbornness, covetousness, foul speech, jealousy, impudence, haughtiness, boastfulness.
2. Persecutors of the good, haters of truth, lovers of lies, knowing not the reward of righteousness, not cleaving to the good nor to righteous judgment, spending wakeful nights not for good but for wickedness, from whom meekness and patience is far, lovers of vanity, following after reward, unmerciful to the poor, not working for him who is oppressed with toil, without knowledge of him who made them, murderers of children, corrupters of God's creatures, turning away the needy, oppressing the distressed, advocates of the rich, unjust judges of the poor, altogether sinful; may ye be delivered, my children, from all these.
 
VI
 
1. See "that no one make thee to err" from this Way of the teaching, for he teaches thee without God.
2. For if thou canst bear the whole yoke of the Lord, thou wilt be perfect, but if thou canst not, do what thou canst.
3. And concerning food, bear what thou canst, but keep strictly from that which is offered to idols, for it is the worship of dead gods.
 
VII
 
1. Concerning baptism, baptise thus: Having first rehearsed all these things, "baptise, in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost," in running water;
2. But if thou hast no running water, baptise in other water, and if thou canst not in cold, then in warm.
3. But if thou hast neither, pour water three times on the head "in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost."
4. And before the baptism let the baptiser and him who is to be baptised fast, and any others who are able. And thou shalt bid him who is to be baptised to fast one or two days before.
 
VIII
 
1. Let not your fasts be with the hypocrites, for they fast on Mondays and Thursdays, but do you fast on Wednesdays and Fridays.
2. And do not pray as the hypocrites, but as the Lord commanded in his Gospel, pray thus: "Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed be thy Name, thy Kingdom come, thy will be done, as in Heaven so also upon earth; give us today our daily bread, and forgive us our debt as we forgive our debtors, and lead us not into trial, but deliver us from the Evil One, for thine is the power and the glory for ever."
3. Pray thus three times a day.
 
IX
 
1. And concerning the Eucharist, hold Eucharist thus:
2. First concerning the Cup, "We give thanks to thee, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David thy child, which, thou didst make known to us through Jesus thy Child; to thee be glory for ever."
3. And concerning the broken Bread: "We give thee thanks, our Father, for the life and knowledge which thou didst make known to us through Jesus thy Child. To thee be glory for ever.
4. As this broken bread was scattered upon the mountains, but was brought together and became one, so let thy Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into thy kingdom, for thine is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ for ever."
5. But let none eat or drink of your Eucharist except those who have been baptised in the Lord's Name. For concerning this also did the Lord say, "Give not that which is holy to the dogs."
 
X
 
1. But after you are satisfied with food, thus give thanks:
2. "We give thanks to thee, O Holy Father, for thy Holy Name which thou didst make to tabernacle in out hearts, and for the knowledge and faith and immortality which thou didst make known to us through Jesus thy Child. To thee be glory for ever.
3. Thou, Lord Almighty, didst create all things for thy Name's sake, and didst give food and drink to men for their enjoyment, that they might give thanks to thee, but us hast thou blessed with spiritual food and drink and eternal light through thy Child.
4. Above all we give thanks to thee for that thou art mighty. To thee be glory for ever.
5. Remember, Lord, thy Church, to deliver it from all evil and to make it perfect in thy love, and gather it together in its holiness from the four winds to thy kingdom which thou hast prepared for it. For thine is the power and the glory for ever.
6. Let grace come and let this world pass away. Hosannah to the God of David. If any man be holy, let him come! if any man be not, let him repent: Maranatha ("Our Lord! Come!"), Amen."
7. But suffer the prophets to hold Eucharist as they will.
 
XI
 
1. Whosoever then comes and teaches you all these things aforesaid, receive him.
2. But if the teacher himself be perverted and teach another doctrine to destroy these things, do not listen to him, but if his teaching be for the increase of righteousness and knowledge of the Lord, receive him as the Lord.
3. And concerning the Apostles and Prophets, act thus according to the ordinance of the Gospel.
4. Let every Apostle who comes to you be received as the Lord,
5. But let him not stay more than one day, or if need be a second as well; but if he stay three days, he is a false prophet.
6. And when an Apostle goes forth let him accept nothing but bread till he reach his night's lodging; but if he ask for money, he is a false prophet.
7. Do not test or examine any prophet who is speaking in a spirit, "for every sin shall be forgiven, but this sin shall not be forgiven."
8. But not everyone who speaks in a spirit is a prophet, except he have the behaviour of the Lord. From his behaviour, then, the false prophet and the true prophet shall be known.
9. And no prophet who orders a meal in a spirit shall eat of it: otherwise he is a false prophet.
10. And every prophet who teaches truth, if he do not what he teaches, is a false prophet.
11. But no prophet who has been tried and is genuine, though he enact a worldly mystery of the Church, if he teach not others to do what he does himself, shall be judged by you: for he has his judgment with God, for so also did the prophets of old.
12. But whosoever shall say in a spirit "Give me money, or something else," you shall not listen to him; but if he tell you to give on behalf of others in want, let none judge him.
 
XII
 
1. Let everyone who "comes in the Name of the Lord" be received; but when you have tested him you shall know him, for you shall have understanding of true and false.
2. If he who comes is a traveller, help him as much as you can, but he shall not remain with you more than two days, or, if need be, three.
3. And if he wishes to settle among you and has a craft, let him work for his bread.
4. But if he has no craft provide for him according to your understanding, so that no man shall live among you in idleness because he is a Christian.
5. But if he will not do so, he is making traffic of Christ; beware of such.
 
XIII
 
1. But every true prophet who wishes to settle among you is "worthy of his food."
2. Likewise a true teacher is himself worthy, like the workman, of his food.
3. Therefore thou shalt take the firstfruit of the produce of the winepress and of the threshingfloor and of oxen and sheep, and shalt give them as the firstfruits to the prophets, for they are your high priests.
4. But if you have not a prophet, give to the poor.
5. If thou makest bread, take the firstfruits, and give it according to the commandment.
6. Likewise when thou openest a jar of wine or oil, give the firstfruits to the prophets.
7. Of money also and clothes, and of all your possessions, take the firstfruits, as it seem best to you, and give according to the commandment.
 
XIV
 
1. On the Lord's Day of the Lord come together, break bread and hold Eucharist, after confessing your transgressions that your offering may be pure;
2. But let none who has a quarrel with his fellow join in your meeting until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice be not defiled.
3. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord, "In every place and time offer me a pure sacrifice, for I am a great king," saith the Lord, "and my name is wonderful among the heathen."
 
XV
 
1. Appoint therefore for yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord, meek men, and not lovers of money, and truthful and approved, for they also minister to you the ministry of the prophets and teachers.
2. Therefore do not despise them, for they are your honourable men together with the prophets and teachers.
3. And reprove one another not in wrath but in peace as you find in the Gospel, and let none speak with any who has done wrong to his neighbour, nor let him hear a word from you until he repents.
4. But your prayers and alms and all your acts perform as ye find in the Gospel of our Lord.
 
XVI
 
1. "Watch" over your life "let your lamps" be not quenched "and your loins" be not ungirded, but be "ready," for ye know not "the hour in which our Lord cometh."
2. But be frequently gathered together seeking the things which are profitable for your souls, for the whole time of your faith shall not profit you except ye be found perfect at the last time;
3. For in the last days the false prophets and the corruptors shall be multiplied, and the sheep shall be turned into wolves, and love shall change to hate;
4. For as lawlessness increaseth they shall hate one another and persecute and betray, and then shall appear the deceiver of the world as a Son of God, and shall do signs and wonders and the earth shall be given over into his hands and he shall commit iniquities which have never been since the world began.
5. Then shall the creation of mankind come to the fiery trial and "many shall be offended" and be lost, but "they who endure" in their faith "shall be saved" by the curse itself.
6. And "then shall appear the signs" of the truth. First the sign spread out in Heaven, then the sign of the sound of the trumpet, and thirdly the resurrection of the dead:
7. But not of all the dead, but as it was said, "The Lord shall come and all his saints with him."
8. Then shall the world "see the Lord coming on the clouds of Heaven."
 
            These were the teachings of the Early Church, East & West, together, as the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church.
​

"We must realize that a House divided
​against itself simply cannot stand..."

ROMAN PRIMACY & EASTERN PATRIARCHATES
WHAT THE CHURCH TAUGHT & PRACTICED
 
            The papacy is a "primacy of service" and there is no doubt that St. Peter and his successors hold a special place of honor within the Church.  This Petrine Ministry is not denied by anyone but universal jurisdiction is.
 
            We look at the Church Fathers to see what was held, believed & taught by the Undivided Catholic Church.  They taught the Faith just a few short years after the death of the last Apostle. Regarding the relationship among the five Patriarchates of Rome, Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria it was very clear…especially in the role and ministry of the Bishop.
 
            The Church established by Jesus, being both East & West, together, understood the complete autonomy of the Bishop: “While the bond of concord remains, and the undivided sacrament of the Catholic Church endures, every Bishop disposes and directs his own acts, and will have to give an account of his purposes to the Lord.”  - St. Cyprian in his Letter to Antonianus
 
            No Bishop was ever to be superior to another.  “For neither does any of us set himself up as a bishop of bishops, nor by tyrannical terror does any compel his colleague to the necessity of obedience; since every Bishop, according to the allowance of his liberty and power, has his own proper right of judgment, and can no more be judged by another than himself can judge another.  But let us all wait for the judgment of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the only one that has the power both of preferring us in the government of His Church, and of judging us in our conduct there.” - St. Cyprian in his Address to the Fathers at the Seventh Ecumenical Council
 
Scriptural scholars of all traditions agree that we can discern in the New Testament an early tradition which attributes a special position to St. Peter among The Twelve. The Church built its identity on the Apostles as witnesses…but responsibility for pastoral leadership was not restricted to St. Peter alone.  In Matthew 16:19, St. Peter is explicitly commissioned to "bind and loose"; later, in Matthew 18:18, Christ directly promises all the disciples that they will do the same.
 
            “Through the changes of time and successions, the ordering of bishops and the plan of the Church flow onwards; so that the Church is founded upon the Bishops, and every act of the Church is controlled by these same rulers.  Since this, then, is founded on the divine law, I marvel that some, with daring temerity, have chosed to write to me as if they wrote in the name of the Church.” – St. Cyprian to the Lapsed, Epistle XXVI
 
            Therefore, the communion of local churches, ontologically identical in Faith, order and charisms of the Holy Spirit, bear witness to their unity when they gather themselves together through their Bishops, in synods.
 
            “…which by means of the Apostolic Sees, and the succession of Bishops is spread abroad in an indisputably world-wide diffusion.” – St. Augustine in his Letter CCXXXII
 
The synod [council] is not "power" in the juridical sense of the word, for there can exist no power over the Church, the Body of Christ. The synod is, rather, a witness to the identity of all churches as the Church of God in Faith, life and love. If in his own church the Bishop is priest, teacher and pastor, the divinely appointed witness and keeper of the Faith of the Apostles, it is through the agreement of all Bishops, as revealed in the synod that all churches both manifest and maintain the ontological unity of tradition.
 
            “…the Councils themselves, which are held in the several districts and provinces, must yield, beyond all possibility of doubt, to the authority of the Plenary (Ecumenical or General) Councils which are formed for the whole Christian world…” – St. Augustine in his work ‘On Baptism, Against the Donatists’
 
            The synod, through which local churches witness and express their unity in the salvific truths of Christ, does not exclude the primacy of the first Bishop or the metropolitan. In regional synods, in which all the Bishops of the area must participate, the primacy of the first Bishop must be acknowledged and respected as the famous 34 Apostolic Canon states: "The Bishops of every nation must acknowledge him who is first among them and account him as their head, and do nothing of consequence without his consent... but neither let him (who is the first) do anything without the consent of all; for so there will be unanimity..." From this canon, it is thus evident that the regional primacy can be conceived not as power or jurisdiction but only as an expression of the unity and unanimity of all the Bishops, and consequently of all the churches, of an area.  We must understand the universal primacy of the Roman Church similarly. Based on Christian Tradition, it is possible to affirm the validity of the church of Rome's claims of universal primacy.
           
            The Church, both East & West, together, from the first days of its existence undeniably possessed an ecumenical center of unity and agreement. In the apostolic and Judaeo—Christian period this center was first the church of Jerusalem and later the church of Rome--"presiding in love" according to St Ignatius of Antioch.  For the Orthodox, the essence and the purpose of this primacy is to express and preserve the unity of the Church in Faith and life; to express and preserve the unanimity of all churches; to keep them from isolating themselves into ecclesiastical provincialism, losing the catholicity, separating themselves from the unity of life.
 
It means ultimately to assume the care, the sollicitudo of the churches so that each one of them can abide in that fullness which is always the whole of the Catholic tradition and not any one "part" of it. The idea of primacy thus excludes the idea of jurisdiction but implies that of an "order" of Church which does not subordinate one church to another, but which makes it possible for all churches to live together this life of all in each and of each in all.
 
            “For on this very account the Lord said, ‘On this rock I will build by Church,’ because Peter had said, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ On this rock, therefore, He said, which thou hast confessed, I will build my Church.  For the Rock (petra) was Christ; and on this foundation was Peter himself also built.” – St. Augustine of Hippo in his Tractate CXXIV, ‘On the Gospel of John’

---

" In the long history of the Church, the presiding
hierarch of the universal Church was the bishop of Rome.
After Eucharistic communion with Rome was broken,
canonically the presiding hierarch of the Orthodox
Church is the Archbishop of Constantinople.

To achieve unity, East & West, together, must proclaim the same Faith as that of St. Peter…our foundation for this Faith must be the Rock, it must be the same Jesus Christ!  With that said, Orthodoxy does not reject Roman primacy as such, but simply a particular way of understanding that primacy. Within a restored unity. the Bishop of Rome would be considered “primus inter pares” [first among equals] serving the unity of God's Church in love.
 
He would not be accepted as set up over the Church as a ruler whose service is conceived through legalistic categories of power of jurisdiction. His authority would be understood, not according to standards of earthly authority and domination, but according to terms of loving ministry and humble service. (Matt. 20:25‑27)
                        Provocative and challenging words were voiced by Father Thomas Hopko to his fellow Orthodox at St. John the Baptist Orthodox Church (OCA) in Campbell, Ohio: “We will never be one unless we desire it with all our hearts, and are ready to put away everything that we can to have it…Everything that doesn’t belong to the essence of the Faith.  Language doesn’t belong to the essence of the Faith.  Calendars don’t belong to the essence of the Faith.  Certain liturgical customs don’t belong to the essence of the Faith.  Even the Byzantine Rite Liturgy for us does not belong to the essence of the Faith.” 
“Thou art therefore, saith He, Peter, and upon this Rock which thou hast confessed, upon this rock, which thou hast acknowledged, saying, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,’ I will build my Church.  Upon Me I will build thee, not Me upon thee.” – St. Augustine of Hippo in his Tractate CXXIV, ‘On the Gospel of John’
 
            “Where the Bishop is to be seen, there let all his people be; just as wherever Jesus Christ is present, we have the Catholic Church.”
 -  St. Ignatius of Antioch in his Letter to the Smynaeans.
            From the earliest centuries of the Church…both East & West, together, lived by the teachings of the Ecumenical Councils and guide of the Church Fathers.  The "Petrine” function was always believed to be necessary for the unity and catholicity of the Church.
 
            The see of Rome, whose prominence was associated with the deaths of Peter and Paul, became the principle center in matters concerning the universal Church.  Classic Roman Catholic tradition maintains that the universal primacy of the bishop of Rome was divinely instituted by Christ. This Petrine Ministry was derived from the Gospel accounts of Matthew (16:17‑19), Luke (22:32) and John (21:15‑17)…which all refer not simply to the historical Peter, but to his successors to the end of time.
 
            Through extensive historical research, Cardinal Yves Congar, O.P. gives a correct interpretation of papal jurisdiction in the East:
 
            “The East never accepted the regular jurisdiction of Rome, nor did it submit to the judgment of Western Bishops.  Its appeals to Rome for help were not connected with a recognition of the principal of Roman jurisdiction but were based on the view that Rome had the same truth, the same good.  The East jealously protected its autonomous way of life.  Rome intervened to safeguard the observation of legal rules, to maintain the orthodoxy of Faith and to ensure communion…In according Rome a “primacy of honor,” the East avoided basing this primacy on the succession and the still living presence of the apostle Peter….  The East remained oriented on the logic of local or particular churches in communion with one another in the unity of Faith, love and Eucharist; this unity was realized by means of exchanges and communications and then, when the need made itself felt, by the holding of a [ecumenical] council.  It was a unity of communion.  The west [Western Lung], which Islam had cut off from North Africa, accepted the authority of the Roman see, and over the course of history Rome occupied an increasingly prominent place.”
 
            Many theologians regard Roman "primacy" as having developed gradually in the West due to the convergence of a number of factors, e.g., the dignity of Rome as the only Apostolic Church in the West; the tradition that both Peter and Paul had been martyred there; Rome's long history as a capital of the Roman empire; and its continuing position as the chief center of commerce and communication.
 
            Wouldn’t it be wonderful, if today,  in moments of divisive theological or ecclesiastical quarrels, it would be possible for the bishop of Rome to exercise his primacy with the approval of all Christians in order to safeguard the unity, the truth, the orthodoxy and the catholicity of Christ's Church?
 
Therefore, as in the Early Church, communion with the Bishop of Rome and his primacy would not imply submission to an authority which would stifle the distinctive features of the local churches; rather, the purpose of the episcopal function of the Bishop of Rome would be to promote Christian fellowship in faithfulness to the teaching of the Apostles!

FACTS OF OUR FAITH
"The One True Church founded
by Christ must be "orthodox" in
faith & "catholic" in communion"

It cannot be stressed enough, that at the Ecumenical Councils, the Bishops of the entire Church, East & West, together, convened and discussed, decided, defined and presented the teaching of the Church. These teachings, after having been found to be in accord with Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, were infallible and were so pronounced. From the beginning, therefore, the body which determined and defined Christian Doctrine was the Ecumenical Council, which was guided by the All Holy Good and Life Giving Spirit.
To this day the seven Ecumenical Councils are accepted by the Western Church, with the exception of a few canons of the Councils which conflicted with the administration of the Western Church.
 
Ecumenical Councils…ARE—AND HAVE ALWAYS BEEN—the  highest authority in the Church…
 
The Administrative System of the Early Church was very specific. The Bishops, as the Direct Successors of the Apostles, were always equal among themselves…having the same spiritual authority and prestige. Being equal among themselves, they respected one another and never interfered in jurisdictional matters belonging to other Bishops.  For administrative and political reasons, some of the Bishops received titles, e.g. Metropolitan, Archbishop, or Patriarch in accordance with the mandates of the Ecumenical Councils. The entire Church was initially divided into five Administrative Districts or Patriarchtes: That of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and of Jerusalem…each with its own Bishops, Auxiliary Bishops, Priests and Deacons. Each district was independent of the other from an administrative point of view.
 
The Bishops of each district recognized the Bishop who had his seat in the capital of the district as their leader. For example, the Bishops who were in the district of Alexandria recognized the Bishop of Alexandria, who was named Archbishop and Patriarch, as their leader. Incidentally, he initially had the title "Pope."  [To this very day, the Patriarch of Alexandria’s official title is "His Most Divine Beatitude the Pope and Patriarch of the Great City of Alexandria, Libya, Pentapolis, Ethiopia, all the land of Egypt, and all Africa, Father of Fathers, Shepherd of Shepherds, Prelate of Prelates, thirteenth of the Apostles, and Judge of the Œcumene."]  Essentially, as is the case in our Church today, the Patriarchs did not differ from other Bishops.
 
The Patriarchs presided only as a matter of honor, because they had their seats in cities where political power was centered, or because these cities were large centers of commerce or were connected with the history of Christianity.
​
Continued in the East…
 
This system has remained unchanged in the Orthodox Church. Take as an example the Church of Antioch or the Church of Serbia. Both of these are Orthodox churches, but administratively they are independent. They have their own Bishops who elect a president whom they call Archbishop or Patriarch. Moreover, they have their own synods and are autonomous [self-governing].
 
Should any question on dogma arise or should any Bishop, Presbyter or Deacon preach anything opposed to the teachings of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, then a synod may be convoked by the Patriarch of Constantinople at which all the churches are represented. This synod makes the final decision.
 
The Papal system…
 
In the Western Church a certain trend was cultivated by the Bishops of Rome, a trend which led to the submission of all the Bishops of the Patriarchate of Rome to the Pope of Rome. Gradually, that trend prevailed so that today the other Bishops of the Roman Church are not equal to the Pope, but are merely his representatives. He is the Supreme Pontiff (Pontifex maximus) and the others are his instruments and are inferior to him, both spiritually and judicially.
 
The reason for this superiority is explained this way by Rome: "He is the successor of the Apostle Peter and for that reason all other Bishops must be his inferiors; he alone should be vested with spiritual and temporal authority."
 
But were not the Apostles equal? If Peter was superior to the others, why did Paul point out Peter's mistakes in his epistle to the Galatians? (Galatians 2:11-14)  If Peter was superior, why didn't the bishops of the entire Church subject themselves to the Bishop of Rome? And why shouldn't the Bishop of Rome alone consider himself the Successor of Peter? According to history, Peter was the first Bishop of Antioch. St. Jerome is one of the historical sources proving the Episcopacy of St. Peter in Antioch. Which of the two shall we recognize as Successor of Peter? History shows that the Bishop of Antioch has precedence in this claim.
 
Furthermore, why didn't the Ecumenical Council's declare themselves on this matter? Why didn't the Fathers of the Church accept the decisions of the Bishop of Rome and stop convoking Ecumenical Councils? For the obvious reason that the Ancient Church did not recognize such petty ambitions and visions of grandeur as did the Bishop of Rome, who today is called Supreme Pontiff. The Bishop of Rome was declared "Vicar of Christ on Earth" and "Head of the Church,” by Roman Catholic Councils. Yet he claims to be superior to these Councils, for that is what the teaching of his primacy and infallibility implies.
 
The leader of the Church…
​

"The papacy and the central structure
of the universal Church need to hear
the call to pastoral conversion,
like the ancient patriarchal churches...
to the concrete realization of the collegial spirit."
Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium

A teaching of the Church which has never changed is: the Church has no visible head, but only the Invisible One, Christ Himself; therefore, the body of its Bishops is the only one which represents the Lord, just as the Apostles did. It was not Peter alone who received power to remit or not remit sin, but the other Apostles as well. Consequently, it was not only Peter who represented Christ, but also the other Apostles. The primacy of the Pope, therefore, served as a wedge to widen the gap between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches.
 
Against these theories of the Latin West, the Orthodox East protested through her Bishops. It can be said that one of the main underlying causes of the Great Schism which divided Christianity was precisely the exaggerated aspiration of such an ambition.
 
The Infallibility of the Pope…
 
After the separation of the two Churches in 1054 the Bishops of Rome finally became free from the Orthodox East, which had previously held their recurring ambitions in check. This left the Western Church free to put other innovations into effect. One of these was the proclamation of the Infallibility of the Pope by decision of the Synod of Bishops [Vatican I] of the Roman Church in 1870. The Church, as a whole, before the Great Schism, always recognized the Ecumenical Councils as infallible. Now the Bishop of Rome was placed above the Councils, and proclaimed infallible when speaking ex cathedra as the Shepherd in matters of faith and morals.
 
This dogma of “papal infallibility” is strange. It is left to the judgment of each individual to examine it. He will see that from a logical viewpoint this doctrine is unsound and devoid of a scriptural or traditional basis. The Council of the Roman Church which convened at the Vatican in 1870 presents the Bishops of Rome as equal to Christ. Today, for many, it is difficult to accept the way the minutes of this Synod read: "Jesus Christ has three existences. His personal existence which Arius denied; His mystical existence in the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist which Calvin denied; and His other existence, which completes the two, and through which He lives constantly, namely His authority in the person of His Vicar on Earth. The Council, maintaining this third existence, assures the world that it possesses Jesus Christ."
 
Reasons & Reactions to Papal Infallibility…
 
Historians have noted that the aforementioned declaration coincided with the ethnic uprising and political independence of Western Europe, especially in Italy.  It is interesting to note that infallibility was proclaimed at the same time the Papal States ended!  One historical view is that Pope Pius IX, who summoned Vatican I, was acting to extend his claim of supremacy to one of infallibility…at a time when his temporal authority was being threatened …accomplishing this by elevating his seat above any political office or synod.
 
Pope Pius IX was the longest-reigning elected pope in the history of the Catholic Church, serving for over 31 years…without him the Dogma of Infallibility would never have been defined…but, was the Council called to freely define a long standing understanding [papal infallibility] that the Church always held or was it a manipulated assembly to put in place an innovative prerogative to replace the temporal power that was being lost?
Father August Hasler served for five years in the Vatican Secretariat for Christian Unity. It was during that time he was given access to the Vatican Archives and discovered diaries, letters and official documents relating to the First Vatican Council that had never been studied before, taken from “How the Pope Became Infallible:”
 
“When Pius IX presided over the opening of the Vatican Council, he was already seventy-eight years old.  His advanced age [for that time] had already taken its toll.  The pope’s intellectual capacities were deteriorating.  ‘He no longer has any memory from one day to the next,’ remarked Bishop William Clifford.  Many bishops spoke of him as an old man in his second childhood. 
 
It was obvious the pope could no longer concentrate on a subject for any length of time and seemed to jump from one thing to another.  His speeches, even at official occasions, often caused embarrassment—the pope no longer paid attention to what he was saying.  All too often Secretary of State Cardinal Antonelli had to undo the damage the pope had done at audiences by his thoughtless statements. 
 
The pope’s physical and psychic condition was also important as far as infallibility was concerned.  Many people, including not a few bishops, say in Pius IX’s determination to define the dogma not so much mature reflection as senile stubbornness: The pope was trapped by his own fixation.”
 
The pope was only confirmed in the course he had embarked on: to proclaim the Dogma of Papal Infallibility!  Any last ditch efforts to change the pope’s mind came to naught.  The more hopeless the situation became, the higher the bishops’ desperation rose. Sometimes it was expressed in violent agitation, sometimes in deep depression.  There were bishops who wept, others who wanted to die.

 
What the French Bishop François Lecourtier wrote at that time was confirmed by similar testimony from countless Bishops and Council observers: “Our weakness at this moment comes neither from Scripture nor the tradition of the Fathers nor the witness of the General [Ecumenical] Councils nor the evidence of history.  It comes from our lack of freedom, which is radical.  An imposing minority, representing the Faith of more than one hundred million Catholics, that is, almost half of the entire Church, is crushed beneath the yoke of a restrictive agenda, which contradicts conciliar traditions.  It is crushed by commissions which have not been truly elected, and which dare to insert undebated paragraphs in the texts after debate has closed.   It is crushed by the commission of postulates, which as been imposed upon it from above.  It is crushed by the absolute absence of discussion, response, objections, and the opportunity to demand explanations; by newspapers which have been encouraged to hunt the Bishops down and to incite the clergy against them; by the Nuncios who bring on reinforcements when the newspapers no longer suffice to throw everything into confusion, and who try to promote the priests ahead of the bishops as witnesses to the Faith, while reducing the true, divinely chosen witnesses to the level of delegates of the lower clergy, indeed to rebuke them if they do not act accordingly.  The minority is crushed above all by weight of the supreme authority [the Pope] which oppresses it with the praise and encouragement it lavishes upon its priests in the form of papal briefs.  It is crushed by the displays of favor toward certain bishops and of hostility to others.”
The drama of Bishop Lecourtier—who ended up throwing his Conciliar Documents in the Tiber and leaving Rome prematurely, for which reason he was removed from office as bishop of Montpellier after the Council—is an example of the crisis of conscience that so many of the most prominent and best educated of the bishops went through. 
 
Many of the Council Fathers left Rome before the deciding vote was taken, and only endorsed the Dogma after being subjected to indescribable pressure from the Vatican and from their own dioceses.  They often gave their final consent only for the sake of Church unity, acknowledging the definition in an attenuated sense and without any inner conviction.
 
All the dismissals, the sanctions and excommunications, all the manipulative and repressive methods used by the Curia and the Nuncios, the threats, surveillance, and denunciations, and, last of all, the Old Catholic schism and the “interior emigration” of so many Catholics, especially theologians and educated people:   All this makes it seem perfectly justified to ask whether the definition of infallibility passed by this Council ever got anything like a free “reception.”
 
According to William Sparrow-Simpson, in his “Roman Catholic Opposition to Papal infallibility.”  In the Vatican Council itself the Bishops appealed repeatedly to the Canon of St. Vincent of Lerins as proof that the Infallibility doctrine formed no portion of the Catholic faith:
 
“Moreover, in the Catholic Church itself all possible care must be taken that we hold that Faith which has been believed everywhere always by all.  For that is truly and in the strictest sense Catholic, which, as the name itself and the reason of the thing declare, comprehends all universally…
 
This rule we shall observe if we follow universality, antiquity, consent.  We shall follow universality if we confess that one faith to be true, which the whole church throughout the world confesses; antiquity, if we in no wise depart from those interpretations which it is manifest were notoriously held by our holy ancestors and fathers; consent, in like manner, if in antiquity itself we ad here to the consentient definitions and determinations of all, or at least of almost all priests and doctors…
 
Keep the Deposit.  What is the Deposit?  That which has been entrusted to thee, not that which thou has devised: a matter not of wit but of learning; not of private adoption but of public tradition; a matter brought to thee, not put forth by thee, wherein thou art bound to be not an author but a keeper, not a teacher but a disciple, not a leader but a follower…Let that which formerly was believed, though imperfectly apprehended, as expounded by thee be clearly understood.  Let posterity welcome, understood through thy exposition, what antiquity venerated without understanding.  Yet teach still the same truths which thou hast learned, so that while thou speakest newly, thou speakest not what is new.”
Nothing can be stronger than St. Vincent’s sense of the substantial immutability of the Faith. 
 
Bishop Maret affirmed in the treatise which he sent to all the members of the Council that the principles of St. Vincent can never legitimately issue in a system of absolute Infallibility and monarchy of each individual Pope.  Bisho Hefele said that:
 
“When differences on matter of faith arose in the primitive Church appeal was made to the Apostolic Churches, Rome, Alexandria, Antioch; and that only was dogmatically propounded to the faithful, which was universally believed.  None of the ancients ever imagined that an infallible decision or controversies could be obtained by any  shorter method at the hands of any single individual.  On the contrary, St. Vincent said, let us follow universality, antiquity, consent.”  Most Bishops urged that according to the principle of St. Vincent no definition could be made without moral unanimity.

 
We have no proof, said another Bishop, least of all from the first five centuries.  And if nothing can ever be de fined except that which has been believed always everywhere and by all, by what right can we defend Papal Infallibility? 
Objections Voiced from American Prelates…
 
Beyond any doubt, the pope was forcing many bishops to go down a road they didn’t want to take.  “We have to eat what we have vomited up,” commented Bishop Michael Domenec of Pittsburgh.  The only possible way out was to break with PIUS IX, but they [ the bishops] lacked the courage for that.
 
For many, the Council was no longer a Council at all.  Archbishop John Baptist Purcell of Cincinnati called it, “a comedy ending in a tragedy.”

 
Archbishop Peter Richard Kenrick of St. Louis finally submitted out of obedience, but in later years he would never teach the doctrine of papal infallibility nor justify it in terms of Scripture and tradition.  He left it to others to demonstrate the compatibility of the doctrine with the facts of church history.
 
Some bishops were unhappy because they felt there were more burning questions to address. For instance, Augustin Vérot, Bishop of Savannah, would have much rather had a declaration by the Council that Negroes, too, had souls—an understandable concern from a bishop from a country where civil war had raged until recently over the question of slavery.  But, the Council leadership had other matters on its mind.

 
Many Catholics, including a particularly large number of professors of theology and history, could not, in conscience, accept the new dogma.  They wanted to hold on to their old Catholic Faith—hence their name.  But the bishops insisted that they recognize the new dogma, and the schism that people had feared at last took place.  In Germany, Austria and Switzerland various communities were founded independently from Rome.  In years after the Council they grew to about two hundred thousand members.
 
Fact is, a lot of land, wealth and control was lost when the Papal States came to an end.  According to the Vatican website: “The Papal States were territories in the Italian peninsula under the sovereign direct rule of the Pope from the 6th century until 1870…
 
In the years before the 4th Century AD the Catholic Church was unrecognized and persecuted and was unable to either hold or transfer property. Early Catholic congregations used to meet in small rooms set aside for that purpose in the homes of well-wishers and a number of early churches on the outskirts of Ancient Rome were held in custody for the Church by their members…
 
The Church received several donations of land but it held all these lands as a private landowner and not as a sovereign entity. In the 5th century, the church organization in Italy, and the Pope – the Bishop of Rome – as its head, submitted their claim asserting their spiritual primacy over the whole Church…
 
During the Renaissance the Papal States expanded greatly and the Pope became an important secular ruler.  The Papal States faced various challenges and they lost much of their Land and power during the French revolution and Napoleonic era…
 
During the course of Italian unification in the 19th century, the Papal States were annexed to Italy. This was later followed by the Lateran Treaty of 1929, which set up Vatican City as an independent state.”
 
Countless histories have been written about the rise of temporal power within the Roman Patriarchate.
 
Failure to reach Unanimity…
 
To summarize, according to Mark Powell, in his book, Papal Infallibility: A Protestant Evaluation of an Ecumenical Issue: “a number of factors were involved in defining papal infallibility at Vatican I.  An obvious concern for many Bishops was to support the Pope at a time when his political and spiritual authority was under severe attack.  With the intention of buttressing papal authority, and in light of debates that go back at least as far as the Protestant Reformation, Vatican I defined a religious epistemology that made the Pope an infallible belief-producing mechanism in the Catholic Church.”
​

A Humble Francis & Loving Bartholomew...
​making efforts to heal the Church of Christ!

The claim of papal infallibility has never rested well with history.  Because the Church, both East & West, together, always taught that the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils were the supreme authority and the infallible guide to proclaim the truth of salvation, the West with its new decree completely went against the conscience of the Church!  Furthermore, as Orthodox Theologian Bishop Kalistos Ware confirms, the Pope’s alleged charism of truth “is common to all other Bishops; he is not more infallible than any other Bishop guided by the Spirit.”
 
For nearly a thousand years, it was always believed, according to St. Cyprian, that “the rest of the Apostles were that which Peter was, endowed with equal partnership, both of honor and office.”  Infallibility of a single Bishop was completely unknown in the Early Church.  There was no evidence of papal infallibility in the first eight hundred years of church history.  The doctrine did not appear until the Middle Ages, and the popes themselves had not taught it distinctly until the sixteenth century. 
 
As mentioned earlier in this book, in 1967 Pope Paul VI stated, “We are aware that the Pope is undoubtedly the greatest obstacle in the path of the Oecumene.”  In 1995 Pope John Paul II again brought attention to the issue in Ut Unum Sint. Similarly, it has been brought up by Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis who said in an interview on 8 March 2017, “I am a sinner and am fallible.”
 
And, the February 1979 “questions” proposed by Hans Küng, Director of the Institute for Ecumenical Research at the University of Tübingen could be asked:
 
“With what right have you—and your forebears—said that you were infallible?  And in the Church of all places.  With what right do you lay claim to the infallibility of the Holy Spirit of God, which ‘blows where it wills,’ you who are men and not God?  Doesn’t ‘to err is human’ hold true for you?  If so, that would have to be attested to in the most unambiguous language.  People in the Bible (and in the Church of the New Testament, beginning with Peter, the ‘Rock’) do not exactly convey an impression of infallibility,  Peter was not the only one—Peter, whom the Lord once called ‘Satan,’ who denied the Lord three times, who, even after Easter, and above all in Antioch, proved to be quite fallible in his controversy with Paul—for whom the cock crowed.  And thus, for many long decades nobody mentioned any infallibility of the Bishop of Rome (nor, for the time being, of the Ecumenical Councils either).  In fact, upon close inspection the historian must judge infallibility to be an innovation of the second millennium, and really only of the nineteenth century.  So what is left of the argument that papal and conciliar infallibility are rooted in Scripture and old Catholic tradition?  Or may one not ask that question?”
 
In hopes of reaching a fair resolution of the controversy over infallibility, the French theologian Yves Congar called for a “re-reception” of Vatican I’s papal doctrines…that the Dogma of Infallibility must be reopened and the definition corrected.  More than anyone else it was Congar who laid the groundwork for the modern understanding of the Church characteristic of Vatican II.  Historical studies, historical-theological analyses, radical questions, then the fact of Vatican II itself, the revival of local and particular churches and, lastly, the revived appreciation of the principles of Eastern ecclesiology—all this, Congar maintained, has made more people realize how trapped in its own time Vatican I was.
           
In conclusion, according to Jesuit Father Luis Bermejo in his Infallibility on Trial: Church, Conciliarity and Communion, “the lack of a true crisis touching the essence of the Church’s Faith which might justify the extreme step of a dogmatic definition [of papal infallibility]; the weakness of the historical argument in favor of the definition, along with the inability to explain satisfactorily some historical cases of the past; the low level and, in general, the unsatisfactory nature of the exegetical work produced in the Council; and the fact that many local churches at that time did not recognize the doctrine as part of the Deposit of Faith: all these reasons combined prevented the attainment of that moral unanimity which, according to an ancient and constant conciliar tradition, was necessary for the definition of a new dogma of Faith.”

 
For many, the First Vatican Council itself was proof enough that the allegedly unanimous consent of the faithful on infallibility did not exist.  Over one hundred bishops would reject the new dogma.  In this connection, they once again raised to question their demand for moral unanimity on dogmatic decisions.  Otherwise, thought Bishop Ketteler of Mainz, the Council would be committing a crime against the Church.
 
Again, according to Father Hasler: “As the day of the vote on infallibility approached, many bishops dodged the decision and left Rome, others became conveniently sick, while still others again forced themselves to come up with a ‘yes.’  On July 17, 1870, 55 bishops renewed their ‘Non Placet’ and let it be known, moreover, that out of reverence for the Holy Father they did not wish to take part in the solemn session of the following day.  They then left Rome in protest…
 
At the last meeting of the Council on July 18, 1870, only 535 bishops voted ‘yes,’ representing less than half of the 1,084 members entitled to take part in the Council, and less than two thirds of the seven hundred bishops present at the opening of the Council.  Only two bishops voted ‘no,’ one being Bishop Edward Fitzgerald of Little Rock, Arkansas.  In terms of the original number of participants, 20 percent boycotted the solemn final session of the Council…
 
As the new dogma was being proclaimed, a violent electrical storm burst over St. Peter’s.  The thunder rolled and growled, the lightning flashes threw a ghostly light in the darkness which had filled the basilica—for some sign of God’s approval, for others of His wrath.”
 
With this in mind, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, as Theologian Joseph Ratzinger stated: “Where neither a unanimous agreement of the universal Church nor a clear testimony of the sources is available, a binding decision is not possible, and if such a decision has formally been take, its conditions are missing and the question must be raised about its legitimacy.”  [contained in “The Ratzinger Solution” at the end of the book]

 
            In 2016, it’s hard to believe that some clergy & Faithful found it difficult to hear Pope Francis say, “I am a sinner and am fallible.”
​

                                              CHRIST COMMISONS THE FIRST FEMAILE DEACONS OF THE CHURCH!

FEMALE DEACONS & WOMEN’S ORDINATION

Women have always been exalted in the Holy Church of Christ!
 
The specific “place” of women in the church is comprised of many facets. We see women very active in the New Testament and Early Church; and, see them proceed to their role as saints and their service as Female Deacons.
 
            Women were the first to hear of Christ's Resurrection, and these women disciples were told to "go and proclaim" the Resurrection.  The Orthodox Church has always taught that Christ first identified Himself to the woman of Samaria. She is known as St Photeine, the Woman at the Well. Many women traveled with Jesus during His ministry. Some women opened their homes to Him, others were teachers and preachers. St. Junia is credited with teaching Apollos about Christianity and bringing him to Christ.
 
Distortion of Women in the New Testament…
 
We can find St. Junia and read about her in Sacred Scripture. But, unfortunately, she is often referred to as Junius, the male form of Junia.  Likewise, St Nina, the Evangelizer of Georgia and Equal to the Apostles is often called Nino, and both women are referred to as “him” not “her.”  Prisca or Priscilla, the wife of Aquila, is mentioned before him in the Bible, thus denoting a more respected status in the Early Christian community. We know that St. Mary Magdalene was a follower of Christ…a disciple…a woman…and the first of mankind to hear of Our Lord’s Resurrection from the Dead!
 
Distortion of Women in Church History…
 
Women in Early Church history were seen to be given an equal share. So unlike the former Hebrew tradition, the Catholic Church, both East & West, together, advocated “equal rights” for all. This history of women's ministry from the New Testament and Early Church should be proclaimed by Roman and Orthodox Catholics today, yet examples of Junia/Junius, and Nina/Nino only serve as a testament to the distortion of women in Church history.
One woman who stands out in the New Testament is Phoebe, a worker with St Paul, who was the first Female Deacon. She was called both diakonos [deacon] and prostatis, which in those days denoted someone in authority. In the Third & Fourth centuries, Female Deacons were common, as attested to by Church Fathers.
St John Chrysostom, who was well respected in his day and Patriarch of Constantinople, was an advocate of the Female Diaconate, and many letters between him and Female Deacons have survived. Many tombstones serve as another reference. They can be found bearing witness to Female Deacons and their ministry. One such example is a tombstone on the Mt. of Olives which bears the inscription, "here lies Sophia the Deacon, a second Phoebe."
 
Several Female Deacons became saints. Among them are St Macrina, the sister of Sts. Gregory and Basil; St. Nonna, the wife of St. Gregory Nazianzus; St. Theosebia, the wife of St. Gregory of Nyssa; St. Gorgonia, the daughter of St Gregory the Theologian; St. Melania, St. Susanna, St. Appolonia, St Olympia and St Xenia.
 
The icon of St. Tatiana shows her wearing the diaconal stole with the words "Holy, Holy, Holy" in Slavonic as is the custom for Russian deacons. She is wearing cuffs, as do Orthodox & Byzantine/Eastern Rite Catholic male priests and deacons, and she is holding the censor in one hand, a cross in the other. In the year 535 AD, forty Female Deacons were employed and serving at Hagia Sophia, The Great Church of Constantinople.
 
            Similarities of Male and Female Deacons…
 
In the Early Eastern jurisdictions of the Catholic Church, accepted by both East & West, together, Female Deacons took Holy Communion [the Mysteries] from the hands of the Bishop, behind the Iconostas [Icon Screen]  in the Holy Altar area, as do the male Priests and Deacons today. The Female Deacons took the Chalice from the Altar and replaced it on the Prothesis table [where the Holy Gifts are prepared] after Communion, as do the male Deacons today.
 
Ancient Service Books attest to the ordination of Female Deacons, showing the “Order of Ordination,” Litanies and Ordination Prayers. Female Deacons were ordained right before the Lord's prayer as male Deacons are and they wore the exact same Sacred Vestments.   All of this is recorded throughout the Service Books & Ceremonials of the Patriarchate of Constantinople.
 
The female diaconate peaked in the Early Church, declined in the Eighth century and virtually disappeared by the Twelfth century, although individual women especially nuns, have been ordained throughout the ages.
 
In 1911, St Nektarios, then a Orthodox Bishop of Greece, ordained a female monastic as a Deacon. A few years later, Chrysostomos, Archbishop of Athens did likewise.
 
In 1957, a college for Fomen Deacons opened in Greece. Whilst most assume no graduates have ever been ordained, rumors persist that there are ordained Female Deacons in Greece.
 
The restoration of the female diaconate received a lot of press in pre-revolutionary Russia, winning support from several bishops. The Revolution interrupted the Synod which had it on its agenda, the restoration of this order. Many contemporary women and men feel that the restoration of this order is not a stepping stone to the priesthood, but a viable women's ministry, and that it is long overdue in the Orthodox Church.
 
In understanding the restoration of the Order of Deaconess, one must realize that this is not innovation but, rather, a return to the original discipline and practice of the Catholic Church, both East & West, together, that was established by Our Lord Jesus Christ!
 
Again, the ordination of Female Deacons has been practiced unbroken in The Armenian Orthodox Church and is currently restored by The Orthodox Church of Greece and some Ukrainian and other Eastern Orthodox jurisdictions.
 
It must also be noted that the Order of Deaconess was distinct within itself. Certain "roles" were assigned to male Deacons and others to the Female Deacons. Furthermore, it was NEVER a step to the Priesthood, which has always been -- as the Apostles exampled --restricted to men. "I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deaconess of the church." (Rom 16:1) Phoebe, Lydia, Priscilla and other Christian women of Bible times and for almost 800 years afterward were highly honored in the Eastern Orthodox Church as Female Deacons or members of the Order of the Diaconate for Women.
 
They were "servants of the Church" and the leaders and teachers of women. Many a male leader of the Church also attested to the influence of the Deaconess in teaching them in the early formative stages of their lives and fondly referred to them as the "Reverend Mothers," a title by which they are still addressed.
 
Here are some reflections on Women Deacons…
 
His All-Holiness +BARTHOLOMEW I
Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome
and Ecumenical Patriarch:
 
"As is known, the Ecumenical Patriarchate organized about twenty years ago a special conference in Rhodes to explore the unique role of women in the Orthodox Church. In 1997 we hosted at the Phanar an inter-Orthodox conference with the participation of women, whom we exhorted to make a thorough examination of this expression of “diakonia.” [Deacon]  We reminded them at the same time that the institution of Deaconesses is an indisputable part of our tradition reaching back to the primitive Church."
 
Ecumenical Patriarchate Inter-Orthodox
Theological Consultation: Rhodes, Greece 1988...
 
THE DIACONATE AND "MINOR ORDERS"
 
"The apostolic order of deaconesses should be revived: It was never altogether abandoned in the Orthodox Church though it has tended to fall into disuse. There is ample evidence, from apostolic times, from the patristic, canonical and liturgical tradition, well into the Byzantine period (and even in our own day) that this order was held in high honor.
 
The deaconess was ordained within the sanctuary during the Divine Liturgy with two prayers, she received the Orarion (the deacon's stole) and received Holy Communion at the Altar exactly as that of the Deacon.  The Rite of Ordination has been preserved from The Great Church of Constantinople
 
The revival of this ancient order should be envisaged on the basis of the ancient prototypes testified to in many sources and with the prayers found in the Apostolic Constitutions and the ancient Byzantine liturgical books.
 
Such a response would represent a positive response to many of the needs and demands of the contemporary world in many spheres. This would be all the more true if the Diaconate in general (male and female) were restored in all places in its original, manifold services (diakonia) with extension in the social sphere, in the spirit of ancient tradition and in response to the special needs of our time. It should not be solely restricted to a purely liturgical role or considered to be a mere step on the way to higher ‘ranks’ of clergy.
 
The revival of women deacons in the Orthodox Church would emphasize in a special way the dignity of woman and give recognition to her contribution to the work of the Church as a whole."
 
His Eminence Archbishop +MICHAEL
Greek Orthodox Archdiocese
of North & South America, 1953...
 
"From the very days when the Church was founded, it has pursued a missionary task.  And our Savior Jesus Christ addressed these words to all of those who have continued in the sacred work of the Apostles: 'Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations.' and 'Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature.'...The missionary character of our Church should be even stronger and more obvious is this great land in which we live, because here besides the Orthodox Church there are many others…In order, therefore, that the Greek Orthodox Church be always in complete communion with its members it needs substantial assistance. While it has, of course, its priests, there is so much to be done in each community that the endeavors of these priests alone do not suffice...
 
...These tremendous needs of the Greek Orthodox Church in America have urged us to make a fervent appeal to our daughters-in-Christ...with the future welfare of our Church and membership at heart, we are considering the establishment in this country of an order of Deaconesses...
 
...Christ continued His work. Christ continues His sacrifice, as He will in the ages to come, so long as there remains even one soul to be saved from sin. He seeks our help. He seeks the assistance of both men and women..."
 
His Eminence Archbishop +IAKOVOS
Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North & South America...
 
Early in his tenure as the successor to Archbishop MICHAEL, Archbishop IAKOVOS also referred to the need for the presence of Deaconesses. In his keynote address to the 1960 Clergy-Laity Congress held in Buffalo, New York, in reference to the need for monasticism, missionaries and deaconesses, he stressed...
 
"No Church exists or can long continue without those who are willing to devote their lives solely in its behalf." The archbishop referred to deaconesses as "additional battalions in the field of battle." He also identified the need to create a school for Deaconesses. In his keynote to the 1962 Clergy-Laity Congress in Boston, Archbishop IAKOVOS said that "the necessity for the establishment of an order of deaconesses has become a crying need more than ever before."
 
            Recently, His Holiness Pope Francis has authorized the establishment of a study group for the establishment and return of Female Deacons in the Roman Catholic Church.  (Sadly, this was voted down)

May Pope Francis & Patriarch Bartholomew
being about unity that we worked for in 1964...
​Pope Paul VI

MARRIED PRIESTS IN THE ROMAN CHURCH
FROM A MARRIED DEACON’S PERSPECTIVE
 
               March 2017 confirmed to the world that Pope Francis is open to ordaining married men in some cases.  At the same time, he was careful to uphold the celibacy rule, stressing that “voluntary celibacy” is not a solution to the vocation crisis in the Roman Catholic Church.
 
            The National Catholic Register quoted from the Pope’s first ever interview with the German Newspaper Die Zeit—saying that the shortage of priests around the world is an “enormous problem” that must be resolved—”we must also determine which tasks they can undertake, for example in remote communities” said the Holy Father; he said the issue of viri probati, married men proven in faith and virtue who could be ordained to the priesthood is a “possibility” that “we have to think about.”
 
            The move to allowing married men to be priests, as is the tradition in Orthodoxy and in Eastern Rites under Rome, has been talked about for years.  Archbishop Pietro Parolin, the Vatican Secretary of State, said in an interview given to the Venezuela newspaper, El Universal on 31 August, 2013 that mandatory celibacy as a prerequisite for priestly ordination in the Latin Rite “is not part of church dogma and the issue is open to discussion because it is an ecclesiastical tradition.  Modifications can be made, but these must always favor unity and God’s will.  God speaks to us in many different ways.  We need to pay attention to this voice that points us towards causes and solutions, for example the clergy shortage.”
 
            The Tablet in 2014 featured a similar article titled, “Pope Says Married Men Could be Ordained – if World’s Bishops Agree.”  It said in a private meeting with Brazilian Bishop Erwin Kräutler that the Pope discussed the shortage of priests in his Diocese of Xingu, Brazil.  The bishop, originally from Austria, gave his interview to an Austrian news source:
 
            “I told him that as bishop of Brazil’s largest diocese with 800 church communities and 700,000 Faithful I only had 27 priests, which means that our communities can only celebrate the Eucharist [Mass] twice or three times a year at the most.  The Pope explained that he could not take everything in hand personally from Rome.  We local bishops, who are best acquainted with the needs of our Faithful, should be corajudos, that is ‘courageous’ in Spanish, and make concrete suggestions.
 
            ‘A bishop should not act alone,’ the Pope told Kräutler.  He said that ‘regional and national bishops conferences should seek and find consensus on reform and we should then bring up our suggestions for reform in Rome.’  The Pope himself told me about a diocese in Mexico in which each community had a deacon but many had no priest.  There were 300 deacons there who naturally could not celebrate the Eucharist.  The question was how things could continue in such a situation?  ‘It was up to the bishops to make the suggestions,’ the Pope said again.” 
 
            Along with the August 2016 edition of CRUX reporting that the next Synod of Bishops in Rome is likely to focus on the ordination of married men, Deacon Keith Fournier, a married deacon serving in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Richmond, Virginia gave his views, published in Living Faith, regarding his role as a married deacon and addressed the subject of married men as Roman Catholic priests…
 
            “Given the growing interest in this story line, I felt it was an appropriate time to address the topic in a wider context.
 
Married Deacons…
 
First, let us turn to an aspect of this topic which too many Catholics do not know: that there are already married clerics in the Western or Latin Rite of the Catholic Church. One example is found in the Order of Deacons. The restoration of the Order was promoted by the Second Vatican Council. Its ranks are open to both married and celibate men. However, the decision concerning state in life must have occurred before the ordination.
 
Married men become clerics when they are ordained as deacons. They are no longer laymen. Thus the oxymoron lay deacons, still used by some, reflects a lack of good teaching - and is just plain wrong. Catholic deacons are ordained members of the Catholic clergy, ordained not to the priesthood but to the ministry.  I have served as an ordained Catholic Deacon for twenty years and recently opined on the diaconate as a vocation on the Feast of St. Lawrence the Deacon.
 
The Catechism of the Catholic Church describes this order of Clergy in this way: “At a lower level of the hierarchy are to be found deacons, who receive the imposition of hands 'not unto the priesthood, but unto the ministry.’” At an ordination to the diaconate only the bishop lays hands on the candidate, thus signifying the deacon's special attachment to the bishop in the tasks of his “diakonia." "Deacons share in Christ's mission and grace in a special way. The sacrament of Holy Orders marks them with an imprint ("character") which cannot be removed and which configures them to Christ, who made himself the "deacon" or servant of all." (See, CCC #1569-1571)
 
The adjective ‘permanent,’ often used to describe married deacons, does not change the nature of the ordination or what is sacramentally conferred with the imposition of the bishop's hands on the man called to the office. A deacon is a deacon. Rather, it denotes the intention of the deacon to remain in that rank of ordered service as a member of the clergy. A transitional deacon intends to be considered for ordination to the priesthood.
 
Married Priests…
 
Second, we have a growing body of married men who have been ordained to the Catholic priesthood for the Latin Rite. For these men, the discipline of celibacy was dispensed by the Church prior to their ordination. Most come from other Christian communities. The most visible community of these priests have come to us through the Ordinariates established for groups of former Anglicans coming into full communion with the [Roman] Catholic Church which was opened by the apostolic constitution of Pope Emeritus Benedict in 2009. My most recent treatment of this gift to the whole Church can be found here. However, there are others, who, through the prior pastoral provision established by John Paul II, were also invited to priestly ordination.
 
Press reports, opinion pieces and editorials which cover the issue of whether married men may once again be admitted to the Roman Catholic priesthood often pose the question improperly. For example, by asking, ‘Should priests be allowed to marry?’ That improper way of posing the question either reveals a complete misunderstanding of the issues and the history of the subject - or it can reveal an agenda to assert some perceived kind of pressure on the Church. None of the discussions over mandatory clerical celibacy for Latin Rite Catholic priests concern those already ordained and pledged to lifelong celibacy. That cannot and will not change.
 
The only issue being raised by any of the discussions concerning a change is whether already mature, proven, married men (viri probati) should be allowed to discern a possible vocation to the priesthood and, if chosen by the Church, be ordained to the priesthood? They can already be considered for ordination to the diaconate. In fact, that ordination always precedes ordination to the priesthood. If this were to happen it would NOT mean a diminution in the cherished role of clerical celibacy.
 
Consecrated Celibacy and Consecrated Marriage…
 
Consecrated celibacy is a prophetic sign of the Kingdom of God and a gift to the whole Church. It was instituted and lived by Jesus, demonstrated in the lives of many of the Apostles, confirmed in the earliest witness of the ancient Church and affirmed in the unbroken tradition of the Church. (See, e.g., Matt. 19:12) Consecrated Christian marriage is also a prophetic sign and a gift to the Church. The Church is the bridegroom and Jesus the bride. This witness is increasingly important, especially in the current age preoccupied with rejecting marriage as solely possible between one man and one woman, open to life and intended for life.
 
At the foundation of both chaste, consecrated celibacy and chaste, sacramental marriage is a call to live the nuptial or spousal mystery.  The consecrated celibate is called to participate in the nuptial or spousal mystery in an immediate and prophetic way, forsaking one person to be married to all. While the married man participates in a mediated way, through chaste love with one woman - and then through the couple's openness to life which expand beyond the couple to family, the domestic church. Both responses have a prophetic dimension as well as a pastoral one…

​Many Roman Catholics are still unaware of this fact, in the Eastern Catholic Church there is an unbroken tradition of admitting both celibate and married men to candidacy for the order of deacon and priest. They must have married before ordination as deacons. In the Code of Canon Law for the Eastern Churches we read:
 
"Clerical celibacy chosen for the Kingdom of Heaven and suited to the priesthood is to be greatly esteemed everywhere, as supported by the tradition of the whole church; likewise, the hallowed practice of married clerics in the primitive church and in the tradition of the Eastern Churches throughout the ages is to be held in honor. Clerics, celibate or married, are to excel in the virtue of chastity; it is for the particular law to establish suitable means for pursuing this end. In leading family life and in educating children married clergy are to show an outstanding example to other Christian faithful.” (Canons # 373-375)
 
Thus, both married and celibate men are considered for ordination to the priesthood from the ranks of deacons in the Eastern Churches. The decision for marriage or celibacy is made before they were ordained as deacons and cannot be changed.  Bishops are always celibate and monastic in the Eastern Churches. And, in the instances of married men ordained as deacons or priests, those ordained clerics pledge not to remarry should their spouse die.
 
The Eastern Church, both Catholic and Orthodox, often assigns married priests to different types of ministry than celibate priests. Similarly, in the Latin rite of the Western Church, married men ordained to the priesthood serve in a manner that reflects and respects their state in life and offers its pastoral witness as a gift to the whole Church.
 
What Does the Church Teach?
 
So, what does the Catholic Church actually teach concerning this issue which has once again attracted so much attention - the possibility of the Latin Rite considering mature, proven, married men for ordination to the priesthood? Rather than rely on secondary sources which so often surround the discussion of this matter, let us turn to the Catechism of the Catholic Church for what the Church has to say. It should settle the matter for most, except perhaps a few of my traditionalist Catholic brethren who simply do not like the practice of allowing married men to be ordained at all.
 
These paragraphs are taken from the treatment of Holy Orders in article six of the Official Catechism of the Catholic Church. I commend this entire section to everyone who wants to understand the issues surrounding the gift of ordained service to the whole Church.             The Catechism contains important footnotes to sources of authority, drawn from the Scriptures and the sacred Tradition, which are well worth a more in depth study. Remember, if you want to know what the Catholic Church REALLY teaches, go first to the Scriptures, to the Catechism of the Catholic Church and to teaching of the Magisterium, not to those who give you their opinion. Some even improperly use sources of authority as proof texts for pushing their own agendas to change the Church rather than be changed by lovingly embracing her teaching. Here are the words of the Catechism concerning clerical ordination:
 
"Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination. The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ's return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason, the ordination of women is not possible."
 
"No one has a right to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders. Indeed no one claims this office for himself; he is called to it by God. Anyone who thinks he recognizes the signs of God's call to the ordained ministry must humbly submit his desire to the authority of the Church, who has the responsibility and right to call someone to receive orders. Like every grace this sacrament can be received only as an unmerited gift.”
 
"All the ordained ministers of the Latin Church, with the exception of permanent deacons, are normally chosen from among men of faith who live a celibate life and who intend to remain celibate "for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Called to consecrate themselves with undivided heart to the Lord and to 'the affairs of the Lord,' they give themselves entirely to God and to men. Celibacy is a sign of this new life to the service of which the Church's minister is consecrated; accepted with a joyous heart, celibacy radiantly proclaims the Reign of God.”
 
"In the Eastern Churches a different discipline has been in force for many centuries: while bishops are chosen solely from among celibates, married men can be ordained as deacons and priests. This practice has long been considered legitimate; these priests exercise a fruitful ministry within their communities. Moreover, priestly celibacy is held in great honor in the Eastern Churches and many priests have freely chosen it for the sake of the Kingdom of God. In the East as in the West a man who has already received the sacrament of Holy Orders can no longer marry." (CCC #1577 - 1579)
 
Conclusion and Personal Opinion…
 
Catholics already have married clergy - deacons and priests. In the Eastern Catholic Churches, the practice of admitting married men to the priesthood has existed for centuries. In the Latin Rite Catholic Church, the body of married priests has increased with the ordinariates established for former Anglican Christians who have come into the full communion of the Catholic Church.
 
For Roman Catholic Christians reading this article, we must learn from all of this…and trust that the Lord is behind it. If there is to be a change in the discipline of mandatory celibacy for men considered for ordination to the priesthood in the Latin Rite, the Lord will unfold it through those whom he has chosen to lead His Church.

 
When I was invited to Holy Orders as a Deacon, I knew that it was a life altering vocation, not a weekend task. As a married man, I pledged to embrace celibacy if my wife should predecease me. My wife gave her consent. I soon came to understand the theology I had studied and have studied since; there truly is an ontological change which occurs at ordination. My life was turned upside down and has never been the same.
 
I personally believe there is room in the Catholic Church, East and West, for a both celibate and a married clergy, deacons and priests. Both consecrated celibacy and consecrated Christian marriage are a response to the universal call to holiness. They are also a gift to the whole Church because they both participate in the one nuptial or spousal mystery revealed in Jesus Christ.
 
However, what I personally believe is not the issue. It is what the Holy Spirit reveals in guiding the whole Catholic Church. For that, we should look to the teaching office, the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. Is Pope Francis really considering opening the possibility of ordaining mature, proven married men to priesthood? Time alone will tell”…according to Deacon Fournier.
 
Deacon Keith A. Fournier is the Editor in Chief of Catholic Online and the founder and Chairman of Common Good Foundation and Common Good Alliance. A married Roman Catholic Deacon of the Diocese of Richmond, Virginia, he and his wife Laurine have five grown children and six grandchildren,  He is also a human rights lawyer and public policy advocate who served as the first and founding Executive Director of the American Center for Law and Justice in the nineteen nineties.

FACTS OF OUR FAITH
"For 1,000 years...
being married was not
an impediment to Holy Orders"

In the Early Catholic Church, both East & West, together, married men were accepted in all stages of the ordained clergy, be it Deacon, Priest or Bishop.  Most of the men chosen by Christ to be His Apostles were married men.  Sacred Scripture confirms that St. Peter, the very first Pope, was a married man with a Mother-in-Law.
 
Being married has never been an impediment to Holy Orders…
 
"If a man desire the office of a Bishop, he desires a good work. A Bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, ...ruling well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity."  (1 Tim 3:1-4)
​
"For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city as I had appointed you; If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly." (Tit 1:5,6)
 
"Now when Jesus had come into Peter's house, He saw his wife's mother lying sick with a fever." (St. Matthew 8:14)
 
"But Simon's wife's mother lay sick with a fever, and they told Him about her at once." (St. Mark 1:30)
 
"Now He arose from the Synagogue and entered Simon's house. But Simon's wife's mother was sick with a high fever, and they made request of Him concerning her." (St. Luke 4:38)
 
First, we must establish the Biblical—and thus traditional position—of the Orthodox Catholic Church regarding the issue of married clergy. Secondly, we must be against the allegations made by some that the consecration of married men to the office of bishop is supposedly "un-canonical", somehow "unorthodox", or even worse, "heretical".
 
St Peter the Apostle: Undoubtedly, St. Peter and virtually all Apostles were married. Their marriage clearly did not nullify being chosen as Apostles by Christ. There is no reference to any children of the marriage, before or after the call as an Apostle. There is a clear Orthodox tradition that St Peter dedicated himself completely (lived celibate from that time on) to Christ from the time of his call. This can be seen in the following words of St Clement of Alexandria: “that the blessed Peter, on seeing his wife led to death, rejoiced on account of her call and conveyance home, and called very encouragingly and comfortingly, addressing her by name, 'Remember the Lord'.”
 
Such was the marriage of the blessed, and their perfect disposition towards those dearest to them. Thus also the Apostle says, “That he who marries should be as though he married not', and deem his marriage free of inordinate affection, and inseparable from love to the Lord; to which the true husband exhorted his wife to cling on her departure out of this life to the Lord.”
​
Evidence of Married Bishops in the early Church: The father of the Cappadocian Fathers was a Married Bishop. The elder Gregory [St. Gregory the Theologian] was converted by the influence of his wife, Nonna; He went to the First Ecumenical Council at Nicea, where he made known his conversion to Christ. He was baptized, ordained presbyter [priest], and then Bishop of Nazianzos devoting himself totally to the Church.  At the same time as his consecration as bishop, St. Nonna was made a Deaconess. With the same zeal with which she had raised her children, she now occupied herself in performing works of charity.

                                                                                      Married Bishop St. Gregory of Nyssa

Early Tradition on the marriage of St Gregory of Nyssa: Here it is usual to place the marriage of Gregory with Theosebeia, said to have been a sister of Gregory of Nazianzos. Certainly the tradition of Gregory's (Nyssa) marriage received such credit as to be made in after times a proof of the non-celibacy of the Bishops of his age.
 
St John Chrysostom on married Hierarchs: “A Bishop then,” he says, “’must be blameless the husband of one wife.’ This he does not lay down as a rule, as if he must not be without one, but as prohibiting his having more than one.
 
If then 'he who is married cares for the things of the world' (1 Cor. 7:33), and a bishop ought not to care for the things of the world, why does he say 'the husband of one wife'? Some indeed think that he says this with reference to one who remains free from a wife. But if otherwise, he that has a wife may be as though he had none. (1 Cor. 7:29) For that liberty was then properly granted, as suited to the nature of the circumstances then existing. And it is very possible, if a man will, to regulate his conduct. 'Having his children in subjection with all gravity.' This is necessary, that an example might be exhibited in his own house.
 
            'If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly.' Why does he bring forward such a one? To stop the mouths of those heretics who condemned marriage, showing that it is not an unholy thing in itself, but so far honorable, that a married man might ascend the holy throne; and at the same reproving the wanton, and not permitting their admission into this high office who contracted a second marriage. For he who retains no kind regard for her who is departed, how shall he be a good presider?
 
'Having faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly.' We should observe what care he bestows upon children. For he who cannot be the instructor of his own children, how should he be the Teacher of others?...But, if occupied in the pursuit of wealth, he has made his children a secondary concern, and not bestowed much care upon them, even so he is unworthy. For if when nature prompted, he was so void of affection or so senseless, that he thought more of his wealth than of his children, how should he be raised to the episcopal throne, and so great a rule?”
 
St Athanasius the Apostolic: “But I have also thought it necessary to inform you of the fact, that Bishops have succeeded those who have fallen asleep. In Tanis, in the stead of Elias, is Theodorus. In Arsenoitis, Silvanus instead of Nonnus. In Bucolia is Heraclius. In Tentyra, Andronicus is instead of Saprion, his father. In Thebes, Philon instead of Philon.
 
For we know both bishops who fast, and monks who eat. We know bishops that drink no wine, as well as monks who do. We know bishops who work wonders, as well as monks who do not. Many also of the bishops have not even married, while monks have been fathers of children; just as conversely we know bishops who are fathers of children and monks 'of the completest kind'”
​

                                                                    Married St. Peter, the first Pope of Rome, with his Wife
 
St Ambrose of Milan: “And so the Apostles have given a pattern, saying that a bishop 'must be blameless', and in another place: 'A bishop must be without offence, as a steward of God, not proud, not soon angry, not given to wine, not a striker, not greedy of filthy lucre.' For how can the compassion of a dispenser of alms and the avarice of a covetous man agree together? I have set down these things which I have been told are to be avoided, but the apostle is the master of virtues, and he teaches that gainsayers are to be convicted with patience, who lays down that one should be the husband of a single wife, not in order to exclude him from the right of marriage (for this is beyond the force of the precept), but that by conjugal chastity he may preserve the grace of his baptismal washing; nor again that he may be induced by the Apostle's authority to beget children in the priesthood; for he speaks of having children, not of begetting them, or marrying again.”
 
Origen: On The Marriage of Church Dignitaries: “But, while dealing with the passage, I would say that we will be able perhaps now to understand and clearly set forth a question which is hard to grasp and see into, with regard to the legislation of the Apostle concerning ecclesiastical matters; for Paul wishes no one of those of the church, who has attained to any eminence beyond the many, as is attained in the administration of the sacraments, to make trial of a second marriage. For laying down the law in regard to bishops in the first Epistle to Timothy, he says, 'If a man seeketh the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. The bishop, therefore, must be without reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded,' etc.; and, in regard to deacons, 'Let the deacons,' he says, 'be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well,' etc.
 
... And, in the Epistle to Titus: 'For this cause,' he says, 'I left thee in Crete that thou shouldest set in order the things that were wanting, and appoint elders in every city as I gave thee charge. If any one is blameless, the husband of one wife, having children, that believe'. Now, when we saw that some who have been married twice may be much better than those who have been married once, we were perplexed why Paul does not at all permit those who have been twice married to be appointed to ecclesiastical dignities; for also it seemed to me that such a thing was worthy of examination, as it was possible that a man, who had been unfortunate in two marriages, and had lost his second wife while he was yet young, might have lived for the rest of his years up to old age in the greatest self-control and chastity.
 
Who, then, would not naturally be perplexed why at all, when a ruler of the church is being sought for, we do not appoint such a man, though he has been twice married, because of the expressions about marriage, but lay hold of the man who has been once married as our ruler, even if he chance to have lived to old age with his wife, and sometimes may not have been disciplined in chastity and temperance? But, from what is said in the law about the bill of divorcement, I reflect whether, seeing that the bishop and the presbyter and the deacon are a symbol of things that truly exist in accordance with these names, he wished to appoint those who were figuratively once married.”
 
Councils of the Church:
 
Canon V of the Canons of the Twelve Apostles (Apostolic Canons): “Let not a bishop, presbyter, or deacon, put away his wife under pretence of religion; but if he put her away, let him be excommunicated; and if he persists, let him be deposed.”
 
Canon LI of the Apostolic Canons: “If any bishop, presbyter, or deacon, or any one of the sacerdotal list, abstains from marriage, or flesh, or wine, not by way of religious restraint, but as abhorring them, forgetting that God made all things very good, and that he made man male and female, and blaspheming the work of creation, let him be corrected, or else be deposed, and cast out of the Church. In like manner a layman.”
 
The Apostolic Canons represent the very early Canon Law of the Church, that the Canons which make up the collection are of various dates, but that most of them are earlier than the year 300, and that while it is not possible to say exactly when the collection, as we now have it, was made, there is good reason for assigning it a date not later than the middle of the Fourth century.... There can be no question that in the East the Apostolic Canons were very generally looked upon as a genuine work prepared by the Holy Apostles.
 
Canon XII: “Moreover, this also has come to our knowledge, that in Africa and Libya, and in other places the most God-beloved bishops in those parts do not refuse to live with their wives, even after consecration, thereby giving scandal and offence to the people. Since, therefore, it is our particular care that all things tend to the good of the flock placed in our hands and committed to us - it has seemed good that henceforth nothing of the kind shall in any way occur. And we say this, not to abolish and overthrow what things were established of old by Apostolic authority, but as caring for the health of the people and their advance to better things, and lest the ecclesiastical state should suffer any reproach...But if any shall have been observed to do such a thing, let him be deposed.”
 
Commentary by Aristenus: “The fifth Apostolic canon allows neither bishop, presbyter, nor deacons to cast forth his wife under pretext of piety; and assigns penalties for any that shall do so, and if he will not amend he is to be deposed. But this canon on the other hand does not permit a bishop even to live with his wife after his consecration. But by this change no contempt is meant to be poured out upon what had been established by Apostolic authority, but it was made through care for the people's health and for leading on to better things, and for fear that the sacerdotal estate might suffer some wrong.”
 
Van Espen: “In the time of this Canon (of the Apostles) not only presbyters and deacons, but bishops also, it is clear, were allowed by Eastern custom to have their wives; and Zonaras and Balsamon note that even until the Sixth Council, commonly called in Trullo, bishops were allowed to have their wives.”
 
Canon XLVII: “The wife of him who is advanced to hierarchical dignity, shall be seperated from her husband by their mutual consent, and after his ordination and consecration to the episcopate she shall enter a monastery situated at a distance from the abode of the bishop, and there let her enjoy the bishop's provision. And if she is deemed worthy she may be advanced to the dignity of a Deaconess.”
 
On the Marriage of the Clergy: The doctrine and practice of the ancient Church in the East can be fittingly quoted in the words of the Rev. John Fulton in the introduction to the Third Edition of his Index Canonum He says, “Marriage was no impediment to ordination even as a Bishop; and bishops, Priests and Deacons, equally with other men, were forbidden to put away their wives under pretext of religion. The case was different when a man was unmarried at the time of his ordination. Then he was held to have given himself wholly to God in the office of the Holy Ministry, and he was forbidden to take back from his offering that measure of his cares and his affections which must necessarily be given to the maintenance and nurture of his family.”
 
St. Demetrius the Vine Dresser (Egyptian Patriarch): The Coptic Orthodox Synaxarian records one of the early Patriarchs of the Church of Alexandria as being a married man. The record states he had lived a celibate life since the beginning of marriage and it is not known whether this is a later redaction to cover the obvious conflict that would ensue otherwise. In any case, the fact of his enthronement again confirms that the tradition of the Church at that time did not consider marriage to be a bar to even hold the highest office of the Orthodox Church.  ~ excerpts from Archbishop GREGORY (Sculley).

From "THE NEW YORK TIMES" (circa 1992)
Greek Orthodox Group
Backs Married Bishops
Photo Caption:
Ecumenical Patriarch Dimitrios I of Constantinople waving to a crowd at Pennsylvania Station on Arriving in New York from Washington.

​Representatives of the Clergy and laity of the Greek Orthodox Church in the Western hemisphere
have recommended that the church allow married priests to become bishops.
Individual Orthodox leaders, including Archbishop Iakovos, head of the Greek Orthodox Church in America,
have previously suggested that married clergy be allowed to become bishops.
Orthodox theologians agree that the restriction on married bishops is a matter of church discipline and
therefore could be changed.
Father Stephanopolous sad that technically a case could be made that the bishops of a self-governing Orthodox Church
lid the Greek Orthodox has the right to institute such a change.

The Greek Orthodox Church: In 1990, an article from The Orthodox Observer, a publication of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America, states: “At the 1992 meeting of the Clergy-Laity Conference of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America (Archbishop +IAKOVOS), held in New Orleans, a formal resolution was sent to the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Constantinople 'to consider returning to the practice of ordaining married priests as bishops as was done in the early church.'”  This was also documented in The New York Times while Ecumenical Patriarch Dimitrios I was visiting with Archbishop Iakovos in New York City.  Earlier in December 1991, the Greek Archdiocese stated that it was the original practice of the Church for a married Episcopate. Archbishop Iakovos promoted the return of married bishops to worldwide Orthodoxy and agreed “that individual jurisdictions could chose to retain the Apostolic tradition of the Early Church.”

​Evidence is overwhelming that, in the Orthodox Catholic Tradition, marriage was never an impediment to consecration.
 
Yes, the Canons of the Fifth-Sixth Council direct all married bishops to separate from their wives and live a dedicated life and these are often quoted by those who deny the correctness of this position. [The Fifth-sixth Council did NOT ban married bishops, but implemented a set discipline upon them.]  However, the earlier Apostolic Canons direct the exact opposite that one was not allowed to put away ones wife.
 
Obviously this matter falls well within the oiconomia [dispensation] of the bishops in a particular Synod to determine the married episcopate for their jurisdiction.  Oiconomia has always allowed bishops to determine how to enforce or interpret the Canons in their particular circumstances.   These are the reasons why Archbishop Iakokvos of the Greek Archdiocese could take a legitimate stand on allowing a married episcopacy.
 
In East & West…They were not alone…
 
The Christian communities, living as they did with the memory of the Apostles still fresh in their hearts and minds, whether in the East or in the West, say the elevation of monogamous men to the ranks of the episcopacy as consistent with a proper regard for the dignity of marriage, as well as the Lord's decision to call Simon Peter, and other family men, to follow Him!
 
Listed below are just a few of the Married Bishops...from declared Saints to Popes and Patriarchs...as confirmed and taken from the ecclesiastical histories—for the Greeks: Eusebius of Caesarea, Socrates, Soyomenes and Theodore of Cyprus; and, for the Latins: Rufinus of Aquilea, Sulpicius Servus, Gregory of Tours, Isidore of Seville and Bede the Venerable....
 
THIRD CENTURY MARRIED BISHOPS +CEREMAN, Bishop of Nilopolis; +DEMETRIAN, Bishop of Antioch; +DEMETRIUS, Patriarch of Alexandria; +IRENAEUS, Bishop of Sirmium; +MARTIAL, Bishop of Merida.
FOURTH CENTURY MARRIED BISHOPS +AJAX, Bishop of Botolous, Syria; +ANASTASIUS I, Pope of Rome and Father of Pope Innocent); +ANTONIUS, Bishop of Ephesus; +ANTONIUS, Bishop of suburban diocese of Rome; +ARTEMIUS, Bishop of Auvergne; +ASRUG, Bishop of Pakravant, Armenia; +CARTERIUS, Spanish Bishop; +EULALIUS, Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia; St. +GREGORY, Bishop of Nyssa; +GREGORY the Elder, Bishop of Nazianzea; +GREGORY the Illuminator, First Armenian Katholikos; +HILARY, Bishop of Poitiers, France; +KHAT, Bishop of Pakravant, Armenia; +LEO, Bishop in Italy; +LEONTIUS, Bishop of Tripoli; +MARCELLUS, Bishop of Apamea, Syria; +MEMORIUS, Bishop of Southern Italy; +NERSES the Great, Armenian Katholikos; +PACIAN, Bishop of Barcelona, Spain; +PELAGIUS, Bishop of Laodicea; +PHAREN, Armenian Patriarch; +PHILIEAS, Bishop of Thmuis, Egypt; +PHILOGONIUS, Bishop of Antioch; +RETICIUS, Bishop of Autun; +SEVERUS, Archbishop of Ravenna; +SPIRIDON, Bishop of Trimithus, Cyprus; +SYMPOSIUS, Bishop of Astorga, Spain; +URBICUS, Bishop of Clermont; +VERTHANES, Armenian Katholikos; +VICTOR, Bishop of Veresium, Nunidia; +YUSIK, Arminian Katholikos.
 
FIFTH CENTURY MARRIED BISHOPS +AMATOR, Bishop of Auxere; +APOLLINARIS Sidonius, Bishop of Clermont; +AVITIUS, Bishop of Plaisance; +BONOSUS, Bishop of Narbonne; +CELIDONIUS, Bishop of Basancon; +DIOGENES, Bishop of Antioch; +DOMNINUS, Bishop of Caesarea; +EUCHERUS, Bishop of Lyon; +EULOGIUS, Bishop of Bourges; +EUTOPUS, Bishop of Orange; +FELIX III, Pope of Rome; +GERMANUS, Bishop of Auxerre; +GERMANUS, African Bishop; +HESYCHIUS, Bishop of Vienna; +IRENAEUS, Bishop of Tyre; +JULIAN, Bishop of Eclanum; +LUPUS, Bishop of Troyes; +NAMATIUS, Bishop of Auvergne; +PALLADIUS, Bishop of Bourges; +PANCRATIUS, Bishop of Umbria; +PAULINUS, Bishop of Nola; ++PRINCIPE, Bishop of Soissons, +RURICIUS, Bishop of Limoges; +ISAAC the Great, Armenian Katholikos; +SIMPLICIUS, Bishop of Bourges; +SYNESIUS of Cyrene, Bishop of Ptolemais; +VOLUSIAN, Bishop of Tours.
 
SIXTH CENTURY MARRIED BISHOPS +APOLLINARIS, Bishop of Auvergene; +ARTEMIUS, Bishop of Sens; +ASTIDIUS, Bishop of Limoges; +AUTIUS, Bishop of Vienna; +BADEGISIL, Bishop of Le Mans; +BAUDIN, Bishop of Tours; +BLANDUS, Bishop of Ortona; +CASSIUS, Bishop of Narni, Provinced of Perusia; +DESIDERATUS, Bishop of Verdun; +ENNODIUS, Bishop of Pavic; +EUPHRONIUS, Bishop of Tours; +EUSANIUS, Bishop of Agrigentia, Sicily; +FIRMINUS, Bishop of Vivens; +FRANCILLON, Bishop of Tours; +GALLOMAGUUS, Bishop of Troyes; +GENEBAUD, Bishop of Laon; +GREGORY, Bishop of Langres; +GREGORY, Spanish Bishop; +HORMISDAS, Pope of Rome; +LEONTIUS, Bishop of Bordeaux; +LUCILLUS, Bishop of Malta, Father of Pope Gregory the Great; +MACLOU, Bishop of Vannes; +NAMATIUS, Bishop of Vienna; +NONNICHIUS, Bishop of Nantes; +PANTOGATHE, Bishop of Vienna; +PASSIUUS, Bishop of Fermo; +PAUL, Bishop of Trois Chateaux; +PRISCUS, Bishop of Lyon; +SALVIUS, Bishop of Albi; +VICTOR, Bishop of Rennes.
 
SEVENTH CENTURY MARRIED BISHOPS +AETHERIUS, Bishop opf Vienna; +AQUILINUS, Bishop of Evreux; +ARNULFUS, Bishop of Metz; +FARON, Bishop of Meaux; +FILIBAUD, Bishop of Aure-sur-l'Adour; +JOHN the Almoner, Patriarch of Alexandria; +LEUDINES, Bishop of Toul; +MAGNUS, Bishop of Avignon; +MEDOALD, Bishop of Trier; +PELLADIUS,Bishop of Eauze; +REOLUS, Bishop of Rheims; +SIGILAICUS, Bishop of Tours; +THEODORE, Bishop in Jerusalem.
 
Church history also reveals that the discipline of celibacy for Bishops was to stop Nepotism: where the ecclesiastical dignity is passed down from father to son and becomes a sort of family empire, something that the Church can never be.
 
 In order to end the passing of ecclesiastical properties as inheritance to sons, the Church began to choose men who were never married, and thus no claims for inheritance could be leveled. This perhaps was valid during the days when the bishops held all property and legal deeds, and incorporations did not exist.
Nowadays, at an age of public transparency & disclosure of banking and financial accounts, with lay treasurers and financial committees etc, there is little to no chance of such to occur.
 
The facts of history stand for themselves and do not need a defense. Oiconomia is the only way the issue of married bishops should be resolved in the Catholic faith, as it always has. For one jurisdiction to use one set of Canons against another jurisdiction's interpretation or oikonomia is neither appropriate nor Orthodox!

DIVORCE, RE-MARRIAGE & HOLY COMMUNION
A COMPASSIONATE CHRIST & HIS CHURCH
DIVORCE BECOMES THE UNFORGIVABLE SIN?   

            Sadly, the Church sees more and more divorce…and civilly remarried Catholics…as we go forward in the Twenty-First century.  The strict teaching has long barred such individuals from receiving Holy Communion in the Roman Catholic Church.  Most recently, Pope Francis for the West, in his document Amoris Laetitia, is looking into “discernment regarding the possible access to the sacraments of some of those who are divorced and in a new union.”
 
            Perhaps, this is the time when the West needs to look towards the East…examining their heart…asking what would Christ do.
 
Unlike many Christian Churches which hold that the bride and bridegroom execute the marriage themselves, in their vows to each other, in the Eastern Orthodox Church it is the priest or the bishop who consecrates the marriage, who calls upon God in the name of the community, and asks that the Holy Spirit be sent down on this man and this woman to make them “into one flesh."  Marriage is a spiritual path, a seeking after God in oneness and love...and not just a necessity for reproduction.
 
Marriage is a mystery instituted with God’s blessing during creation. Christ says: “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.'  For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and two will become one flesh."  (Mk 10:6-8).
 
Therefore, the purpose of marriage is the reciprocal love, the relationship and the help between the marriage partners with view to their completion in Christ.  The Early Church, both East & West, together, said this: “There are two reasons for which marriage was established …(1) to cause the man to be satisfied with one single wife and (2) to give him children...but it is the first which is the most important…As for reproduction, marriage does not necessarily include this…in many marriages having children is not possible...”
 
We must also understand that divorce is a sin...it kills a marriage; but, the Eastern Orthodox Church has always permitted divorce and remarriage on the grounds of interpretation of what Our Lord says in St. Matthew: “I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."  According to the Church, the granting of divorce is an “expression of compassion” toward sinful man. “Since Christ allowed an exception to His general ruling about the indissolubility of marriage...the Orthodox Church also is willing to allow an exception."
 
Did Christ consider marriage to be indissoluble?  We need to be very clear in this as when Christ teaches that marriage may not be dissolved...that does not mean that He is stating that divorce or dissolution cannot occur.  We know the completeness of the marriage relationship can be tainted by erroneous behavior.  As the Early Church, East & West, together, taught: “It is not the letters of divorce that dissolve the marriage in relation to God...but the errant behavior."
 
According to the spirit of Orthodox [rightfully believing] Christianity, the unity of the married couple cannot be maintained through the virtue of a legal obligation alone; the formal unity must be consistent with an internal symphony.  The problem arises when it’s no longer possible to salvage anything of this symphony, for “then, the bond that was originally considered indissoluble...is already dissolve...and the law (that Marriage License) can offer nothing to replace grace...and can neither heal nor resurrect, nor say: ‘Stand up and go.’”
 
This is where the Church must recognize that there are cases in which married life has no content or may even lead to loss of the soul. Our Church Fathers say in this regard that it is: “better to break the covenant than to lose one’s soul."
 
The Orthodox Church sees divorce as a tragedy due to human weakness and sin...but, despite the fact that the Church condemns sin, she also desires to be an aid to those who suffer and for whom she may allow another marriage. This is certainly the case when the marriage has ceased to be a reality.  Another marriage is therefore only permitted because of “human weakness."  As the apostle St. Paul says concerning the unmarried and widows: “If they can not control themselves, they should marry” (1 Cor 7:9).  Remarriage is permitted as a pastoral concession in the context of the Church’s “expression of compassion,” it is an answer to the human weakness and the corrupt world in which we live.  The Church simply cannot turn Her back on Her children...She is there to forgive, comfort and love.
 
This pastoral concession is an image of the divine love and kindness of Almighty God!  The Church, which continues to extend Christ’s redeeming work in the world, has on the basis of the Lord’s commandments, and of the Apostles, always holds in mind what the Lord Himself has said: “The Sabbath is made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.” (Mk 2:27)
 
Pastoral concession is based on Christ’s command to his apostles: “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven.” (Jn 20:22-23)  And, nowhere does Christ or Sacred Scripture say divorce is the unforgivable sin!  This IS the case when the human marriage experience becomes impossible, due to the spiritual death of love…the marriage ceases to be a reality! It is then that the Church – as the Body of Christ – with understanding and compassion and out of personal concern can “accept the divorce and not reject the sinful humanly weak believers, or deprive this man or this woman from God’s mercy and further grace.” This is the precise goal of pastoral concession - that the weak person not be irrevocably banned from the church communion…or receiving the Holy Eucharist…according to Christ’s example, who came, after all, to save the lost.
 
The Eastern Orthodox Church’s perspective on divorce and remarriage, is steeped in wisdom and in applying the unconditional love as exampled by Our Blessed Lord.  The Orthodox Church confirms the indissolubility of a true and valid Christian marriage ...but...NOT the downright irrevocable preservation of a legal affirmation. The Orthodox Church refuses to shut the door of Christ’s mercy, but holds still, to the teaching of the New Testament....and, therefore....YOU ARE FORGIVEN...


“LEAVENED BREAD” & THE LAST SUPPER
“MYSTICAL SUPPER” NOT THE PASSOVER MEAL
 
            Another “contention” held throughout the centuries has been the type of bread that is used in the Eucharistic Celebration.  In fact, that “small pinch of yeast” (used in the leavening process), is a great part of what caused the Great Schism in 1054 AD.  For the Eastern Patriarchates were upset, when the West demanded use of unleavened bread for the Eucharist by their Eastern parishes, because they were located within geographical areas of the Roman Patriarchate.
 
            Deacon Andrew Gerakas, in The Origin and Development of the Holy Eucharist: East and West, gives us the precise history of why there is a difference in usage, i.e. why leavened bread is used in the Orthodox & Byzantine/Eastern Rite Catholic Churches and why unleavened bread is used in the Roman Catholic & Western Rites:
 
            “The Eastern Orthodox follow the Gospel of St. John while the Roman Catholics follow the Synoptic Gospels of Sts. Matthew, Mark and Luke with regard to whether the Holy Eucharist was instituted on the Day of Preparation, or on the day before.  As a result, the Eastern Church uses leavened bread in their Divine Liturgy while the Western Church uses unleavened bread in their Mass.”

 
            It must be noted that BOTH Churches, East & West, together, used leavened bread during the first eight centuries when the Western Church began using unleavened bread.  The bread destined for the Eucharist received special names; from the fact that it was offered it was called the oblation in the West which corresponded to prosphora in the East.
            According to the 1985 Code of Canon Law, A Text and Commentary, Canon 926 states “In accord with the ancient tradition of the Latin Church, the priest is to use unleavened bread in the celebration of the Eucharist whenever he offers it.”  The commentary however is quite clear: “…In the early centuries, both Eastern and Western Churches used leavened bread for the Eucharist, but in the Eighth and Ninth centuries the use of unleavened bread became the general custom in the West.”
 
            Father Joseph Jungmann, S.J. was a Professor of Theology at the University of Innsbruck and contributor at Vatican Council II regarding the Liturgy.  In his book The Mass of the Roman Rite he states that: In the West, various ordinances appeared from the Ninth century on, all demanding the exclusive use of unleavened bread for the Eucharist.  A growing solicitude for the Blessed Sacrament and a desire to employ only the best and whitest bread, along with various scriptural considerations – all favored this development…Still, the new custom did not come in to exclusive vogue until the middle of the Eleventh century…Particularly in Rome it was not universally accepted until after the general infiltration of various usages from the North.”
 
            It is a total fabrication to believe that unleavened bread was always used in the West!
 
            The fact that the West changed its practice and began using unleavened bread in the Eighth and Ninth centuries – instead of the traditional unleavened bread – is confirmed by the research of Father William O’Shea, who noted in his book The Worship of the Church that along with the various other innovative practices from Northern Europe, the use of unleavened bread began to infiltrate into the Roman liturgy at the end of the first millennium, because as he put it, “another change introduced into the Roman Rite in France and Germany at the time [i.e. eighth and ninth centuries] was the use of unleavened bread and of the thin white wafers or hosts instead of the loaves of leavened bread used hitherto.”
            Moreover, this innovation of using unleavened bread in the West was also noted by Dr. Johannes Emminghaus in his book The Eucharist: Essence, Form, Celebration, because as he said, “The Eucharistic bread has been unleavened in the Latin rite since the eighth century – that is, it is prepared simply form flour and water, without the addition of leaven or yeast…in the first millennium of the Church’s history, both East and West, the bread normally used for the Eucharist was ordinary ‘daily bread,’ that is, leavened bread, and the Eastern Church uses it still today…the Latin Church, by contrast, has not considered this question very important.”
 
            Although there was a Council of Florence in 1439—after the Great Schism in attempts to reunite East and West—it failed to smooth over the so-called “custom differences” [leavened or unleavened] by simply acknowledging and accepting both as being legitimate!  If Our Lord Himself used leavened bread at the Last Supper and said “do this in remembrance of Me,”…then it is of the greatest importance!
 
            So, in the Ninth century there began in the West the innovative development towards the use of unleavened bread…it was completed only by the middle of the Eleventh century.  In The Church’s Liturgy by Michael Kunzler points out “that the introduction of unleavened pre-formed hosts is not least to be seen against the background of the further development of the celebration of Mass in the West: the preparation of the bread by the congregation ceased, the bread for the Eucharist was prepared only in monasteries.  Already in the Twelfth century, for the few days on which the people communicated, there were made along with ‘the host for the celebrant’ , ‘particles’ the size of coins…the ‘breaking of bread’ from then on was limited to the celebrant’s host alone and completely lost its former meaning.  Not to least, the shift in Eucharistic piety towards Eucharistic ‘seeing’ needed a white form of host, easily seen at the elevation and in the monstrance, but which had almost nothing to do with real bread.”
 
            In Orthodox & Byzantine/Eastern Rite Catholic Churches, it is a great honor for the bread [being prepared for the Eucharist] to be baked by a member of the congregation.  The prosphora loaves  are stamped with specific lettering: “IC-XC-NI-KA” meaning “Jesus Christ Conquers” which will become the “Lamb of God” the consecrated Holy Eucharist; and portions dedicated to the Theotokos [Blessed Virgin Mary], Saints of the Church and Living & Deceased Faithful who are being remembered during the Divine Liturgy.
 
            “In the earliest times the Eucharistic celebration took its name from the breaking of the bread.  With reference to 1 Cor 10:16 the breaking was considered a significant expression for the entire Eucharistic celebration: all who partake of the one Bread, form the one Body of Christ, because this one Bread is the communion with the Body of Christ.  So long as many received Communion and leavened bread was used, the breaking of the Eucharistic bread was a significant process.  The breaking of the bread lost its practical meaning with the transition to unleavened bread and the pre-prepared small hosts for the faithful,” according to Kuknzler.
           
            Part of the confusion also lies in the different ways a day is determined.  For the Jews the new day began at sundown and ended at sundown the next day, while the West calculated the new day beginning at midnight.  The Passover Lamb would be slaughtered by the priests on Wednesday and the Lord’s Supper celebrated after sundown, which would make it Thursday by Jewish time but still Wednesday by Western time.
 
            The Orthodox & Byzantine/Eastern Rite Catholics use leavened bread based on the fact that the Lord’s Supper was celebrated on Thursday the day before the preparation for the Passover.  Jesus was brought before Pilate on the Preparation Day for Passover (Jn 19:14) and the crucifixion and death of Our Lord took place on the Day of Preparation according to all four Gospels (Mt 27:62; Mk 15:42; Lk 23:54; Jn 19:14)
 
            The Orthodox believe that the Lord’s Supper was not on the day of the Passover and unleavened bread would not have been used.  The word used in the Bible is artos or leavened bread and not azyma or unleavened bread.  Furthermore, it was against the law to crucify anyone during Passover time.  If Jesus used unleavened bread it would have been the Passover period.


PURGATORY OR THE “TOLL-HOUSES”  

The Catholic Church, both East & West, together, has always taught that nothing unclean can enter into the presence of God and into Heaven. (Rev 21:27)  After we die Sacred Scripture says, “it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment.” (Heb 9:27) this is known as the particular or “individual” judgment.  We will know in a twinkling of an eye what our final destiny will be.
Later, at the end of the Ages, at the Second Coming of Christ, there will take place the general judgment that the Bible refers to: “When the Son of man comes in His glory, and all the angels with him then He will sit on His glorious throne.  Before Him will be gathered all the nations, and He will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.” (Mt 25:31-32)
            It is between the particular and general judgments that the soul will be purified of the remaining consequences of sin: “I tell you, you will never get out till you have paid the very last copper.” (Lk 12:59) 
            From the earliest of times, Sacred Scripture, the patristic teaching of the Church Fathers and the Church's liturgical tradition has professed that following a person's death the soul leaves the body and is escorted to God by angels. During this journey the soul passes through an aerial realm which is ruled by demons. The soul encounters these demons at various points referred to as Toll-Houses where the demons then attempt to accuse it of sin and, if possible, drag the soul into hell, contrasting the “purgatorial fires” of the West!
In Blessed Fr. Seraphim Rose’s book entitled The Soul after Death he shows that the Toll-House phenomenon is actually an authentic teaching of the Orthodox Church.
The Argument for the Toll-House Theory…Blessed Seraphim relies heavily on the exegesis and writings of Bishop Ignatius Brianchaninov for support of the tollhouse theory. The following quote from Bishop Ignatius is a good example:
"The space between Heaven and earth, the whole azure expanse of the air which is visible to us under the heavens, serves as the dwelling for the fallen angels who have been cast down from heaven…. The holy Apostle Paul calls the fallen angels the spirits of wickedness under the heavens (Eph. 6:12), and their chief the prince of the powers of the air (Eph. 2:2). The fallen angels are dispersed in a multitude throughout the entire transparent immensity, which we see above us. They do not cease to disturb all human societies and every person separately; there is no evil deed, no crime, of which they might not be instigators and participants; they incline and instruct men towards sin by all possible means. Your adversary the devil, says the holy Apostle Peter, walketh about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour (I Peter 5:8), both during our earthly life and after the separation of the soul from the body. When the soul of a Christian, leaving its earthly dwelling, begins to strive through the aerial spaces towards the homeland on high, the demons stop it, strive to find in it a kinship with themselves, their sinfulness, their fall, and to drag it down to the hell prepared for the devil and his angels (Matt. 25:41). They act thus by the right which the have acquired." (Brianchaninov, vol. III, pp. 132-133)
Bishop Ignatius goes on further to say "For the testing of souls as they pass through the spaces of the air there have been established by the dark powers separate judgment places and guards in a remarkable order. In the layers of the under-heaven, from earth to heaven itself, stand guarding legions of fallen spirits. Each division is in charge of a special form of sin and tests the soul in it when the soul reaches this division. The aerial demonic guards and judgment places are called in the patristic writing the toll-houses, and the spirits who serve in them are called tax-collectors." (Brianchaninov, vol. III, p. 136).
The following are supporting quotes from both patristic and liturgical sources, which are given as evidence that the Toll-House theory is the historical teaching of the Church:
            St. John Chrysostom-Homily on Patience and Gratitude…
"Then we will need many prayers, many helpers, many good deeds, and a great intercession from angels on the journeys through the spaces of the air. If when travelling in a foreign land or a strange city we are in need of a guide, how much more necessary for us are guides and helpers to guide us past the invisible dignities and powers and world-rulers of this air, who are called persecutors and publicans and tax-collectors."
            St. Isaiah the Recluse-Homily 5 and 17…
"Daily have death before our eyes and take care how to accomplish the departure from the body and how to pass by the powers of darkness that are to meet us in the air. When the soul leaves the body, angels accompany it; the dark powers come out to meet it, desiring to detain it, and testing it to see if they might find something of their own in it.”
St. Ephriam the Syrian, Collected Works in Russian…
"When the fearful hosts come, when the divine takers-away command the soul to be translated from the body, when they draw us away by force and lead us away to the unavoidable judgment place - then, seeing them, the poor man… comes all into a shaking as if from an earthquake, is all in trembling…. The divine takers-away, taking the soul, ascend in the air where stands the chiefs, the authorities and world-rulers of the opposing powers. These are our accusers, the fearful publicans, registrars, tax-collectors; they meet it on the way, register, examine, and count the sins and debts of this man - the sins of youth and old age, voluntary and involuntary, committed in deed, word, and thought. Great is the fear here, great the trembling of the poor soul, indescribable the want which it suffers then from the incalculable multitudes of its enemies surrounding it there in myriad's, slandering it so as not to allow it to ascend to heaven, to dwell in the light of the living, to enter the land of life. But the holy angels, taking the soul, lead it away."
Tone 4, Friday, 8th Canticle of the Canon at Matins…
"O Virgin, in the hour of my death rescue me from the hand of the demons, and the judgment, and the accusation, and the frightful testing, and the bitter toll-houses and the fierce prince, and the eternal condemnation, O Mother of God."
Tone 2, Saturday, Canticle 9…
"When my soul shall be about to be released from the bond with the flesh, intercede for me, O Sovereign Lady … that I may pass unhindered through the princes of darkness standing in the air." 
​

​Ladder of Divine Ascent by St. John Climacus                      
Played upon the Early understanding of the “Toll Houses”

Metropolitan Macarius of Moscow Dogmatic Theologian…
"Such an uninterrupted, constant, and universal usage in the Church of the teaching of the Toll-Houses, especially among the teachers of the 4th century, indisputably testifies that it was handed down to them from the teachers of the preceding centuries and is founded on Apostolic Tradition."
Dr. Jaroslav Pelikan's The Spirit of Eastern Christendom refers to the Eastern Church's understanding of Purgatory and the state of the soul after death. "… The failure of the union of Florence meant that the East returned to its view that the state of the soul after death was not clearly defined in Scripture or tradition and that therefore there was not an official Orthodox doctrine on the question, but only various private theologoumena, which could not be proved from the norms of the church's teaching. In addition, the East maintained that whatever the 'immediate' state' might or might not be, the church on earth didn’t have the right to claim jurisdiction over it."


THE EIGTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL FOR UNITY
CONDEMNATION OF “FILIOQUE” & INNOVATIONS
 
While the Orthodox East and Latin West were still ONE Church, an Ecumenical Council was held in Constantinople…the legates of Pope John VIII condemned the “Filioque” addition to the Nicene Creed, while anathematizing anyone who argued the veneration of icons…especially the Frankish theologians who had castigated the Eastern Church for teaching that it was permissive to venerate images and icons.
 
The delegates attending the Council irrevocably promised [swore under oath] that Roman Churches situated in the East or West will “no longer interfere” in the affairs of the other True [Orthodox] Churches in the East.  The legates of the pope who were present also flatly rejected all previous Roman claims of “universal jurisdiction” by the papacy!

 
This Council was regarded in Rome as the Eighth Ecumenical Council, and all representatives of the papacy rejected all “innovations” of the Western [Roman] Church!  These same innovations were [sinfully] re-interpreted as “untrue” by Rome in the Ninth Century, and that is what would eventually drive her permanently away from the True Orthodox Faith [as held by both East & West when they were together] in the Eleventh Century.  [Take note of the different centuries]  The Protestant Reformers [who protested from the West] later would not accept the Council’s decisions, and eliminated those decisions from their official minutes.
 
Frankish theologians of Western Europe were churchmen of Charlemagne’s Empire [begun in the Eighth Century] who steered the Western Church away from the traditional Orthodox theology.
 
These Frankish theologians adopted the “Filioque” clause which was added to the Nicene Creed, AND THUNDERED ALOUD that all Holy Icons and images were “pagan” and that the Pope of Rome was supreme in all church matters.  Among other charges and changes, these Frankish teachers were almost totally ignorant of the profound faith of the Eastern Roman [Byzantine] Empire that was, at that date, centered in Constantinople.
 
So…did the Eighth Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (879/880) condemn the Filioque addition to the Ecumenical Creed as canonically unacceptable and theologically unsound?
 
This is the question that Father George Dragas answered in light of discussions between Orthodox and Lutherans in America.
 
This extensive explanatory work originally appeared in The Greek Orthodox Theological Review.  We appreciate the Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology for permissions so we can share the exact understanding of this Truth that’s been distorted in history:
 
Clarifications concerning the Eighth Ecumenical Council
 
“As far as Ecumenical Councils go the Greek Orthodox East and the Latin West appear to be divided at the point where the Eighth Ecumenical Council is introduced. Both Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholics accept the first Seven Ecumenical Councils.   Beyond these Seven Councils, however, the Roman Catholics enumerate several others, which bring the total number to 21 — Vatican II being the latest. The Orthodox Church does not enumerate any more beyond the Seven, although she accepts several Councils which occurred afterwards and call themselves "Ecumenical" [as their minutes show]. One of them is the so-called Eighth Ecumenical or Constantinople IV (879-880).
 
Roman Catholic scholars have repeatedly remarked that the Orthodox have not had — and for that matter, could not have had — any further Ecumenical Councils beyond the first Seven after their separation from the Roman See in 1054. This is totally unjustified and misleading. Lack of enumeration does not imply lack of application.
 
Orthodox conciliar history and relevant conciliar documents clearly indicate the existence of several Ecumenical Councils after the first Seven, which carry on the conciliar life of the Church in history in a way which is much more rigorous than that of the Latin Church.
 
These Councils [including that of Constantinople (879/880), the "Eighth Ecumenical" as it is called in the Tomos Charsa (Τόμος Χαρᾶς) of Patriarch Dositheos who first published its proceedings in 1705 and also by Metropolitan Nilus Rhodi whose text is cited in Mansi's edition] have not been enumerated in the East because of Orthodox anticipation of possible healing of the Schism of 1054, which was pursued by the Orthodox up to the capture of Constantinople by the Turks in 1453. There are other obvious reasons that prevented enumeration, most of which relate to the difficult years that the Orthodox Church had to face after the capture of Constantinople and the dissolution of the Roman Empire that supported it.
 
The case of the Eighth Ecumenical Council provides the occasion not only for clarifying this divergence, but also for indicating the arbitrary conciliar development of the Church of Rome after its separation with the Eastern Orthodox Churches. For Roman Catholics the Eighth Ecumenical Council is a Council that was held in Constantinople (869/870) — also known as the ‘Ignatian’ Council, because it restored Ignatios to the Patriarchal throne — which among other matters procured the condemnation of Ecumenical Patriarch Photios. It is clearly confirmed by modern scholarship, however, that this Ignatian Council was rejected by another Constantinopolitan Council which was held exactly ten years later in 879/880. This Council is also known as the Photian Council, because it exonerated and restored to the Throne of Constantinople St. Photios and his fellow Hierarchs and was signed by both Easterners and Westerners. How did it happen that Roman Catholics came to ignore this conciliar fact?
 
Johan Meijer — author of a most thorough study of the Constantinopolitan Council of 879/880 — has pointed out that Roman Catholic canonists first referred to their Eighth Ecumenical Council [the Ignatian one] in the beginning of the twelfth century. Meijer explains that this was done deliberately because these canonists needed at that time canon 22 of that Council. In point of fact, however, they overlooked the fact that ‘this Council had been cancelled by another, the Photian Synod (879-880) — the acts of which were also kept in the pontifical archives.’ It is interesting to note that later on the Roman Catholics called this Photian Council ‘Conciliabulum Oecumenicum Pseudooctavum’, thus acknowledging it implicitly as another Eighth Council rival to that of their own choice!
 
The history of this Constantinopolitan Council, which has left its mark on the career of Ecumenical Patriarch Photios, one of the greatest Patriarchs of the Great Church of Christ, has been thoroughly researched by modern historians. Dvornic's pioneering work has restored the basic facts. Meijer in 1975, Phidas in 1994 and Siamakis in 1995 have refined these facts. There is no doubt to anyone who surveys this literature that the Roman Catholic position is untenable [incapable of being maintained, defended, or vindicated against attack].
 
The Photian Council of 879/880 is that which: i) annulled the Ignatian one (869/70), ii) enumerated the Seventh (787) adding it to the previous Six, iii) restored unity to the Church of Constantinople itself and to the Churches of Old and New Rome, which had been shattered by the arbitrary interference of the popes of Rome in the life of the Eastern Church especially through the Ignatian Council, and iv) laid down the canonical and theological basis of the union of the Church in East and West through its Horos.

"One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism"
​Christ's  mandate that "all may be One"

It is with the theological basis of this Council that we are particularly concerned here. Did the Horos of faith of this Council, which was articulated at the sixth session in the presence of the King, have any bearings on the Filioque controversy? The Lutheran theologian Dr. Bruce Marshall has suggested that it did not. Indeed for him ‘the Filioque as a theological issue played virtually no role either in the breakdown of communion between Constantinople and Rome or in the restoration of communion; it was only much later that the theological issues surrounding the Filioque were even discussed between East and West.’ Furthermore, Dr. Marshall has claimed that it was only as a canonical issue that the Filioque played a role at that time, inasmuch as only its insertion into the Creed was considered to be unacceptable and constituted grounds for breaking communion. The implication of this argument, which is pursued by some Western scholars, is that contemporary discussions between Orthodox and Western Christians should not make the theological issue over the Filioque a criterion for restoring communion between them.
As a response to this thesis I want to recall the views of Orthodox scholars who have dealt with this Photian Council and more generally with the Councils of the 9th century which led to the overcoming of a big crisis in communion between East and West.
 
By doing this I intend to convey that from an Orthodox point of view the distinction between what is ‘canonical’ and what is ‘theological’ is a juridical one and does not carry any real weight. Far from being helpful, it becomes an instrument for perpetuating an arbitrary situation that can only lead to unfruitful and precarious agreements.
 
In 1974 the American Orthodox scholar Richard Haugh, in a study of the history of the Trinitarian controversy between East and West with special reference to the Filioque, stated that ‘the sixth session of the Council of 879/880 had enormous bearings on the Triadological controversy.’ He defended this by citing and discussing the Horos of faith, which was formulated at that time.
 
Haugh examined the particular nuances of the Horos [the formula of faith of the Synod] of this Council in the light of the subsequent writings of Photios relating to the Filioque doctrine — especially his Letter to the Patriarch of Aquileia and his Mystagogy on the Holy Spirit, both of which took the Horos as a powerful rebuff against the Frankish doctrine of the Filioque which formed the theological background to the theological controversy between Orthodox and Westerners at that time. Had the Horos of 879/880 not had any theological import on the Filioque then why does St. Photios refer to such an issue in these two documents?
 
In no case, either before or after the Council of 879/880 did Photios reject the Filioque on just canonical grounds. Actually he explicitly stated that his grounds were both biblical and theological. They were biblical for they were based on the teaching of St. John's Gospel and on the explicit saying that the ‘Spirit proceeds from the Father’ (full stop!). They were also theological in that the Filioque introduced two causes and two origins in the Trinity and thus utterly destroyed the monarchy of the Holy Trinity. Why would St. Photios write such a full theological critique as that of his Mystagogia only a few years later if his only concern were simply the preservation of the original wording of the Creed? Would it not have sufficed if he had simply referred to the canonical prohibition of the Horos of 879/880?
 
In 1975 Meijer published his thorough study of the Photian Council of 879/880 putting forward the thesis, as the title of his book stated, that this was ‘a successful Council of union.’ In part iii of this study, entitled ‘Reflection’ he concluded: ‘the restoration of unity was the reason for the convocation of the Synod of 879-880. More precisely, perhaps, it celebrated peace once more in the Church of God.’ But he went on to explain that the basis of this unity was theological. In his own words, ‘this unity means first of all unity in the same faith. Photios was a strong defender of the purity of doctrine.’ Indeed, ‘where orthodoxy was concerned, Photios was the true spokesman of the Byzantine Bishops.’ And Meijer goes on, ‘the West also attached great value to the purity of faith, but in fact concentrated more on the question of devotion to the Church of Rome.’ At the Synod of 879-880 the Fathers' care for purity of doctrine emerged in the Horos (the formula of faith of the Synod) which they proclaimed.
 
This Horos [the formula of faith of the Synod] cannot be understood as a dogmatic definition ... but rather as the true expression of the ecclesiastical feeling of the Synod ... expressed by the conciliar Creed of Nicæa-Constantinople ... There is no doubt that Photios opposed the addition of the Filioque to the Creed on dogmatic grounds. In his famous encyclical to the oriental Patriarchs he complained about this addition by the Frankish missionaries working in Bulgaria, because he considered it theologically unacceptable. His whole argument is based on the conviction that this addition undermined the unity of God. We find the same reasoning in his Mystagogia and in his letter to the Archbishop of Aquileia.’
 
Photios knew, of course, that the Roman Church had not approved of the Frankish Filioque, and hence she agreed on the conciliar refusal of inserting it into the Creed. He also knew, however, that the Franks were striving to introduce the Filioque into the Creed on theological grounds — as they eventually did. Thus Meijer concludes: ‘there is no doubt that the Horos of the Photian Synod officially disapproved of the [theological and for that matter canonical] use of the Filioque by the Frankish missionaries in Bulgaria [cf. the phrase he cites here from the Horos τῇ διανοίᾳ καὶ γλώσσῃ στέγομεν, which is reminiscent of St. Photios' Encyclical of 867] and was not directed against the church of Rome which at that time did not use the addition either.’
 
In 1985 Dr. Constantine Siamakis stated in his extensive introduction to the new edition of Patriarch Dositheos' Τόμος Χαρᾶς the same point of view. ‘At this Ecumenical Synod the Filioque was condemned as teaching and as addition into the Symbol of the Faith.’
 
In his description of the 6th session of the Council he stated:
 
‘The Filioque is condemned ...etc.’ and further on, ‘without mentioning the Filioque, the emperor asks for an Horos of the Synod and the synodical members present at this meeting propose the Horos of the first two Ecumenical Councils, i.e. the Symbol of the Faith, but without any addition and with the stipulation that any addition or subtraction or alteration in it should incur the anathema of the Church. This is accepted by the emperor who signs it and the synodical members who express their satisfaction.’ It is important to note that Siamakis attempted a critical investigation of the text of the Minutes and exposed the intention of various Western manuscripts (e.g. Cod. Vaticanus Graecus 1892 of the 16th century) and of the various Western editors of the Acts of this Council (e.g. Rader's edition of 1604) to hide the fact that the Horos is in fact an implicit but clear condemnation of the Frankish Filioque.
​
​

​Church Fathers at the First Ecumenical Council of Nicæa 325 AD
Delivered the “Symbol of Faith” infallibly from the Holy Spirit
 
More recently in 1994 Professor Phidas of Athens University stated the same point of view in his new and impressive manual of Church History. In his discussion of the Photian Council of 879/880 he wrote, that ‘the antithesis between the Old and the New Rome was also connected with the theological dispute over the Filioque, which did not inhibit at that time the restoration of communion between Rome and Constantinople, since it had not been inserted into the Symbol of the Faith by the papal throne, but had acquired at that time a dogmatic character in the obvious tendency of diversification between East and West.’
 
Phidas also suggested, that ‘apparently the papal representatives may not have realized the scope of the suggestion of restating the traditional Creed in the Horos of the Council which was implicitly connected with the condemnation of the Filioque addition to this Creed, which had been already adopted in the West by the Franks ... Yet all the participating Bishops understood that this was meant to be a condemnation of the Filioque addition to the Creed.’
 
Furthermore Phidas determined that the acceptance of the Horos [the formula of faith of the Synod] by Pope John VIII was due to the influence of Zachariah of Anagne, librarian of the Vatican, papal legate at the Council and a friend and sympathizer of St. Photios to whom the latter addressed an epistle as a vote of thanks.
 
The above references clearly indicate that contemporary Orthodox scholarly opinion is unanimous in understanding the Horos of the Photian Council of 879/880 as having a direct bearing on the Filioque controversy. It condemns the Filioque not only as an addition to the Creed but also as a doctrine. It is acknowledged, of course, that this condemnation is implicit and not explicit in the strong and vehement condemnation in the Horos of any kind of addition to the Creed. That this implication is unavoidable is based both on the historical context of this Council — the conflict between Photios and the Frankish theologians, which lies in the foreground and background to this Council. To restrict this implication to a mere ‘canonical issue’ which has no theological bearing, is unwarranted by the text and the dogmengeschichtlich context which entails Photios' opposition to the Frankish doctrine on the Filioque. This becomes more apparent by looking at the Horos itself.
 
The Horos [the Formula of Faith] of the Eighth Ecumenical Council…
 
The following text is, to my knowledge, the first complete translation of the Horos of the Eighth Ecumenical Council which appears in both the minutes of the sixth and the seventh acts:
 
‘Jointly sanctifying and preserving intact the venerable and divine teaching of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, which has been established in the bosom of our mind, with unhesitating resolve and purity of faith, as well as the sacred ordinances and canonical stipulations of his holy disciples and Apostles with an unwavering judgment, and indeed, those Seven holy and ecumenical Synods which were directed by the inspiration of the one and the same Holy Spirit and effected the [Christian] preaching, and jointly guarding with a most honest and unshakeable resolve the canonical institutions invulnerable and unfalsified, we expel those who removed themselves from the Church, and embrace and regard worthy of receiving those of the same faith or teachers of orthodoxy to whom honor and sacred respect is due as they themselves ordered. Thus, having in mind and declaring all these things, we embrace with mind and tongue (τῇ διανοίᾳ καὶ γλώσσῃ) and declare to all people with a loud voice the Horos [Rule] of the most pure faith of the Christians which has come down to us from above through the Fathers, subtracting nothing, adding nothing, falsifying nothing; for subtraction and addition, when no heresy is stirred up by the ingenious fabrications of the evil one, introduces disapprobation of those who are exempt from blame and inexcusable assault on the Fathers. As for the act of changing with falsified words the Horoi [Rules, Boundaries] of the Fathers is much worse that the previous one. Therefore, this holy and ecumenical Synod embracing whole-heartedly and declaring with divine desire and straightness of mind, and establishing and erecting on it the firm edifice of salvation, thus we think and loudly proclaim this message to all:
 
‘I believe in One God, Father Almighty, ... and in One Lord Jesus Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God... and in the Holy Spirit, the Lord ... who proceeds from the Father... [the whole Nicene Creed is cited here without the filioque addition]
Thus we think, in this confession of faith we were we baptized, through this one the word of truth proved that every heresy is broken to pieces and canceled out. We enroll as brothers and fathers and coheirs of the heavenly city those who think thus. If anyone, however, dares to rewrite and call Rule of Faith some other exposition besides that of the sacred Symbol which has been spread abroad from above by our blessed and holy Fathers even as far as ourselves, and to snatch the authority of the confession of those divine men and impose on it his own invented phrases (ἰδίαις εὑρεσιολογίαις) and put this forth as a common lesson to the faithful or to those who return from some kind of heresy, and display the audacity to falsify completely (κατακιβδηλεῦσαι ἀποθρασυνθείη) the antiquity of this sacred and venerable Horos [Rule] with illegitimate words, or additions, or subtractions, such a person should, according to the vote of the holy and Ecumenical Synods, which has been already acclaimed before us, be subjected to complete defrocking if he happens to be one of the clergymen, or be sent away with an anathema if he happens to be one of the lay people.’
 
The solemnity and severity of this statement is quite striking. The reference to the Lord, the Apostles and the Fathers as guardians of the true faith clearly imply that what is at stake here is a theological issue. The issue is not just words or language but thought and mind as well. The whole construction clearly implies that there is some serious problem in the air which, however, is not explicitly named. The focus is the Creed, which is said to be irreplaceable.
 
It is totally unacceptable to replace it [the Nicene Creed] with anything else. It is worse, however, to tamper with it, to add or to subtract from it. The addition or subtraction is not merely a formal matter, but has to do with the substance of the faith into which one is baptized and on which salvation in the Church is established. To commit such a mistake can only mean rejection of the faith once delivered to the saints and therefore can only incur expulsion from the Church. What else could St. Photios have in mind but the Filioque? Was there any other threat to the Creed at that time?

 
The Filioque was the only problem, which St. Photios himself above every one else had detected and denounced earlier on when he became fully aware of its severity. This is also the creedal problem [the addition of the “filioque”], which he will pinpoint again shortly after this Synod, and will produce his extensive treatise on it. The purpose of this Horos could not be anything else but a buffer against the coming storm, which he foresaw.
 
The Frankish theologians had already committed this error and were pressing for it with the Popes. Rome had resisted it, but for how long? He must have thought that an Ecumenical Council's Horos, which included severe penalties on those who tampered with the ancient faith, would be respected and the danger would be averted. That this was not only the mind of Photios but of the whole Council becomes obvious in the reactions of the Bishops to the reading of the Horos.
 
We read in the minutes of the Sixth act that after reading the Horos the Bishops shouted:
 
‘Thus we think, thus we believe, into this confession were we baptized and became worthy to enter the priestly orders. We regard, therefore, as enemies of God and of the truth those who think differently as compared to this. If one dares to rewrite another Symbol besides this one, or add to it, or subtract from it, or to remove anything from it, and to display the audacity to call it a Rule, he will be condemned and thrown out of the Christian Confession. For to subtract from, or to add to, the holy and consubstantial and undivided Trinity shows that the confession we have always had to this day is imperfect. [In other words the problem which is implied but not named has to do with the Trinitarian doctrine]. It condemns the Apostolic Tradition and the doctrine of the Fathers. If one, then having come to such a point of mindlessness as to dare do what we have said above, and set forth another Symbol and call it a Rule, or to add to or subtract from the one which has been handed down to us by the first great, holy and Ecumenical Synod of Nicæa, let him be Anathema.’

 
The minutes go on to record the approbation of this solemn statement by the representatives of the other Patriarchates and finally by the Emperor himself.
 
The Emperor's statement and signature leave no doubt of the seriousness of this theological Horos which was issued by an ecumenical Council of the Church:
 
‘In the Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, Basil Emperor in Christ, faithful king of the Romans, agreeing in every way with this holy and ecumenical Synod in confirmation and sealing of the holy and ecumenical Seventh Synod, in confirmation and sealing of Photios the most holy Patriarch of Constantinople and spiritual father of mine, and in rejection of all that was written or spoken against him, 1 have duly signed with my own hand.’
 
By way of epilogue it may be pointed out that the image of St. Photios that emerges from the acts of the Eighth Ecumenical Council is one of moderation, sensitivity and maturity.
 
Confrontation is avoided but without compromising firmness in matters that relate to the faith. Generosity towards others is displayed and maturity permeates everything.
 
This is indeed the image, which Prof. Henry Chadwick has recently resolved to promote.
 
This is the authentic image of the East. The Photian Council of 879/880 is indeed the Eighth Ecumenical of the Catholic Church, Eastern and Western and Orthodox.
 
It is a Council of Unity — the last one before the storm of the great Schism — based on the common Holy Tradition and especially on the unadulterated faith of the Ecumenical Creed,” according to Father Dragas.


FUNERAL OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY
HER DEATH & ASSUMPTION INTO HEAVEN
 
The Dormition, or Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary as it is called in the West, is celebrated by both Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics on 15 August. 
 
The big difference between East & West is that in Orthodoxy, the Mother of God died and was buried before she was bodily assumed into Heaven.  This is the historical account regarding the Mother of God…
 
At the time of Her blessed Falling Asleep, our Most Holy Mother was living in Jerusalem. Her reputation as Mother of the Messiah had already spread throughout the land and had aroused many of the envious and those who were spiteful against Her. Throughout the years, the Blessed Virgin Mary even had numerous attempts made on Her life; but God preserved Her from all harm.
           
Her days and nights were spent in prayer interceding for all of us, her children. The Most Holy Theotokos went often to the Holy Sepulchre of the Lord, and there She offered up fervent prayer. In one such visit to Golgotha, the Archangel Gabriel appeared to Her and announced Her approaching departure from this life to eternal life. In pledge of this, the Archangel gave Her a palm branch from Paradise. The Mother of God returned to Bethlehem and summoned Righteous Joseph of Arimathea and other disciples of the Lord, to tell them of Her impending repose.
 
Our Holy Mother also prayed that the Lord would have the Apostle John come to be with Her. The Holy Spirit miraculously transported him from Ephesus, setting him in that very place where the Mother of God lay. After prayer, the Most Holy Virgin offered incense, and John heard a voice from Heaven, closing Her prayer with “Amen.”  She understood the voice to mean the speedy arrival of the Apostles, Disciples and the holy Angels [Bodiless Powers] to be with her.
 
The Faithful, whose number was impossible to count, gathered together, says St John of Damascus, like clouds and eagles, to listen to the Mother of God. Seeing one another, the Disciples rejoiced, but in their confusion they asked each other why the Lord had gathered them together in one place? St John the Theologian, greeted them with tears of joy, saying the time of the Blessed Virgin Mary’s repose was at hand.  Going in to the Mother of God, they beheld Her lying upon the bed, filled with spiritual joy. The Disciples greeted Her, and then they told her how they had been carried miraculously on clouds from their places of preaching. The Most Holy Virgin Mary glorified God, because He had heard Her prayer and fulfilled Her heart’s desire, and She began speaking about Her imminent end.
 
During this conversation the Apostle Paul also appeared in a miraculous manner together with his disciples Dionysius the Areopagite, St Hierotheus, St Timothy and others of the Seventy. The Holy Spirit had gathered them all together so that they might be granted the blessing of the All-Pure Virgin Mary, and more fittingly to see to the burial of the Mother of the Lord. She called each of them to Herself by name…She blessed them and extolled them for their Faith and the hardships they endured in preaching the Gospel of Her Son. To each She wished eternal bliss, and prayed with them for the peace and welfare of the whole world.
 
Then came the third hour [about 9AM], when the Dormition [Falling Asleep] of the Mother of God was to occur. A number of candles were burning. The holy Disciples surrounded her beautifully adorned bed, offering praise to God. She prayed in anticipation of Her death and of the arrival of Her longed-for Son and Lord! Suddenly, the inexpressible Light of Divine Glory…the Uncreated Light… shone forth, before which the blazing candles were dimmed in comparison. All who saw it were frightened. Descending from Heaven was Christ, the King of Glory, surrounded by hosts of Angels and Archangels and other Heavenly Powers, together with the souls of the Forefathers and the Prophets, who had prophesied in ages past concerning the Most Holy Virgin Mary.
Seeing Her Son, the Mother of God exclaimed: “My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God My Savior, for He hath regarded the low estate of His Handmaiden” (Luke 1:46-48) and, rising from Her bed to meet the Lord, She bowed down to Him, and the Lord bid Her enter into Life Eternal. Without any bodily suffering, as though in a happy sleep, the Most Holy Virgin Mary gave Her soul into the hands of Her Son and God.
 
Then began a joyous angelic song. Accompanying the pure soul of the God-betrothed and with reverent awe for the Queen of Heaven, the angels exclaimed: “Hail, Full of Grace, the Lord is with Thee, blessed art Thou among women! For lo, the Queen, God’s Maiden comes, lift up the gates, and with the Ever-Existing One, take up the Mother of Light; for through Her salvation has come to all the human race. It is impossible to gaze upon Her, and it is impossible to render Her due honor.” The Heavenly gates were raised, and meeting the soul of the Most Holy Mother of God, the Cherubim and the Seraphim glorified Her with joy. The face of the Mother of God was radiant with the glory of Divine virginity, and from Her body there came a sweet fragrance, being the Odor of Sanctity.

Kissing the all-pure body with reverence and in awe, the Disciples in turn were blessed by it and filled with grace and spiritual joy. Through the great glorification of the Most Holy Theotokos, the almighty power of God healed the sick, who with faith and love had touched Her holy bed.
 
With tears and wailing for their separation from the Mother of God, the Apostles prepared to bury Her all-pure body. The holy Apostles Peter, Paul, James and others of the Twelve Apostles carried the funeral bier upon their shoulders, and upon it lay the body of the Ever-Virgin Mary. St John the Theologian went at the head with the resplendent palm-branch from Paradise. The other saints and a multitude of the Faithful accompanied the funeral bier with candles and censers, singing sacred songs. This solemn procession went from Sion through Jerusalem to the Garden of Gethsemane.
 
With the start of the procession there suddenly appeared over the all-pure body of the Mother of God and all those accompanying Her a resplendent circular cloud, like a crown. There was heard the singing of the Heavenly Powers, glorifying the Mother of God, which echoed that of the worldly voices. This circle of Heavenly carolers and great radiance accompanied the procession to the very place of burial.
 
The inhabitants of Jerusalem could not believe what they had seen, taken aback by the extraordinarily grand funeral procession and vexed at the honor accorded the Mother of Jesus; many complained of this to the High Priest and scribes. The Jewish priest Athonios, out of spite and hatred for the Mother of Jesus of Nazareth, wanted to topple the funeral bier on which lay the body of the Most Holy Virgin Mary, but an angel of God invisibly cut off his hands, which had touched the bier. Seeing such a wonder, Athonios repented and with Faith confessed the majesty of the Mother of God. He immediately received healing and joined the crowd accompanying the body of the Blessed Virgin, and he became a zealous follower of Christ.
 
When the procession reached the Garden of Gethsemane, there amidst great weeping and wailing, began the last kiss to the all-pure body. Only towards evening were the Apostles able to place it in the tomb and seal the entrance to the cave with a large stone.
For three days they did not depart from the place of burial, praying and chanting Psalms. Through the wise providence of God and reminiscent of events following Her Son’s resurrection, the Apostle Thomas was not to be present at the burial of the Mother of God. Arriving late on the third day at Gethsemane, he lay down at the tomb and with bitter tears asked that he might be permitted to look once more upon the Mother of God and bid her farewell. The Apostles out of heartfelt pity for him decided to open the grave and permit him the comfort of venerating the all-pure body of the Ever-Virgin Mary. Having opened the grave, they found in it only the grave wrappings and were thus convinced of the bodily ascent of the Most Holy Virgin Mary to Heaven.
 
In the Icon we see Christ in Glory holding the pure soul of Mary in His arms, shown as an infant. The parallel between the image of the God-Man Jesus holding the child-like soul of Mary and the image of the Mother Mary holding the Christ-child in her own arms is, of course, deliberate. The title of “God-bearer” is given to other Saints, such as St. Ignatius. To carry the Word of God, Jesus Christ, within us is the calling of all Christians: to bear Him spiritually within us during our lives, and shine with His glory. The “reward” for this in our earthly life is suffering at the hands of enemies, even to the point of martyrdom, as in the case of St. Ignatius. Yet the reward after our repose is that God bears our soul into His own hands and carries us into eternity, as we carried Him, for just a short time.
 
The Apostles are shown reverencing the body of the Mother of God: St. Paul at her feet; St Peter at the head with censer in hand.  Together with the Apostles are several bishops and holy women.  The account of the Jewish priest Athonios can be seen where his hands have been severed by the sword of the Archangel.
 
Just as we look to the Blessed Virgin Mary’s life for an example, we look to her bodily death – in this Icon – for hope as to where such an example leads us. The hope is in the bodily Resurrection and the life of the age to come. Both are shown in the Icon: the bodily assumption of Mary into Heaven, as well as the commendation of her soul into the hands of Jesus Christ.

Like those who gathered around the body of the Virgin Mary, we gather around our departed loved ones and commend their souls into the hands of Christ. As we remember those who have reposed in the Faith before us and have passed on into the communion of the Saints, we prepare ourselves to one day be received into the new life of the age to come.


SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY CRUSADERS
DESECRATIONS THAT ARE HARD TO FORGET
           
The most difficult of all events to forgive and forget in the minds of Easterners, are the events that took place in Constantinople, home of the Ecumenical Patriarchate!  For many in the West the exact facts & extent of what took place have been hidden away in history.
 
As of June 1203 AD, the fleet had sailed through the Dardanelles and down the Bosporus.  When they caught their first glimpse of Constantinople, many of the knights onboard were awestruck!  Never had any of them seen such a splendid sight according to Geoffrey of Villehardouin, Marshal of the County of Champagne:“ I can assure you that all those who had never seen Constantinople before gazed very intently upon the city, having never imagined there could be so fine a place in the entire world. They noted the high walls and lofty towers encircling it, and its rich palaces and tall churches, of which there were so many that no one would have believed it to be true if he had not seen it with his own eyes, and viewed the length and breadth of that city which reigns supreme over all others. There was indeed no man so brave and daring that his flesh did not shudder at the sight. Nor was this to be wondered at, for never had so grand an enterprise been carried out by any people since the creation of the world.
 
                            Now you must know that many of those in the host went to see Konstantinoupolis, and the rich palaces and great churches, of which there were many, and all the great wealth of the city for never was there city that possessed so much. Of relics it does not behoove me to speak, for at that day there were as many there as in all the rest of the world.”
​

​The Great Church of Constantinople “Hagia Sophia”
Once the largest Christian Church in the World
Eventually converted into a Mosque by the Muslims
 
Regrettably, in April 1204, the armies of the Fourth Crusade broke into the city of Constantinople and began to loot, pillage, and slaughter their way across the greatest metropolis in the Christian world. This Sack of Constantinople was so tragic -- and has ever since been recalled with such pain and anger amongst the Orthodox and Byzantine/Eastern Rite Catholics -- that it simply cannot be ignored even in the context of friendly ecumenical discussion. Bishop Kallistos Ware of Oxford comments:
 
“Eastern Christendom has never forgotten those three appalling days of pillage... What shocked the Greeks more than anything was the wanton and systematic sacrilege of the Crusaders. How could men who had specially dedicated themselves to God's service treat the things of God in such a way? As the Byzantines watched the Crusaders tear to pieces the altar and icon screen in the Church of the Holy Wisdom, and set prostitutes on the Patriarch's throne, they must have felt that those who did such things were not Christians in the same sense as themselves...Can we wonder if the Greeks after 1204 also looked on the Latins as ‘profani?’ Christians in the west still do not realize how deep is the disgust and how lasting the horror with which Orthodox regard actions such as the sack of Constantinople by the Crusaders.”
 
Niketas Choniates, was one of the inhabitants of the city.  He condemned the actions of the Crusaders in understandably harsh terms: “In truth, they were exposed as frauds. Seeking to avenge the Holy Spirit they raged openly against Christ and sinned by overturning the Cross with the cross they bore on their backs, not even shuddering to trample on it for the sake of a little gold or silver. These barbarians did horrible things that are beyond imagination. They tortured and massacred a large part of the population, destroyed churches, palaces, monasteries, stole thousands of priceless Holy Icons, Precious Relics and other things, raped young girls and boys. Not to mention the countless manuscripts of ancient Greek philosophy which were burnt by the ignorant and illiterate Francs.”
 
Warren Carroll, one of the best Orthodox Catholic historians of our time, admitted: “The sack that followed was one of the worst in all of history. . . No man, woman or child was safe from the ravagers. Robbery and rape were almost universal, mindless destruction widespread. Westerners . . . killed indiscriminately, without mercy or restraint . . . For this to have been done by Crusaders - men actually wearing the Cross of Christ - was an ineffaceable disgrace . . . The Greeks never forgot the sack of Constantinople in 1204; its memory, more than anything else, has prevented the healing of the Greek schism from that day to this, despite several major efforts at reunion.”

 
                 The Crusaders swarmed across the city, breaking into churches, palaces, and houses, and seizing booty with an insatiable greed. Nicholas Mesarites, a contemporary Byzantine writer, observed “war-maddened swordsmen, breathing murder, iron-clad and spear-bearing, sword-bearers and lance bearers, bowmen, horsemen, boasting dreadfully…pillaging the holy places, trampling down on divine things, running riot over holy things, casting down to the floor the holy images of Christ and His holy Mother and of the holy men who from eternity have been pleasing to the Lord God.”
 
Nobody controlled the troops. Thousands of defenseless civilians were killed. Women, even nuns, were raped by the crusaders and churches, monasteries and convents were looted. The very altars of churches were smashed and torn to pieces for their gold and marble by warriors who had sworn to fight in service of the Christian faith.
 
Even the magnificent Santa Sophia, [Holy Wisdom] the Great Church of Constantinople, was ransacked by the Crusaders. Works of tremendous value were destroyed.  The loss of art treasures the world suffered in the sack of Constantinople is immeasurable.  As the Crusaders began to send news of their achievement back to the West, they argued that God had exercised his judgment on the sinful Greeks.
Geoffrey de Villehardouin further attested:  “One would be hard-pressed to find a Catholic historian (or any Catholic who learns the details) who would defend what took place in this abominable, reprehensible catastrophe.”
 
Initially, Pope Innocent III, the man who had first called for the Crusade, was overjoyed and celebrated their success, but as he received news of their atrocities against defenseless women and children and their plundering of the holy sites, he condemned them as “having turned away from the purity of your vow when you took up arms not against Saracens, but Christians…preferring earthly wealth to celestial treasures.” The Pope bitterly lamented the spilling of “blood on Christian swords that should have been used on pagans” and described the expedition as “an example of affliction and the works of Hell.”
 
Of course, the Pope neither knew about nor sanctioned this massacre and sacrilegious pillage. In fact, he had forbidden the Crusaders, on pain of excommunication, to attack Byzantium, instructing the leader, that: “The crusade must not attack Christians, but should proceed as quickly as possible to the Holy Land.” He only found out the full horror of what had happened more than eight months later, the Pope wrote to Cardinal Peter Capuano, denouncing the sack in no uncertain terms:
“These ‘soldiers of Christ’ who should have turned their swords against the infidel have steeped themselves in Christian blood, sparing neither religion, nor age, nor sex... They stripped the altars of silver, violated the sanctuaries, robbed icons and crosses and relics... The Latins have given example only of perversity and works of darkness. No wonder the Greeks call them dogs!”

 
Sadly, both East & West, together, were guilty of serious sin.  Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics have every right to be horrified by what took place in the siege of Constantinople in 1204.  Both sides, sadly, were infected with the workings of the devil to destroy the Church that Our Lord ransomed His life for!
 
Bishop Kallistos again comments on the Orthodox share of the blame in these massacres: “Each . . . must look back at the past with sorrow and repentance. Both sides must in honesty acknowledge that they could and should have done more to prevent the schism. Both sides were guilty of mistakes on the human level. Orthodox, for example, must blame themselves for the pride and contempt with which during the Byzantine period they regarded the west; they must blame themselves for incidents such as the riot of 1182, when many Latin residents at Constantinople were massacred by the Byzantine populace.”
 
In a humble move during the summer of 2001, Pope St. John Paul II met with Orthodox Hierarchs saying: “It is tragic that the assailants, who set out to secure free access for Christians to the Holy Land, turned against their brothers in the faith. That they were Latin Christians fills Catholics with deep regret….For occasions past and present, when the sons and daughters of the [Roman] Catholic Church have sinned by actions and omission against their Orthodox brothers and sisters, may the Lord grant us the forgiveness we beg of Him.”

 
For a lasting union to take place between East & West, we must all lay aside these tragic events and pray for forgiveness.

Brothers....Peter & Andrew
"...and they will know
​we are Christians by our Love!"

THE “DONATION OF CONSTANTINE”
A PRIMACY BUILT UPON A FORGERY
 
   A question hardly asked…to what extent would those go to secure a false understanding of the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome?
 
This is perhaps the most famous forgery in history! It bestowed vast territory and spiritual & temporal power on Pope Sylvester [314-335] and his successors. For hundreds of years, until Lorenzo Valla proved it was forgery in the 15th century, this Imperial Decree gave great influence on political and religious affairs in medieval Europe.   No doubt, it was an underlying factor in the Great Schism of 1054 AD and greatly influenced the papal claims, most especially, the universal jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome.
​
According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, “This forgery has been associated with the coronations of Pippin in 754 and Charlemagne in 800, as well as with papal efforts to secure independence from the Byzantine Empire or to undermine Byzantine territorial claims in Italy.  Leo IX [1049-1054] was the first pope to cite it as an authority in an official act, and subsequent popes used it in their struggles with the Holy Roman emperors and other secular leaders.” Here is exactly what the forged document said:   
 
“In the name of the holy and indivisible Trinity, the Father, namely, and the Son and the Holy Spirit. The emperor Caesar Flavius Constantine in Christ Jesus, the Lord I God our Saviour, one of that same holy Trinity,-faithful merciful, supreme, beneficent, Alamannic, Gothic, Sarmatic, Germanic, Britannic, Hunic, pious, fortunate, victor and triumpher, always august: to the most holy and blessed father of fathers Sylvester, bishop of the city of and to all his successors the pontiffs , who are about to sit upon Rome and pope, the chair of St. Peter until the end of time - also to all the most reverend and of God beloved catholic bishops, subjected by this our imperial decree throughout the whole world to this same holy, Roman church, who have been established now and in all previous times-grace, peace, charity, rejoicing, long-suffering, mercv, be with you all from God the Father almighty and from Jesus Christ his Son and from the Holy Ghost. Our most gracious serenity desires, in clear discourse, through the page of this our imperial decree, to bring to the knowledge of all the people in the whole world what things our Saviour and Redeemer the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the most High Father, has most wonderfully seen fit to bring about through his holy apostles Peter and Paul and by the intervention of our father Sylvester, the highest pontiff and the universal pope. First, indeed, putting forth, with the inmost confession of our heart, for the purpose of instructing the mind of all of you, our creed which we have learned from the aforesaid most blessed father and our confessor, Svlvester the universal pontiff; and then at length announcing the mercy of God which has been poured upon us.
 
For we wish you to know, as we have signified through our former imperial decree, that we have gone away, from the worship of idols, from mute and deaf images made by hand, from devilish contrivances and from all the pomps of Satan; and have arrived at the pure faith of the Christians, which is the true light and everlasting life. Believing, according to what he-that same one, our revered supreme father and teacher, the pontiff Sylvester has taught us…
 
…I together with all our satraps [provincial governors] and the whole senate and the nobles and all the Roman people, who are subject to the glory of our rule considered it advisable that, as on earth he [Peter] is seen to have been constituted vicar of the Son of God, so the pontiffs, who are the representatives of that same chief of the apostles, should obtain from us and our empire the power of a supremacy greater than the earthly clemency of our imperial serenity is seen to have had conceded to it, we choosing that same prince of the apostles, or his vicars, to be our constant intercessors with God. And, to the extent of our earthly imperial power, we decree that his holy Roman church shall be honoured with veneration; and that, more than our empire and earthly throne, the most sacred seat of St. Peter shall be gloriously exalted; we giving to it the imperial power, and dignity of glory, and vigour and honour.
 
And we ordain and decree that he shall have the supremacy as well over the four chief seats Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople [at the time of the supposed date of the document, Constantinople had not been founded. Its position as "chief seat" was two centuries away.] and Jerusalem, as also over all the churches of God in the whole world. And he who for the time being shall be pontiff of that holy Roman church shall be more exalted than, and chief over, all the priests of the whole world; and, according to his judgment, everything which is to be provided for the service of God or the stability of the faith of the Christians is to be administered.
 
It is indeed just, that there the holy law should have the seat of its rule where the founder of holy laws, our Saviour, told St. Peter to take the chair of the apostleship; where also, sustaining the cross, he blissfully took the cup of death and appeared as imitator of his Lord and Master; and that there the people should bend their necks at the confession of Christ's name, where their teacher, St. Paul the apostle, extending his neck for Christ, was crowned with martyrdom. There, until the end, let them seek a teacher, where the holy body of the teacher lies; and there, prone and humiliated, let them perform I the service of the heavenly king, God our Saviour Jesus Christ, where the proud were accustomed to serve under the rule of an earthly king.
 
Meanwhile we wish all the people, of all the races and nations throughout the whole world, to know: that we have constructed within our Lateran palace, to the same Saviour our Lord God Jesus Christ, a church with a baptistry from the foundations. And know that we have carried on our own shoulders from its foundations, twelve baskets weighted with earth, according to the number of the holy apostles. Which holy church we command to be spoken of, cherished, venerated and preached of, as the head and summit of all the churches in the whole world as we have commanded through our other imperial decrees.
 
We have also constructed the churches of St. Peter and St. Paul, chiefs of the apostles, which we have enriched with gold and silver; where also, placing their most sacred bodies with great honour, we have constructed their caskets of electrum, against which no force of the elements prevails. And we have placed a cross of purest gold and precious gems on each of their caskets, and fastened them with golden keys. And on these churches for the endowing of divine services we have conferred estates, and have enriched them with different objects; and, through our sacred imperial decrees, we have granted them our gift of land in the East as well as in the West; and even on the northern and southern coast;-namely in Judea, Greece, Asia, Thrace, Africa and Italy and the various islands: under this condition indeed, that all shall be administered by the hand of our most blessed father the pontiff Sylvester and his successors.

For let all the people and the nations of the races in the whole world rejoice with us; we exhorting all of you to give unbounded thanks, together with us, to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. For He is God in Heaven above and on earth below, who, visiting us through His holy apostles, made us worthy to receive the holy sacrament of baptism and health of body. In return for which, to those same holy apostles, my masters, St. Peter and St. Paul; and, through them, also to St. Sylvester, our father, the chief pontiff and universal pope of the city of Rome, and to all the pontiffs his successors, who until the end of the world shall be about to sit in the seat of St. Peter: we concede and, by this present, do confer, our imperial Lateran palace, which is preferred to, and ranks above, all the palaces in the whole world; then a diadem, that is, the crown of our head, and at the same time the tiara; and, also, the shoulder band, that is, the collar that usually surrounds our imperial neck; and also the purple mantle, and crimson tunic, and all the imperial raiment; and the same rank as those presiding over the imperial cavalry; conferring also the imperial scepters, and, at the same time, the spears and standards; also the banners and different imperial ornaments, and all the advantage of our high imperial position, and the glory of our power.
 
And we decree, as to those most reverend men, the clergy who serve, in different orders, that same holy Roman church, that they shall have the same advantage, distinction, power and excellence by the glory of which our most illustrious senate is adorned; that is, that they shall be made patricians and consuls, we commanding that they shall also be decorated with the other imperial dignities. And even as the imperial soldiery, so, we decree, shall the clergy of the holy Roman church be adorned. And I even as the imperial power is adorned by different offices by the distinction, that is, of chamberlains, and door keepers, and all the guards, so we wish the holy Roman church to be adorned. And, in order that the pontifical glory may shine forth more fully, we decree this also: that the clergy of this same holy Roman church may use saddle cloths of linen of the whitest colour; namely that their horses may be adorned and so be ridden, and that, as our senate uses shoes with goats' hair, so they may be distinguished by gleaming linen; in order that, as the celestial beings, so the terrestrial may be adorned to the glory of God. Above all things, moreover, we give permission to that same most holy one our father Sylvester, bishop of the city of Rome and pope, and to all the most blessed pontiffs who shall come after him and succeed him in all future times-for the honour and glory of Jesus Christ our Lord,-to receive into that great Catholic and apostolic church of God, even into the number of the monastic clergy, any one from our senate, who, in free choice, of his own accord, may wish to become- a cleric; no one at all presuming thereby to act in a haughty manner.
 
We also decreed this, that this same venerable one our father Sylvester, the supreme pontiff, and all the pontiffs his successors, might use and bear upon their heads-to the Praise of God and for the honour of St. Peter-the diadem; that is, the crown which we have granted him from our own head, of purest gold and precious gems. But he, the most holy pope, did not at all allow that crown of gold to be used over the clerical crown which he wears to the glory of St. Peter; but we placed upon his most holy head, with our own hands, a tiara of gleaming splendour representing the glorious resurrection of our Lord. And, holding the bridle of his horse, out of reverence for St. Peter we performed for him the duty of groom; decreeing that all the pontiffs his successors, and they alone, may use that tiara in processions.
 
In imitation of our own power, in order that for that cause the supreme pontificate may not deteriorate, but may rather be adorned with power and glory even more than is the dignity of an earthly rule: behold we giving over to the oft mentioned most blessed pontiff, our father Sylvester the universal pope, as well our palace, as has been said, as also the city of Rome and all the provinces, districts and cities of Italy or of the western regions; and relinquishing them, by our inviolable gift, to the power and sway of himself or the pontiffs his successors do decree, by this our godlike charter and imperial constitution, that it shall be [so] arranged; and do concede that they [the palaces, provinces etc.] shall lawfully remain with the holy Roman church.
​

Wherefore we have perceived it to be fitting that our empire and the power of our kingdom should be transferred and changed to the regions of the East; and that, in the province of Byzantium, in a most fitting place, a city should be built in our name; and that our empire should there be established. For, where the supremacy of priests and the bead of the Christian religion has been established by a heavenly ruler, it is not just that there an earthly ruler should have jurisdiction.
 
We decree, moreover, that all these things which, through this our imperial charter and through other godlike commands, we have established and confirmed, shall remain uninjured and unshaken until the end of the world. Wherefore, before the living God, who commanded us to reign, and in the face of his terrible judgment, we conjure, through this our imperial decree, all the emperors our successors, and all our nobles, the satraps [provincial governors] also and the most glorious senate, and all the people in the whole world now and in all times previously subject to our rule: that no one of them, in any way allow himself to oppose or disregard, or in any way seize, these things which, by our imperial sanction, have been conceded to the holy Roman church and to all its pontiffs. If anyone, moreover, which we do not believe prove a scorner or despiser in this matter, he shall be subject and bound over to eternal damnation; and shall feel that the holy chiefs of the apostles of God, Peter and Paul, will be opposed to him in the present and in the future life. And, being burned in the nethermost hell, he shall perish with the devil and all the impious.
 
The page, moreover, of this our imperial decree, we, confirming it with our own hands, did place above the venerable body of St. Peter chief of the apostles; and there, promising to that same apostle of God that we would preserve inviolably all its provisions, and would leave in our commands to all the emperors our successors to preserve them, we did hand it over, to be enduringly and happily possessed, to our most blessed father Sylvester the supreme pontiff and universal pope, and, through him, to all the pontiffs his successors God our Lord and our Saviour Jesus Christ consenting.
 
And the imperial subscription: May the Divinity preserve you for many years, oh most holy and blessed fathers.”
 
…Given at Rome on the third day before the Kalends of April, our master the august Flavius Constantine, for the fourth time, and Galligano, most illustrious men, being consuls.
 
Such strong words from the Emperor!  This forgery would drive deep the seeds for the Great Schism in 1054 AD.


“FALSE DECRETALS OF ISIDORE”
A COMPLETE FABRICATION OF CHURCH HISTORY

            According to Abbe Guette in his “False Decretals of Isidore, Cornerstone of the Papacy,”  "The False Decretals make as it were the dividing point between the Papacy of the first eight and that of the succeeding centuries. At this date, the pretensions of the Popes begin to develop and take each day a more distinct character." [Abbe Guette was a devout Roman Catholic and a historian.  As a result of his historical research about the papacy, he eventually joined the Eastern Orthodox Church.]          
           
            As we  accounted previously, in the Early Church the Bishop of Rome was simply one bishop, the Patriarch of the West, among brother bishops, the Patriarchs of their respective Sees in the East.
 
            But, something happened! Over many years the Pope was imbrued with power over the entire Church. [universal jurisdiction]  He became so powerful that he was able to depose kings and emperors.  Sadly, he became so powerful that he was able to force kings to use their secular might to enforce things like the Inquisition.
 
History reveals that the process of increasing papal power was influenced by forged documents which forever changed the world’s perception of the “history of the papacy” and of the Roman Catholic Church!  Forgery was the extent that some in the West would go to, to secure a false understanding of the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome!  Such deception would greatly influence the separation of East & West and create long-lasting suspicions giving great impetus to “protestors” who would later break away from Rome in 1517 AD.
 
One of the most famous forgeries in Roman Catholic Church history is the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals, which were written around 845 AD…they are also known as the ”False Decretals” consisting of 115 documents which were supposedly written by early popes.
 
These “Decretals” were a complete fabrication of Church history.  They set forth precedents for the exercise of sovereign authority of the popes over the entire Catholic Church -- both East & West, together -- prior to the Fourth century, and make it appear that the popes had always exercised sovereign dominion and had ultimate authority even over Church Councils.
 
The “Catholic Encyclopedia” admits that these were forgeries.  It says, “that the purpose of these forged documents was to enable the Church to be independent of secular power, and to prevent the laity from ruling the Church.”  In other words, their purpose was to increase the power of the Pope…it was much more than that!

 
In addition to documents which were total forgeries, genuine documents were  also altered.  One hundred twenty-five genuine documents had forged material added to them, which increased the power of the Pope.  “Many early documents were changed to say the opposite of what they had originally said,” according to former priest, Peter de Rosa, in his Vicars of Christ, from extensive research in Rome at the Vatican Archives he documented the following:
“One of the forgeries is a letter which was falsely attributed to Saint Ambrose.  It said that if a person does not agree with the Holy See, then he or she is a heretic.”  This is an example of how papal power was promoted by fraudulently claiming the authority of highly respected Church Fathers.
 
“When Eastern Christians tried to discuss issues with the Church in Rome, the popes often used forged documents to back their claims.  This happened so frequently that for 700 years the Greeks referred to Rome as the ‘home of forgeries.’”

 
It’s easy to see why the East looked at Rome that way, because another forgery, the Donation of Constantine, subordinated the four patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem and Constantinople under the Pope of Rome!  Yes, for three hundred years, the False Decretals and the Donation, with other forgeries, would be used by the West to claim authority over the Patriarchates in the East. 
 
In the middle of the Twelfth century, a monk named Gratian wrote the Decretum, which became the basis for Canon Law [the legal system for running the Roman Catholic Church].  It contained numerous quotations from forged documents.  “He drew many of his conclusions from those quotations and quoted 324 passages which were supposedly written by popes of the first four centuries.  Of those passages, only eleven are genuine and 313 quotations are forgeries.”
 
In the Thirteenth century, Thomas Aquinas wrote the “Summa Theologica” and numerous other works.  “His writings are the foundation for Scholastic Theology. He used Gratian’s Decretum for quotations from the Church Fathers and early popes. Aquinas also used forged documents which he thought were genuine.”
 
The importance of Thomas Aquinas theology can be seen in the encyclical of Pope Pius X on the priesthood.  In 1906, Pius said that, “in their study of philosophy, theology, and Scripture, men studying for the priesthood should follow the directions given by the popes and the teaching of Thomas Aquinas.”
“In the middle of the ninth century, a radical change began in the Western Church, which dramatically altered the Constitution of the Church, and laid the ground work for the full development of the papacy.  The papacy could never have emerged without a fundamental restructuring of the Constitution of the Church and of the world’s perceptions of the history of that Constitution” according to de Rosa.
 
 As long as the true facts of Church history were well known, it would serve as a buffer against any unlawful ambitions.  However, in the 9th century, a literary forgery occurred which completely revolutionized the ancient government of the Church in the West.  This forgery is known as the “Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals,” written around 845 A.D. 
 
“The historical facts reveal that the papacy was never a reality as far as the universal Church is concerned.  There are many eminent Roman Catholic historians who have testified to that fact as well as to the importance of the forgeries, especially those of ‘Pseudo-Isidore.’  One such historian was Johann Joseph Ignaz von Dollinger,  one of the most renowned Roman Catholic historians of the Nineteenth century, who taught Church history for 47 years.”
​

"One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism...
Two brothers....Andrew & Peter
His All-Holiness Bartholomew & His Holiness Francis
​Determined...TOGETHER...to heal the Church of Christ!

​“In addition to the ‘Pseudo Isidorian Decretals’ there were other forgeries which were successfully used for the promotion of the doctrine of papal primacy.  One famous instance is that of Thomas Aquinas.  In 1264 A.D. Thomas authored a work entitled ‘Against the Errors of the Greeks’.  This work deals with the issues of theological debate between the Greek and Roman Churches in that day on such subjects as the Trinity, the Procession of the Holy Spirit, Purgatory and the Papacy.  In his defense of the papacy Thomas bases practically his entire argument on forged quotations of Church fathers…. These spurious quotations had enormous influence on many Western theologians in succeeding centuries.”
 
“The authority claims of Roman Catholicism ultimately devolve upon the institution of the papacy.  The papacy is the center and source from which all authority flows for Roman Catholicism.  Rome has long claimed that this institution was established by Christ and has been in force in the Church from the very beginning.  But the historical record gives a very different picture.  This institution was promoted primarily through the falsification of historical fact through the extensive use of forgeries as Thomas Aquinas’ apologetic for the papacy demonstrates.  Forgery is its foundation,” said de Rosa.
 
Remember, if this is in any way true, that Thomas Aquinas quoted from forged materials—with the “Catholic Encyclopedia” admitting that such materials were forgeries—we have a big problem!
 
The “False Decretals” were so extensively circulated in the West, that they were everywhere received, and particularly at Rome, as authentic.
 
According to Abbe Guette, further objections to the False Decretals were made by Fleury: "The subject matter of these letters [Hist. Eccl. liv. xliv.] reveals their spuriousness. They speak of archbishops, primates, patriarchs, as if these titles had existed from the birth of the Church. They forbid the holding of any council, even a provincial one, without permission from the Pope, and represent appeals to Rome as habitual.
 
Frequent complaints therein made of usurpations of the temporalities of the Church. We find there this maxim, that bishops falling into sin may, after having done penance, exercise their functions as before. Finally, the principal subject of these Decretals is that of complaints against bishops; there is scarcely one that does not speak of them and give rules to make them difficult. And Isidore makes it very apparent in his preface that he had this matter deeply at heart."
 
“The object of the forger in this last matter is evident. It was to diminish the authority of the metropolitans, who, from time immemorial, had enjoyed the right to convoke the council of their province to hear complaints against a bishop of that province in particular, and judge him. The forger, whose object it was to concentrate all authority at Rome, would naturally first endeavor to check the authority of the metropolitan, and make the appeals to Rome seem to offer greater guarantees and to be more consonant with Episcopal dignity.”
 
“One must be utterly ignorant of the history of the first three centuries, not to know that at that period the Church had no fixed organization; that it was not divided into dioceses until the reign of Constantine and by the Council of Nicea; that it was this council that recognized in the sees of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch a superiority common to them all over a certain number of churches to which they had given birth, and over which, according to custom, they exercised a special supervision. But the forger does not hesitate for all this to bring into play archbishops, primates, and patriarchs during the first three centuries, and ascribes to the first Bishops of Rome, as rights, prerogatives, which the councils had never recognized, and which these bishops had usurped in the West since the invasions of the barbarians had overthrown the ancient Roman polity.”
 

DIALOGUE YIELDS MORE DIALOGUE
BUT ACTION IS URGENTLY NEEDED
 
I’ve heard it said, “the streets of Hell are paved with good intentions”…literal or not…it does present a good point.
 
            Certainly, there can be no doubt, that Pope Francis and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew agree that Christ’s words in Sacred Scripture are demanding when He says, “that all may be one!”
 
            Here are major Highlights of the past 50+ years in the long journey for reunion between the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches.  These are wonderful initiatives:
            1963 Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras declares the Orthodox intention of a serious dialogue at the second Pan-Orthodox Conference of Rhodes.
 
1964 Translation of the Sacred Relic, the head of St Andrew to the Orthodox Church of Patras; Mutual lifting of the 1054 AD excommunications by Patriarch Athenagoras I and Pope Paul VI on the banks of the Jordan River in Jerusalem.
 
1965 the ecclesial act (7 December 1965) with which the Church of Rome and the Ecumenical Patriarchate decided to "condemn to oblivion" and to "remove from the heart of the Church" the memory of the mutual excommunications between Patriarch Michael Cerularius and Cardinal Humbert of Silva Candida (1054); the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation is founded, meeting twice yearly; the office of Latin Patriarch of Constantinople is officially abolished; the Church of Greece began the practice of exchanging Easter letters between the Pope and His Beatitude Archbishop Christodoulos, Archbishop of Athens and of all Greece.
 
1966 Translation of the Sacred Relics of the Holy Apostle Titus of Crete, from Venice back to the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Crete.
 
1966-67 Pope Paul VI continued John XXIII's policy of dialogue with Soviet leaders in order to reduce persecutions against local Orthodox Christians (Ostpolitik policy).
 
1967 Athenagoras I and Paul VI publicly declared the intention of a "dialogue of charity" between the two churches, and a parallel "dialogue of truth" as well.
 
1968 Visit to the Patriarchate of Alexandria by Vatican representatives, who give Patriarch Nicholas VI a part of the relics of St Mark from Venice, on behalf of Pope Paul VI; the Centro Pro Unione center is founded by the Society of the Atonement (Graymoor Friars and Sisters) as an ecumenical research and action center;
 
1969 The new Roman Missal Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani or General Instruction of the Roman Missal is issued, indicating a preference for the liturgical orientation in which the priest
 
1969  The North American Consultation issues statement: "An Agreed Statement on the Holy Eucharist"
 
1971  The North American Consultation issues statement: "An Agreed Statement on Mixed Marriage"
 
1974 The North American Consultation issues statements: "An Agreed Statement on the Respect for Life"  and  "An Agreed Statement on the Church"
 
1976 The North American Consultation issues statements: "The Pastoral Office: A Joint Statement" and  "The Principle of Economy: A Joint Statement"
 
1978 The North American Consultation issues statement:  "An Agreed Statement on the Sanctity of Marriage;" through the efforts of Metropolitan Panteleimon (Chrysofakis) of Thessalonica, the sacred relics St. David of Thessalonica were triumphantly returned to Thessaloniki from Milan, Italy, after having been taken by Crusaders in 1236 AD.
 
1979 Joint Commission of Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches for Theological Dialogue established.
 
1980 Greece and the Vatican City State formally established diplomatic relations; the North American Consultation issues statement: "Joint Recommendations on the Spiritual Formation of Children of Marriages between Orthodox and Roman Catholics"
 
1982 Orthodox-Roman Catholic Joint Commission publishes in Munich first official common document, "The Mystery of the Church and of the Eucharist in Light of the Mystery of the Holy Trinity."
1985 Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI) issues “The Ratzinger Report: An Exclusive Interview on the State of the Church” where he gives solid paths for reunion of East & West         
 
1987 Orthodox-Roman Catholic Joint Commission in Bari issues common document "Faith, Sacraments and the Unity of the Church."

"And the Brethren shall
dwell together as one..."

​1988 Orthodox-Roman Catholic Joint Commission in Valamo publishes common document "The Sacrament of Order in the Sacramental Structure of the Church;" Pope John Paul II addressed the European Parliament urging unity with the East.
 
            1989 The North American Consultation issues statement: "An Agreed Statement on Conciliarity and Primacy in the Church"
 
1993 Orthodox-Roman Catholic Joint Theological Commission meets in Balamand, Lebanon, issuing common document "Uniatism: Method of Union of the Past, and Present. Search for Full Communion" (the "Balamand document"); the Balamand Document declared that what has been called "uniatism" "can no longer be accepted either as a method to be followed nor as a model of the unity our Churches are seeking".
 
1995 Pope John Paul II issues Apostolic Letter Orientale Lumen ("Light from the East") on May 2, encouraging East-West union; Pope John Paul II issues Encyclical Ut Unum Sint ("That they may be one") on May 25, reiterating that unity of these two sui juris churches is essential (as well as further dialogue with the Protestant churches), showing that the Roman Catholic Church is officially moved to unity.
 
1997 Beginning of the annual series of Orientale Lumen Conferences, a grassroots movement among lay persons and clergy providing a common forum for Eastern Orthodox, Eastern Catholics and Roman Catholics to meet and learn about each other's traditions; "Orientale Lumen I" is held in Washington D.C.
 
            1999 The North American Consultation issues statement: "Baptism and ‘Sacramental Economy'"
 
2000 Orthodox-Roman Catholic Joint Theological Commission meets in Baltimore, but is suspended due to the issues of papal primacy and the role of Eastern Catholic Churches, with the Commission not resuming again for six years; in view of the celebration of the Roman Catholic Great Jubilee year (Jubilaeum), on Sunday March 12 in his "Day of Pardon" homily Pope John Paul II formally asked forgiveness for the various sins committed by the Roman Catholic Church over the last two millennia.
 
2001 Pope John Paul II apologizes to Orthodox for Fourth Crusade, on the first trip to Greece by a Pope since 710 AD.
 
2002 Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I and Pope John Paul II co-sign Venice Declaration of Environmental Ethics.
 
            2003 The North American Consultation issues statement:  "The Filioque: A Church-Dividing Issue?"
 
2004 Return of relics of Ss. John Chrysostom and Gregory the Theologian to Constantinople from Rome; the Orientale Lumen EuroEast I conference is held in Istanbul, May 10-13, 2004;  the Saint Irenaeus Joint Orthodox-Catholic Working Group is established at Paderborn, Germany composed of 26 theologians—13 Orthodox and 13 Roman Catholics—attempting to go through Church history chronologically to understand and analyze the development of the interrelationship between primacy and synodality in terms of both theology and praxis.
 
2006 Pope Benedict XVI visits Ecumenical Patriarchate; Archbishop Christodoulos (Paraskevaides) of Athens visits Vatican, the first head of the Church of Greece to visit the Vatican, reciprocating the Pope's visit to Greece in 2001, and signing a Joint Declaration on the importance of the Christian roots of Europe and protecting fundamental human rights; the Russian Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches confronted Secular Humanism at the conference "Giving a Soul to Europe" (Vienna, May 3-5, 2006), discussing the challenges facing Christianity, specifically materialism, consumerism, agnosticism, secularism and relativism, all based on liberal humanist ideology, constituting a real threat to Christianity today; Pope Benedict XVI met with Bishop Agathangelos of Fanarion and Greek Orthodox Seminarians from the Apostoliki Diakonia theology college in Greece who were visiting Rome, urging them to confront the challenges that threaten the faith by working to unify all Christians; The Joint Commission met in Belgrade, Serbia and discussed a text entitled: "The Ecclesiological and Canonical Consequences of the Sacramental Nature of the Church: Conciliarity and Authority in the Church", at three levels of the Church's life: local, regional and universal.
 
2007 Orthodox-Roman Catholic Joint Commission meets in Ravenna, Italy, 10th plenary, led by co-presidents Cardinal Walter Kasper and Metropolitan John (Zizioulas) of Pergamon, agreeing upon a joint document consisting of 46 articles providing an ecclesiastical road map in discussing union ("Ravenna Document"); Orientale Lumen EuroEast II conference, May, 2007 in Istanbul;
 
2009 Orthodox-Roman Catholic Joint Commission meets in Paphos, Cyprus, 11th plenary, studying the theme "The Role of the Bishop of Rome in the Communion of the Church in the First Millennium;" first-ever Russian Orthodox church is consecrated in Rome; Russia and the Holy See upgraded their diplomatic relations to full ambassadorial relations in 2009, following improvements in the working relationship between the Holy See and the Orthodox Patriarchate of Moscow; at the invitation of Cardinal Walter Kasper, Archbishop Hilarion (Alfeyev) of Volokolamsk visited Pope Benedict XVI and several officials of the Roman Curia who have key roles in the Roman Catholic ecumenical dialogue; the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation issues "A Common Response" to the Ravenna Document of 2007, identifying a number of criticisms.
 
2010 Patriarch Bartholomew firmly addressed the opponents of the Orthodox theological dialogues in the Patriarchal and Synodal Encyclical on the Sunday of Orthodoxy, signed by 12 Bishops in addition to the Ecumenical Patriarch; first ever visit by a pope to Cyprus, as Pope Benedict went on a sensitive three-day day visit to the divided island; Cardinal Walter Kasper stated that there can be no full integration of eastern and western Europe without ecumenical dialogue and the contribution of the eastern European Orthodox churches; at the “Orthodox Constructions of the West” conference at Fordham University (June 28-30), keynote speaker Fr. Robert F. Taft, (S.J) delivered the address "Perceptions and Realities in Orthodox-Catholic Relations Today," calling on Catholic and Orthodox Churches to Restore Communion; Pope Benedict XVI proclaims the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the New Evangelisation; Orientale Lumen EuroEast III conference, July 5-8, 2010 in Istanbul; Orthodox-Roman Catholic Joint Commission meets in Vienna, Austria, 12th plenary, studying the theme "The Role of the Bishop of Rome in the Communion of the Church in the First Millennium;" North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation meets in Washington DC, issuing two statements: Steps Towards A Reunited Church: A Sketch Of An Orthodox-Catholic Vision For The Future., and Celebrating Easter/Pascha together; Croatian Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Zadar gives cherished relic of St. Simeon to the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem.
 
2012 The Assembly of Catholic Ordinaries of the Holy Land (ACOHL) issues a directive stating that within two years (by 2015) all Eastern Catholics and the Latin Patriarchate in the Holy Land will officially adopt the Greek Orthodox Julian calendar date for the celebration of Pascha; the North American Consultation issues statement: "The Importance of Sunday"
 
2013 Patriarch Bartholomew attends inauguration of Pope Francis at the Vatican, the first time an Ecumenical Patriarch has ever attended a papal inauguration.

His Holiness Pope Francis
meets with His Holiness Patriarch Theophilos
and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew
in Jerusalem on 25 May 2014 to commemorate
​the 50th Anniversary of the Lifting of the Anathemas

​2014  Pope Francis and Patriarch Bartholomew meet in Jerusalem to mark the 50th Anniversary of the lifting of the excommunications by their predecessors, Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras, in 1964; Pope Francis visits the Phanar for patronal Feast of St. Andrew.  He and Patriarch Bartholomew pledged their firm resolve “to intensify our efforts to promote the full unity of all Christians, and above all between Catholics and Orthodox.”
 
“Full communion” means that Orthodox and Catholics will actually cease to belong to two distinct churches and will recognize each other once again as brothers and sisters in one Church, East and West. We will celebrate the Eucharist together and be welcome to Communion in one another’s churches. Preserving the rich variety of our respective traditions of liturgy, theology and devotion, we will fully share those treasures with one another and rejoice in growing closer to Christ and to one another as members of one family instead of two.
 
2016  Pope Francis met in Cuba with Patriarch Kirill of Moscow, the first-ever meeting between a pope and the head of the Russian Orthodox Church. The meeting followed decades of tension and delicate dialogue between Moscow and Rome; in Chieti, Italy, an international group of 60 members of Catholic and Orthodox bishops and theologians reached agreement on how the role of the pope was understood in the first millennium of Christian history and what that role might look like with unity restored between Catholics and Orthodox.


IN CONCLUSION…
WHAT I COULDN’T SAY BEFORE
 
            Initially, I made the statement:  “Where We Are & Where We Must Go.”  I briefly mentioned that during high school and seminary days, I came to know about the Eastern Rites and the Eastern Orthodox Church…the most important fact being…that all, East & West, together…possessed valid Sacraments and valid Orders.
 
            Growing up in Central Florida during the ‘50s & ‘60s I lived in a neighborhood with Southern Baptists living on one side and Seventh Day Adventists on the other.   It’s hard to believe, but at that time, many groups and their members projected there was something “wrong with you” if you weren’t part of their denomination! Some even lauded that “everyone else was going to hell”
 
            To make matters more trying, I was raised in a mixed household: Mom was Roman Catholic and Dad was from a strict Pentecostal family.  Both my Grandfather and Uncle served as Church of God ministers for over fifty years, establishing numerous congregations throughout the state of Florida.
 
            During those times, I remember, very vividly, the visits to Grandfather’s churches and the congregations being very stern in their Pentecostal beliefs.  When we walked into the assembly…with Mom wearing her typical make-up, jewelry and “fancy” clothing …you would have thought from the harsh looks and whispered comments that “the whore of Babylon” had just arrived! 
 
Needless to say, it was rough growing up, “religion wise”…especially, me wanting to be a priest!  Thankfully, by the end of the ‘60s and into the ‘70s, attitudes began to change!  A peaceful calm was in the midst…denominations began to accept that members were brothers & sisters, under the same God & Father, with members of other denominations…then, part of a unique Christian tradition.
 
            I will never forget my Mom telling me that the same Pentecostal Father-in-Law, the same Grandfather who was disgruntled towards her for many years because she was Roman Catholic, actually asked her to pray with him…a Rosary...on his deathbed!  Yes, times were changing with a new ecumenical era about to prevail! 

​Next to any fruits of my vocation, my Wife has given me the greatest of joys.  And, in spite of my faults, she has stood by me for over forty-five years…supporting my religious and secular endeavors.
I thank her for being my wife, my helpmate, my best friend, devoted mother to our four sons and loving grandmother to our grandchildren.

His Holiness John Paul II
paternally imparts a special
Apostolic Blessing to
Father Michael D. Kirkland and
Sharon Lee Edgington,
on the occasion of their Marriage,
All Saints Day - November 1, 1981
​as a pledge of continued divine protection.

​From early contacts with Eastern Orthodox, it gave me solace as my ministry progressed through turbulent years following Vatican Council II.  I was and am convinced, more than ever, that the Eastern Rites would certainly by the salvation of the Western Church.

​In ministry, true Ecumenism comes from the seeds of UNITY that accompany it, beginning at the grassroots level—at the local parish—Sayidna Cyril of the Diocese of Newton and my Archbishop, allowed me to serve the Meklite Community in Ohio.

His Holiness Benedict XVI
cordially imparts the requested
Apostolic Blessing to
Right Reverend Mitred
Archpriest Michael D. Kirkland
and invokes an abundance of divine graces on the occasion of
his 25th Anniversary of Ordination to the Priesthood
Our Lady of Perpetual Help Church - Carmona
1982 March 23, 2007

​An unexpected honor was given by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI on the 25th Anniversary of my ordination to the Priesthood.
 
I’ve been blessed to serve at the Holy Altars in both Eastern & Western Rites of Rome to celebrate the Divine Liturgy with the Melkite Catholics, Byzanitine-Ruthenians, Antiochian Orthodox and have been incardinated with the Ukrainian Orthodox since 1986.

​I even had the opportunity to meet & pray with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew in 1997, when I was invited by New York’s Greek  Archbishop Iakovos to attend Vespers with them in Pittsburgh.

A highlight of my ministry was to serve with the Melkite Greek Catholics at their Holy Resurrection parish in Columbus, Ohio.  I will never forget the words of Archbishop Cyril as he clearly stated, “there is only ONE Church”… “we are all ONE Church!”


​Today, we arrive at a unique time…when Almighty God has enlightened our Spiritual Leaders, calling East & West to UNITY and a New Evangelization…to re-examine our history & our relationships with each other…to be that witness of our common Christian heritage.
 
            In this book I have tried to present, in a sincere and respectful way, many aspects of our Faith…some topics not easy to write about…others, virtually unknown and seemingly hidden for years.  Regardless, my intention has been to honestly examine the immense strengths and wealth we possess, East & West, together…as the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church.  Now, all we need to do is march forward in forgiveness & love to heal our Orthodox Catholic Church.
 
With the kind permission of contributors, I felt it, of great importance, to include extensive materials & documentation regarding the messages and miracles of “Our Lady of Soufanieh” in Damascus, Syria ~ and ~ the great “Miracle of Orthodoxy” the “Holy Fire” that miraculously appears each year on Holy Pascha in the Tomb of Christ.
           
In conclusion…the direction of how, and just how quickly, the great work of healing the Church of Christ will go, lay in the hands of His Holiness Pope Francis, wanting a return of the papacy “to what Christ intended it to be”…and His All-Holiness Bartholomew, who, for years, is an Ecumenical Patriarch who literally “lives and desires unity” the Holy Church of Christ.
These are the minimum steps—without crucial compromise for Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholics —to show Our Blessed Lord & the world—that the Pope & Patriarch are willing to fulfill that, “all may be one”…AND…for UNITY & HEALING of the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church:
 
            1.       Immediately restore the Nicene Creed – using only the wording from the Ecumenical Councils without the “filioque” 
 
          2.       Immediately restore a Common Date for the celebration of Easter/Holy Pascha – use only the formula authorized by the First Ecumenical Council of Nicæa
 
            These two steps toward UNITY are crucial and could be accomplished very easily by a mere “stroke of the pen” because they require simple adherence to the already understood mandates of the first Ecumenical Councils.
           
            Furthermore, both Pope & Ecumenical Patriarch could solemnly proclaim the following Commonly Held Truths:
 
            1.         Together, we possess the same Jesus Christ in His fullness…in the “Real Presence” of the Holy Eucharist
 
            2.         Together, we have the same valid Apostolic Succession of true Bishops & true Priests serving the Faithful
 
            3.         Together, we have the same Seven Sacraments/Holy Mysteries…giving Divine Grace
 
            4.         Together, we have both the Blessed Virgin Mary as our Holy Mother & the “great cloud of Witnesses”—the Saints--interceding for us in Heaven
 
            5.         Together, we have the same historical continuity, the same origin from Our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ and The Twelve…born as ONE Church on the Day of Pentecost        

Father, this is My prayer...
that "all may be one"
This is Our Blessed Lord's mandate...do we believe and accept it?
Do we trust that He will guide the Pope &n Ecumenical Patriarch
...relying on the Deposit of Faith, Nicene Creed and most especially
the Holy Eucharist...to Proclaim the UNITY of the Body of Christ?
Or...will we continue to harbour hurts and suspicions & misunderstandings?
We must FORGIVE AS CHRIST FORGIVES...laying aside these things.
We must in FAITH...East & West...return to what was believed and taught
by the Undivided "Catholic" Church of the Seven Ecumenical Councils!
Until this happens, there can be no UNITY...and His mandate is not fulfilled.

Of course, to achieve UNITY & HEALING of Christ’s Church it is also in the hands of each of us…Clergy and Faithful alike…not just in the hands of our Spiritual Leaders.
 
My prayer is that Pope Francis and Patriarch Bartholomew will take speedy initiatives for use of the unaltered Nicene Creed without the filioque ~ and ~ come to a firm decision on a Common Date for Easter so we may celebrate the Resurrection together!

Both Pope Francis and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew say they profess the same
Sacred Scripture, the inerrant "Word of God" to serve the Faithful...same Deposit of Faith
as delivered to the Apostles...and...both believe to be guided by the same All Holy Spirit.

Entrusted to lead 2 BILLION of the world's population!!!
Jesus said the gates of Hell "would not prevail against His Church."
Orthodox East, Rome West & Protestants...all Separated Brethren!
Will the Pope & Patriarch fulfill Christ's prayer that "all be One?"

What is a "Catholic?"  What did the UNDIVIDED Catholic Church really teach?
What are correct understandings of the Real Presence, Ordination of Female Deacons
& a Common Date to celebrate Easter?  Why hasn't the West been told about the yearly
"Miracle of Orthodoxy - The Holy Fire" in Jerusalem or Our Blessed Mother Mary's pleas
for UNITY in a Damascus Apparition?  Now, in one book...the FACTS will astound you!

"We must look truth in the eye...the Bishop of Rome must ensure communion of all the Churches."
Pope St. John Paul II
"Truth is not determined...by a vote"
His Holiness Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI
"...speak the Truth in Love"
His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I
"...make the exercise of my ministry more faithful to the meaning which Jesus Christ wished to give it"
and to the present needs of evangelization."
His Holiness Pope Francis

Father Michael has been ordained for over 35 years as an Orthodox Priest.
He is married with four sons and has served the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
in Central Ohio since 1987.
archpriest.michael@gmail.com

ST. NICHOLAS PRESS
Rightly Dividing the Word of Thy Truth