The Seventh Ecumenical Synod as a Landmark for the Unity of the Church

 

By Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos and Agiou Vlasiou

The Sunday of Orthodoxy celebrates the restoration of the sacred icons that took place in the year 843 AD, and in fact it is the implementation of the decision of the Seventh Ecumenical Synod, which took place in the year 787 AD in Nicaea of Bithynia. An iconoclastic period preceded it, during which an intense debate about icons took place, people were divided into iconoclasts and iconophiles and many arguments were heard from each side.

The important thing about this case is that the politicians of that time were heavily involved in this debate. This was not unprecedented since, unfortunately, theology is always connected with politics, to be more precise I would say that politics used and still uses theology to implement its plans. This will also be made evident in today's speech.

The "Blasphemous" and "Impious" Sermon of the "High Priest of Bacchus" Regarding Carnival

By Panagiotis Andriopoolos

Much has been written from time to time about the famous homily of the late Elder Meliton of Chalcedon about "Carnival" (Metropolitan Church of Athens 3/8/1970).

We focus on two important texts that illuminate its implications for ecclesiastical life today.

Reading them, and having in mind, of course, the eponymous speech, one comes to the conclusion that even if only this homily had been delivered by this eminent - in his time - hierarch of the Ecumenical Throne, it would have gone down in history.

The Return of the Skull of the Apostle Andrew to Patras as a Fruit of the Dialogue With the Roman Catholic Church

In the book by the theologian Aristides Panotis Peacemakers: Paul VI - Athenagoras I (Athens 1971) we read the following very interesting things about the return of the Honorable Head of the Apostle Andrew the First-Called from Rome to Patras on September 26, 1964:

"The story of the return of the head of Saint Andrew began in February 1963 at a meeting of Orthodox and Catholics in Athens. The relevant suggestions are made in Rome, with positive results. The Metropolitan of Patras, Konstantinos, is indicated by the writer the path he must follow. The text is written and sent. The answer is most desirable. In the middle of May, John Willebrans comes to Patras, for secret consultations with Metropolitan Konstantinos, who writes a personal letter to Pope Paul VI. Pope Paul VI responds in the affirmative to the request. But he wants the head to be returned "with a new reliquary worthy of its contents", which he would pay for himself, because the original reliquary, with which Thomas Palaiologos handed it over to Pope Pius II in 1462, had been replaced with a newer one, and the traces of the old one were lost in a Sacristy. Reliquary designs are requested from Athens, of the Orthodox type, but at the same time research is being done to discover the original reliquary. It is discovered. It was in the museum of the homeland of Pope Pius II. It is golden and its scientific examination by eminent archaeologists and Byzantine scholars proves that it is a rare work of art of the pre-iconoclast period (7th century) and thus has great artistic value. After this responsible opinion, the Pope decides to make a double gift to the Metropolis of Patras, the head and the ancient reliquary. They repair it and add only a base of precious stones, "blue" (lapis lazuli) with the inscription "in the spirit of concord and as a sign of great love". In this unique reliquary, with a relevant ceremony, in the presence of the Orthodox Observers, the Pope encloses the sacred relic and seals it and in this manner it is handed over to the Metropolitan of Patras Konstantinos, on 26 September 1964."

 

Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos.

 

The Orthodox: Arrival and Dialogue (Fr. John Romanides) - Part 5 of 5

 ...continued from part four.

VII

 

From an Orthodox point of view many aspects of Roman Catholic-Protestant differences are really divergent consequences of similar, sometimes identical, presuppositions. This means that on several key issues the Orthodox consider dialogue between Roman Catholics and Protestants really soliloquy which can become true dialogue only when the Orthodox are included.

Such three-way dialogue might help break down the thousand-year-old impasse between the Latin and Greek churches. Thus far two-way dialogue between those two groups has proved impossible because each has interpreted the other's theological language according to his own categories. For instance, the Greeks rejected the dogmatic formula of Filioque (that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son as well as from the Father) because, according to their categories - which are those of the First (325) and the Second (381) Ecumenical Councils - it is sheer heresy. On the other hand, the Latins in a legalistic way accepted the decisions of those Greek councils as authority, but with little understanding of the categories dominating the lengthy debates which provided background. One calls to mind St. Augustine's complaint that he could not understand what the Greeks meant by distinguishing between essence and hypostasis in the Trinity (De Trinitate, v, 8, 10), and this happens to be one of the foundation stones of Greek Trinitarian theology. When difficulties arose about the Filioque the Latins, consistent with their trinitarian categories, insisted that it is a dogma of faith necessary for salvation. The seventh century Greek theologian St. Maximus the Confessor calmed Greek suspicions by translating the Filioque into Greek categories. The enthusiasm of later Frankish and Latin theologians led the West to claim that the Filioque is consistent with and implicit in the decisions of the early Greek Ecumenical Councils, even that it was taught by the early Greek Fathers. For a while the Latins accused the Greeks of having removed the Filioque from the Creed and thus having betrayed their own tradition. Eventually they repeated that accusation in regard to other aspects of doctrine on which differences exist - such as grace, merits, sacraments, purgatory, authority, ecclesiology, even piety. The practical effect of many centuries of such anti-Greek propaganda has been to create a Latin image of the Greek as a stubborn and tricky churchman who because of pride refuses to be faithful to his own tradition.

The Orthodox: Arrival and Dialogue (Fr. John Romanides) - Part 3 of 5

...continue from part two.

In the ancient Church each Eucharistic assembly was headed by a bishop. Very early these bishops organized themselves into synods whose jurisdiction was determined by the provincial divisions of the Roman Empire. The provincial synods gathered together at the ordinations of the bishops and at regular intervals at the provincial capitals. Since the bishop of the provincial capital was usually the host at the gatherings of the bishops, he was recognized as the presiding bishop of the provincial synod and became known as the Metropolitan. The bishops decided upon questions by vote in synod and not by the arbitrary rule of any one bishop. The Metropolitan was primus inter pares.

When the Roman provinces were later reorganized and grouped into dioceses, the bishops of the diocesan capitals were recognized as having a primacy of honor (primus inter pares) above that of the provincial Metropolitans. Then there was a higher scale of primacy of honor for those bishops of imperial capitals. Rome was given the first place (primus inter pares), Alexandria, the capital of the Ptolemies, was accorded second place, and Antioch, the capital of the Seleucid Empire, third place.

Was Emperor Constantine XI Palaiologos A Uniate?

By John Sanidopoulos

Emperor John XIII Palaiologos led the delegation that ultimately signed for the union with the Pope during the Synod of Ferrara-Florence. When the emperor John XIII died in October 1448, the process of electing a new emperor began, who was ultimately John's brother, Constantine XI Palaiologos. Overall, the last Roman emperor reigned from March 12, 1449 until May 29, 1453. Here are a summary of some of the proofs that Constantine Palaiologos was not a Uniate but an Orthodox Christian:

The Ecclesiastical Ebbs and Flows of the Moscow Patriarchate

By Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos and Agiou Vlassiou

Ecumenism is associated with relativism, that is, everything is relative and thus there is a confusion in the theological and ecclesiological issues.

Ecumenicalism, of course, differs from Ecumenism, which is distinguished for confusing true and false, true and sect.

I note, however, that anti-ecumenists in Greece strongly judge and criticize the Ecumenical Patriarchate, and in particular Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, while pardoning the other Orthodox Churches, and in particular the Russian Orhodox Church.

I think this is neither fair nor objective.

That is why I will address the attitude of the Moscow Patriarchate from time to time, especially towards the Roman Catholics. Basically, I will present its transitions to ecclesiological issues, which are tailored to the external influences at the time.

I have to make clear from the outset that what follows is not about the Russian Orthodox people and the saints who lived and live in Russia, but about the leadership that has been influenced by other factors from time to time.

New views of the Russian Church on Roman Catholics and other Christian confessions appear from various statements made by representatives of the Moscow Patriarchate, which reverse basic orthodox ecclesiological principles.

For example, the Moscow Patriarchate accepts Roman Catholics in Orthodoxy without baptism and without new ordination, because it accepts their Apostolic succession. They are also involved in co-prayers and intercommunion.

It is characteristic that, according to Fr. Peter Hirsch, the Metropolitan of Volokolamsk, Hilarion (Alfeyev), “openly declared that he does not believe there are fundamental differences between Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism.”

He states: “Virtually and in practice there is already a mutual recognition of our Mysteries. If a Roman Catholic priest converts to Orthodoxy (in Russia) we accept him as a priest and we do not re-ordinate him… so, that means we de facto recognize the Sacred Mysteries of the Roman Catholic Church.”

Russian theology has turned aside the Orthodox Tradition, as shown in the views expressed by Orthodox Russian theologians on the exceedance of the Patristic Tradition, which is the basis of the Post-Patristic theology on “the human face” with the misbelieving extensions overturning the basic decisions of the Ecumenical Councils on eucharistic ecclesiology, etc.

The “Joint Declaration” of the Pope and the Patriarch of Moscow in Havana

Although in the end of January 2016 it was decided in Geneva by all Orthodox Churches and the Moscow Patriarchate to convene the Holy and Great Synod of the Orthodox Church in the Orthodox Academy of Crete in June of the same year, however after a few days, and in particular on February 12, 2016, Patriarch Kirill of Moscow met with Pope Francis in Havana, Cuba.

During this meeting Pope Francis and Patriarch Kirill of Moscow signed a “Joint Declaration” which abounds with ecumenistic views and is, actually, moving beyond the decisions taken by the Synod of the ten Orthodox Churches that took place in the Orthodox Academy of Crete, at Kolympari, Chania. While the “Holy and Great Synod” in Crete mentioned that “the Orthodox Church accepts the historic name of other heterodox Christian Churches and Confessions that are not in communion with her,” however, the “Joint Declaration” between Pope Francis and Patriarch Kirill of Moscow has gone even further.

Surprisingly, the several antipatriarchal circles in Greece, although they have been highly critical of the Ecumenical Patriarchate for ecclesiological issues, not only they do not critisize this “Joint Declaration” between Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and Pope Francis, but they also take a stand for the Moscow Patriarchate at the expense of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. At the same time, they consider ecumenistic issues to be secondary, which is a tampering of the doctrine!

However, at the meeting between the Patriarch of Moscow and Pope Francis “which is the first in history,” as it is written in the “Joint Statement,” all these things have been forgotten, and they talk about a Church, about “mutual relations among the Churches,” about “Brethren in the Christian faith”, about “key issues of our flock” etc.

The “Joint Declaration” in Havana, Cuba, refers to the common tradition of the first millennium. “We share the common tradition of the first millennium of Christianity”, “We want to unite our efforts to bear witness to the Gospel of Christ and to the common inheritance of the Church of the first millennium,” as if this same inheritance still exists.

Admittedly, there was once a “common inheritance of the first millennium”, which today does not exist, because Old Rome was removed from the Church and added new sects. So, we cannnot say that we share the “common tradition of the first millennium,” but we did share it in the past.

The “Joint Declaration” mentions that “despite the common tradition of the first ten centuries, for almost a millennium Roman Catholic and Orthodox people have been deprived of the Eucharistic communion.” The deprivation of the “Eucharistic communion” stems from the fact that “the wounds of conflict between distant and recent past, and the differences between our understanding and interpretation of our faith in God, One God in three persons, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, divide us.” But we must point out that it is not only the “wounds of conflict” for the Trinitarian doctrine that divide us, but also for other theological matters, which are sects, such as the actus purus, the primacy, the Papal infallibility, the unleavened bread in the Divine Liturgy, and other things, which, deliberately, are not mentioned in the “Joint Statement”.

Despite the “disagreements” between the two “Churches” and despite the common inheritance of the first millennium and the lack of unity, efforts are still being made to unite the “Churches”. The “Joint Declaration” speaks of the fact that “we must, with our determination, make every effort to tackle the dispute we have inherited from history.” That is, no significant theological differences seem to exist, but “disagreements”, for which we are not responsible, but history has given them to us abstractly!

The fact that some heterodox Christians shed their blood for Christ does not mean that the sects of their Confession can be pardoned. And this is because there are Christians in all Christian Confessions, who observe Christ’s commands, believe in God, without accepting the teaching of their Confession as it is being expressed through its “dogmatic” texts. As there are also Orthodox Christians who do not live according to the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils.

It is therefore not possible to invoke the martyrdom of some Orthodox Christians for ecumenistic purposes and to correlate the martyrdom with the pardoning of the ecclesiological theological principles and by referring to the achievement of unity of the Christians. It is as if one might argue that because in the period of Persecution some idolaters believed in Christ and martyred, without first being baptized, since this act constitutes the “baptism of blood”, there is no need to be orthodox baptized, when they return to the Church.

This means that the “union of the Churches” is not valid, without invoking the Dogmatic facts and correcting the sects just because of the “martyrdom of blood,” and it is not possible to speak of the “union of the Churches” through the “ecumenism of the blood”, when, at the same time, we violate the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils.

The “Joint Declaration” between the Patriarch of Moscow and the Pope also dealt with the issue of Unia. Although there are unambiguous views of the Orthodox people regarding Unia, saying that we do not accept this way to “unite the Churches”, but this could be achieved by addressing the theological differences between the Orthodox and the Catholic, however, in the “Joint Statement” different views are being adopted.

Throughout the “Joint Declaration” there is one common finding. In its headline it says, “Joint Declaration signed by Pope Francis and Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and all Rus’.” However, in all its content it seems that the contracting parties are two “world” leaders, the Pope for the Roman Catholics and the Patriarch of Moscow for the Orthodox people, that is, the ecclesiastical Leaders of the “First Rome” and of the “Third Rome” are making the decisions; although I do not accept the terms “First”, “Second” and “Third Rome”.

The Patriarch of Moscow does not decide with the Pope on issues that concern the Patriarchate of Moscow, but they decide on issues that concern the entire Christian world; all the Orthodox Churches, in the East, the West, the North and the South, that is, in the Middle East, in Africa, in Latin America, in “other continents”, as well as the “faithful” of other religions too, and generally all mankind.

This shows that the Patriarch of Moscow, during his discussions with the Pope and by making this decision, really considers himself as the “Primate” of Orthodoxy, overriding in this way the Ecumenical Patriarch. This is also obvious both in inter-orthodox and inter-ecclesiastical issues, such as the issue of Ukraine. Which means that the Patriarch of Moscow discusses with the Pope about the Ukrainian issue, possibly in order to prejudice the decisions of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

It is obvious that Patriarch Kirill of Moscow signed the “Joint Declaration” as a religious and political superpower, as a spokesman for other Orthodox Churches, but without receiving any authorization and by substituting for the Ecumenical Patriarch. It seems as if the so-called “Second Rome” (or New Rome) has been lost and now the “Third Rome” is talking with the “First Rome,” the two World Christian Leaders and two political Organizations.

From this brief and comprehensive analysis of the “Joint Declaration” between Pope Francis and Patriarch Kirill of Moscow it seems that the positions of the “Joint Declaration” are a very bad form of the decisions taken by the “Holy and Great Synod”, where the Patriarch of Moscow did not attend, that took place in Kolympari, Chania, a few months after the “Joint Declaration” in Havana, Cuba, in June 2016.

And how could he attend, since a few months before (February 2016) he had already made his own desicions, and in particular along with the Pope, the other World Leader, representing all the Orthodox Churches without authorization whatsoever and substituting for the Ecumenical Patriarch? And how, after this summit with Pope Francis and their “Joint Declaration”, could he attend the Synod in Kolympari, Crete, and occupy the fifth place?

The Patriarch of Moscow moves freely as a Church and Political Leader and expresses his ecumenistic positions, reversing the decision of the “Conference of Heads and Representatives of Orthodox Autocephalous Churches” that took place in Moscow in 1948.

It seems that the Patriarchate of Moscow has occasionally made various decisions on ecclesiastical matters, according to the circumstances of each era. The problem, however, is that the anti-ecumenist theologians who criticize Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and the Synod of Crete, not only pardon the worst views of the Patriarch of Moscow, but they also support him at the expense of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

This is a matter of interpretation on every side.

Source

Translation of the Relics of Saint Donatos of Euroea from Venice to Paramythia

Saint Donatos reposed in 387 and was buried near a church he built and a grave he prepared in the village of Glyki of Paramythia, which is in Epirus, Greece. For security reasons due to the invasion of various barbaric tribes, the sacred relic was transferred in 604 to Kerkyra, where it was kept in Kassiopi. The refugees from Paramythia accompanying the relic, including Bishop John of Euroea, were welcomed by Bishop Alkison of Kerkyra and hosted in the Castle of Kassiopi.

Saint Nicholas the Pilgrim and Fool for Christ (+ 1094)

St. Nicholas the Pilgrim (Feast Day - June 4)

Saint Nicholas the Pilgrim was born in Steiri of Boeotia in Greece in the year 1075. His parents were poor farmers that did not give him an education. When he was eight years old his mother sent him to become a shepherd. He did not last long as a shepherd however, because one day he suddenly called out "Kyrie Eleison", which he then began to say repetitively. His constant repetition of this phrase brought him conflict and aggression in populated places, and he suffered much oppression. Even his mother punished him for this. In Orthodox tradition, this is why he is regarded as a Fool for Christ.

Saint Eustathios, Patriarch of Constantinople (+ 1025)

St. Eustathios of Constantinople (Feast Day - May 31)

Our Holy Father Eustathios was the protopresbyter of the imperial palace when he was raised to the Patriarchal throne by the Emperor Basil II in 1019. Eustathios participated in the efforts of the Eastern Romans in 1024 to come to an accommodation with the Latin Papacy concerning the widening gap between the Western and Eastern Churches, which culminated in the Great Schism of 1054.

Where Catholics and Orthodox Have Celebrated Easter Together Since 1588

On the Greek island of Corfu, known to the Greeks as Kerkyra, Orthodox and Catholics have celebrated Easter together since 1588, without interruption, as an act of brotherly love between two communities.

It all began when Kerkyra was under Venetian Rule (1386-1797), and the Greeks of the Ionian Islands were granted permission to not have to follow the Gregorian Calendar, introduced by Pope Gregory XIII in October 1582, but continue following the Julian Calendar, which they had followed for centuries. Catholics in Kerkyra also requested the same, and permission was granted to them to use the Julian Calendar.

Saint Alexander Nevsky (+ 1263)

St. Alexander Nevsky (Feast Day - November 23)

The Holy Prince Alexander Nevsky was born on May 30, 1220 in the city of Pereslavl-Zalessk. His father Yaroslav II, Theodore in Baptism (+ 1246), “a gentle, kindly and genial prince”, was the younger son of Vsevolod III Large Nest (+ 1212), brother of the Holy Prince Yuri Vsevolodovich (Feb. 4). Saint Alexander’s mother, Theodosia Igorevna, a Ryazan princess, was Yaroslav’s third wife. Their older son was the Holy Prince Theodore (June 5), who departed to the Lord at age fifteen. Saint Alexander was their second son.

His childhood was spent at Pereslavl-Zalessk, where his father was prince. The princely tonsure of the lad Alexander (a ceremony of initiation to be soldier) was done in the Savior Transfiguration Cathedral of Pereslavl by Saint Simon, Bishop of Suzdal (May 10), one of the compilers of the Kiev Caves Paterikon. From this Elder-Hierarch, Saint Alexander received his first blessing for military service in the name of God, to defend the Russian Church and the Russian Land.

On the Application of the Term "Theologoumenon"

By John Sanidopoulos

The term "theologoumenon", or its plural "theologoumena", is an ancient Greek word that means either "something that is theologized" or "that which is said about God or divine things", and in the scant use of the word from patristic writings, this is how it was understood. In theological literature today, the word "theologoumenon" takes on a different or added meaning, usually summarized as being an "individual theological opinion". But this is not how the term was ever meant to be used, at least from an Orthodox Christian perspective.

The Discovery of the Relics of Saint Barbaros the Myrrhgusher in 2013

The reliquary containing a portion of the skull of St. Barbaros in Potamos, Kerkyra

Saint Barbaros lived in the ninth century and died after living a stric ascetic life in Tryfo in Xiromero of the municipality of Aetolia-Acarnania in Greece, where he was also buried and worked numerous miracles. Many centuries after the death of Saint Barbaros, in 1571, an officer from Venice named Sklavounos, who was taking part at that time in the naval battle of Nafpaktos, fell seriously ill and saw the Saint in a dream, telling him to go to his grave to be healed. Indeed, as soon as the officer venerated the tomb, he was miraculously healed and took the holy myrrhgushing relics of the Saint with him as he departed.

A Greek Orthodox View of Ecumenism (2 of 2)

...continued from part one.

A Greek Orthodox View of Ecumenism (Part Two)

By Rev. John S. Romanides

(Orthodox Observer, December 1964)

In contrast to these developments in the West, the Churches of the East were not confronted with the problems of a feudal society, since the East Roman Empire continued to exist for almost a thousand years after the Western half of the Empire collapsed. Even within the areas conquered by Islam the basic administration of Church affairs remained that were established during Roman times. Whereas the emperor showed effective concern in the election of the bishops of the capital cities, he did not interfere in the election of the bishops of the provinces, and there were no feudal lords to interfere either. The several autocephalous and autonomous Churches of the East continued to administer their own ecclesiastical areas by means of local synods of all the bishops of each respective grouping. Apart from certain of the Slavic Churches the more or less democratic character of Church administration continued, and there was nothing like the Church-State crisis which shook the foundations of medieval Western society. The Churches of the East Roman Empire could not even evolve theories, let alone dogmas, concerning centralized Church administration, since the very numerous Churches of apostolic origin were careful to preserve their ancient customs and privileges. One is reminded of the insistence of the Third Ecumenical Council of 431 that the Churches of the Island of Cyprus had been independently self-governed or autocephalous since ancient times. Then there is the peculiar phenomenon of St. Catherine's Monastery on Mt. Sinai, which is a self-governing autocephalous Church headed by an Archbishop elected by the monks and enjoying a status equal to the other autocephalous Churches and higher than the autonomous Churches.

A Greek Orthodox View of Ecumenism (1 of 2)

A Greek Orthodox View of Ecumenism (Part One)

By Rev. John S. Romanides

(Orthodox Observer, November 1964)

An Orthodox Christian may approach the Ecumenical Movement by seeing its roots in the formation of Israel in history. God has created for Himself a people with the mission of uniting humanity in the true worship and service of God. The Orthodox believe that Christians are the New Israel, the New Zion and the New Jerusalem. There is Israel according to the flesh and Israel according to the spirit, and in the eyes of God they are but one nation. The patriarchs, prophets and saints of the Old Testament, and the apostles and saints of the New Testament are ever present living witnesses in the worship and piety of Orthodox Christians, who believe themselves to be by virtue of baptism members of this universal Israelitic nation of God.

Does Canon 15 of the First-Second Synod of 861 Allow for "Walling-Off" Against Ecumenists?

By John Sanidopoulos

According to recent reports, on March 5, 2017, which was the Sunday of Orthodoxy, the well-known anti-ecumenist theologian Fr. Theodore Zisis announced from the ambo of his church that he was ceasing commemoration of Metropolitan Anthimos of Thessaloniki. The reason for this is, according to the reports, that in November, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew called upon Archbishop Ieronymos of Athens and All Greece to defend the documents produced at the Holy and Great Synod of Crete and to quell criticism of them, warning that he would break communion with those individuals who vocally criticized the Synod, after which Metropolitan Anthimos of Thessaloniki instructed Fr. Theodore to cease expressing any open criticisms of the Synod. Fr. Theodore's main criticism had to do with the document “Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World,” which he claims leaves open the possibility for the Orthodox accepting a heretical ecclesiology based on the "pan-heresy" of ecumenism. For this reason he calls the Great and Holy Synod of Crete a "Pseudo-Synod" or "Robber Synod", and he wants to be vocal about this. This act of Fr. Theodore was preceded by Fr. Nicholas Manolis, who some weeks ago also ceased commemorating Metropolitan Anthimos for the same reasoning.

The Annual Miracle of the Mushroom at Xeropotamou Monastery

Church of the Holy Forty Martyrs at Xeropotamou Monastery

By John Sanidopoulos

According to the Russian pilgim Vasily Barsky, who visited Mount Athos twice (1725 and 1744), when Emperor Romanos went to Mount Athos with the Patriarch of Constantinople to consecrate the newly-built Church of the Holy Forty Martyrs at Xeropotamou Monastery, while it was being sprinkled with Holy Water by the Patriarch and he was proclaiming the names of the Forty Martyrs, a miraculous sign took place. Below the Holy Altar, a large mushroom with forty roots and forty heads sprung up, and it wrapped itself around the Altar. This astonished everyone and they glorified God, for they realized it was done in honor of the Holy Forty Martyrs. The miracle was not a singular event, but it took place every year on the feast of the Holy Forty Martyrs. Barsky says that he not only heard this from the oral tradition of the monks, but he also read about it in Greek and Bulgarian manuscripts.

Life and Martyrdom of Hieromartyr Platon, Bishop of Tallinn (+ 1919)

St. Platon of Estonia (Feast Day - January 1)

By Jüri Poska

ARCHPRIEST PAUL KULBUSCH, LATER BISHOP PLATON, IN SAINT PETERSBURG

The fall of the autocratic Government in Russia encouraged the Estonian leaders to present to the Russian government a proposal for granting autonomy to Estonia.

In order to accentuate this claim for autonomy, the Estonian colony in Saint Petersburg organized a powerful demonstration before the Tauride Palace on April 8, 1917. In this demonstration more than 40,000 Estonians participated, among them 15,000 soldiers of the army, enthusiastically accompanied and supported by 30 orchestras. The demonstration, carried out in perfect order, made a decisive impression in the Russian capital.

The Government on April 12, 1917 promulgated the law granting autonomy to Estonia. It was laid down in this law that Estonia should be governed by a Maapäev (Diet), in which one delegate should represent every 20,000 inhabitants, and that the executive power should be placed in the hands of a High Commissioner. As High Commissioner was appointed the Lord Mayor of the capital city of Estonia, Tallinn, Jaan Poska.

Holy Martyr Kosmas the Protos (+ 1280) and the Athonite Holy Martyrs of Karyes With Him

St. Kosmas the Protos (Feast Day - November 18 & December 5)

Verses

The multitude of Venerables with one mind,

Were killed on behalf of the doctrines of the fathers.

These Holy Venerable Martyrs were Athonite Monks from various cells, who resisted Emperor Michael VIII Palaiologos and the Latin-minded Patriarch John Bekkos (1275-1282), and they were martyred when Latin-minded Uniates came to Mount Athos. Saint Kosmas the Protos of the Holy Mountain was hanged, while the others were beheaded.