Your Beatitude, Metropolitan Jonah:
What can save the political scene – which, as John Podesta, former Clinton chief of staff and leader of Obama's transition team, so succinctly put it, just plain "sucks"? Surely not the Manhattan Charter, which suffers from the same uh, malady. How about, Met. Jonah, taking a look at a Russian hierarch untimely taken from us when he reposed in the arms of the newly elevated Pope John Paul I, who within less than a month, himself suffered a like fate, Met. Nikodim (Rostov).
Met. Nikodim was the spiritual mentor of now Patriarch Kirill as also of my own Spiritual Father, Abp. Paul, presently of Ryazan. I have for some time been curious to know more of this fascinating Russian hierarch, but the backlash against him from various quarters made it impossible to get a fair picture. On the birthday of my husband, now born into heaven, I was cleaning up backlogged material on my computer, and I came across an impossibly lengthy article with info on Met. Nikodim by a ROCOR person which I had filed, lacking the patience to plough through it. When, before I consigned it to trash, I did read it – I decided it could only be a very special gift from Gordon, who always supported me in my “foibles”, but in a way that could only be described, by any fair-minded observer, as every bit as idiosyncratic as my own efforts.
I will begin with a contemporary – and most relevant to our political uh, “situation” here and now, in the US and in the world which our USA so powerfully influences, for well or for woe, Met. Jonah – tribute to Met. Nikodim, by a very highly placed official of the Moscow Patriarchate:
Writes Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin, Chairman of the Synodal Department for Church-Society relations:
For me, I speak as someone who did not know Vladyki Metropolitan Nikodim personally, but … there is no doubt that he left a number of lessons for the new generation of archpastors, pastors, and laity of our Church, lessons that are very important for the building up of church life in the 21st century.
The first lesson was his ability to fearlessly, honestly, and in all circumstances do God’s work, defending the right of Christians to live and act according to their faith. He entered into difficult dialogues with Soviet officials, and at the same time, he skillfully brought the weight of the Western media and world public opinion to protect the rights and interests of believers. Vladyki Nikodim’s actions clearly show that the Church must never be isolated in its dialogue with the state. It should always respond to the will of the people and state the truth boldly and honesty, [rather than coming with tin cup in hand, your Beatitude] which impresses even skeptical foreign journalists and public figures. There have always been powerful critics of the Church in the world. Yesterday, they were the officials of an officially-atheist state; today, we see “new atheists” amongst intellectuals, the economic and media elite…. We can never engage in dialogue with such people fruitfully and we can never defend our beliefs if we do not seek the support of the people….
Our Church does not wish to be an arm of the state and it should not be such. However, a Church of the people becomes their conscience and spiritual leader; it means that we can fulfill our mission, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places (Ephesians 6. 12). The words of Metropolitan Nikodim shall inspire our path to victory. “A sincerely religious man… relates to the world of reality as a complex process in the great and continuing struggle between the forces of good and evil, a struggle in which he himself participates, because he hears the sound of God’s call in his heart, a call to reject evil and become a strong advocate of Divine justice and goodness” (Человек Церкви (Chelovek Tserkvi: A Man of the Church) Moscow, 1998. p. 89).
The second lesson of Vladyki Nikodim was his desire for dialogue, coupled with fidelity to the truth of Orthodoxy. Today, many explain the need for dialogue with people of other faiths and beliefs on pragmatic grounds. We need to encourage each other… dialogue needs to respond to the common challenges of our time, build up a harmonious social life, extinguish conflict, and to solve the everyday problems of religious communities and individuals. We truly need to do this, especially in a society where people of different religions and different views coexist with one another (and whose company we cannot and will not avoid, except for those who call people to hide in metaphorical caves).
However, the primary impetus behind Christian dialogue must be completely different, and Vladyki Nikodim knew that. “Extravagant brotherhood” as a means to unify people was the dream of many Russian religious philosophers. This meant that they tried to share with those near and far the incomparable sense of collegiality (соборного) of the assembly
that comes amongst Orthodox Christians during the Divine Liturgy. This should inspire us when we leave the church and be the goal of our communication with those who do not share our faith. Vladyki Nikodim wrote, “We seek unity and peace, inner peace in the hearts of mankind and peace in the outside world amongst all people and nations. We strive for unity, but, unity is not an external, human, or mechanical concept; we seek a deeper unity, the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, which comes to us through the Lord Jesus Christ, who is above all and through all and in all” (Человек Церкви (Chelovek Tserkvi: A Man of the Church) Moscow, 1998. p. 80).
Moreover, this apostolic openness is the best means of Orthodox witness. In his contacts with non-Orthodox and non-Christians, Metropolitan Nikodim always declared nothing but the truth of Christ. Today, with sorrow, we remember how quickly enthusiasm evaporated in the inter-Christian dialogue…. In the 60’s, many believed, and not without reason, that the unity of those who call themselves followers of Christ was achievable in the short term. Let’s not forget that many Western Christians were ready to return to the faith of the ancient undivided Church as preserved in Holy Orthodoxy. This caused Vladyki Nikodim to say, “The only way to reunite Christians of various denominations naturally in the unity of faith is to return to the dogmatic teachings of the ancient undivided Church in the era of the Seven Ecumenical Councils”… As we know, very soon, another spirit arose in the Western world. [AND REMAINS WITH US.] It was a spirit of secularization, of accommodation…. However, I wholeheartedly believe that if we go on the path that Vladyki Nikodim trod,… through the sincere testimony of the truth, we can gather this disparate lot into a single flock of Christ. Today, we hear the cries of those who are “spiritually thirsty” in the deserts of … the “post-Christian” milieu….
Let the legacy to the spirit of Metropolitan Nikodim be that … in the words of the Saviour, He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light (St John 5. 35).
(http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=analysis&div=109)
The re-discovered article follows. What initially caught my interest was the fact that it deals with our own OCA (Orthodox Church in America), the Russian Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR), and the Moscow Patriarchate at a time when they were all 3 at loggerheads with one another. Times have changed, as you will see, your Beatitude Met. Jonah – please rouse yourself and act accordingly:
On the very same day that ROCOR condemned the MP [Moscow Patriarchate] as “partaking in heresy”, Metropolitan Irenaeus of All America and Canada and Metropolitan Nicodemus (Rotov) of Leningrad signed an Agreement giving autocephaly [literally: “self-rule”] to the American Metropolia [as what is now the OCA was previously known as] – a deal which was accepted by no other Autocephalous Orthodox Church.
In March, 1969, the Great Council of the Metropolia made a last Orthodox statement on Ecumenism [which the writer views, uh – VERY negatively] before succumbing to it: “The basic goal of the ecumenical movement… is the unity of all Christians in one single body of grace. And here the Orthodox Church firmly confesses that such a genuine unity is founded, above all, on the unity of faith, on the unanimous acceptance by all of the Holy Scriptures and the Holy Traditions as they are wholly and integrally preserved by the Church. Real love for brothers separated from us [the writer opines: {sic – a misleading description of heretics, who are not our brothers in Christ}] consists therefore not in silencing all that divides us, but in a courageous witness to the Truth, which alone can unite us all, and also in a common search for the ways to make that Truth evident to all. Only in this way did the Orthodox Church always understand her participation in the ecumenical movement.”…
In May-June, 1971 there was a council of the MP attended by 75 hierarchs, 85 clergy and 78 laymen, representatives of many other Orthodox Churches and the general secretary of the WCC [World Council of Churches, actually founded by Fr. Georges Florovsky, a renowned Orthodox priest who ended up teaching at Harvard until his retirement, then as an Honored Fellow at Princeton]. It confirmed all the previous decisions made by the MP since 1945. Only one candidate for the patriarchate (Patriarch Alexis [“The First”] had died in April) was put forward: the weak Metropolitan Pimen, who was elected unanimously in an open ballot (a secret ballot was not allowed by the all-powerful Metropolitan Nicodemus). The 1961 statute taking control of the parishes away from the bishops and clergy was confirmed, as was (unanimously) Nicodemus’ report on the decision to give communion to Catholics, in which he said that the measure was justified “insofar as we have a common of faith with them in relation to the sacraments”….
On September 28, 1971, ROCOR’s Hierarchical Council decreed: “The lack of accord of the decree of the Moscow Patriarchate, concerning the granting of communion to Roman Catholics, with Orthodox dogmatic teaching and the Church canons is completely clear to any person even slightly informed in theology…. No matter what explanation Metropolitan Nicodemus and the other Moscow hierarchs might try to give of this act, it is completely clear that by this decision, even though with certain limitations, communion has been established between the Moscow Patriarchate and Roman Catholics. Furthermore, the latter have already made the decision to permit members of the Orthodox Church to receive communion from them. All this was particularly clearly demonstrated in the service held on December 14, 1970, in St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, when Metropolitan Nicodemus gave communion to Catholic clerics….
From the 1970s we see the ascendancy in the MP of a school of thought devoted both to the interests of the Soviet State and of the ecumenical movement which has been called “Nikodimovschina” [-schina being a Russian suffix meaning “mischief-maker”, or, more properly, “chaos-maker”] from its first leader and originator, Metropolitan Nicodemus.
The fruits of Nicodemus’ activity were soon evident….
Ever since writing his master’s thesis on Pope John XXIII, the man who led the Catholic Church onto the ecumenical scene, Metropolitan Nicodemus had been trying to do the same for the Moscow Patriarchate. Hierodeacon (now Hieromonk) Theophanes (Areskin) writes: “Metropolitan Nicodemus begins his exposition of his ecumenist faith with an Orthodox thesis on the unity of the whole human race in Adam: ‘Mankind, the whole Adam (in the expression of St. Macarius the Great) is united by means of the Incarnation, Cross and Resurrection of the last Adam (I Corinthians 14.45), the second Man, the Lord Who “for us men” came down from the heavens (I Corinthians 15.47), and, having tasted “death for us ALL by the grace of God” (Hebrews 2.9), “is the Saviour of ALL men” (I Timothy 4.10)… We ALL, in accordance with the ineffable wisdom of God, have been bound from the beginning with the bonds of unity and brotherhood’. [Emphasis mine] But further on Metropolitan Nicodemus reveals his understanding of this unity: ‘Christ died for all men, and, as the new Adam, he laid the beginning for a new humanity… The fullness of the grace-filled gifts is communicated to people by the Holy Spirit in the Church of Christ. However, it would be a dangerous error to consider that Christ, the Redeemer of the whole world, does not extend His saving influence on the whole of humanity.’ This saving influence consists, according to Metropolitan Nicodemus, ‘in faith in Christ Jesus, acting through love in each separate person, as in the whole of humanity, with which we are united by our common human nature. God redeemed us into an undivided, indivisible, unchanging and unconfused union with this nature through the incarnation of the Only-Begotten Son.’ ‘By taking on and deifying our nature in the Divine Incarnation the Chief and Accomplisher of our faith (Hebrews 12.2) and of eternal salvation (Hebrews 5.9), our Lord Jesus Christ reconciled, united and related the whole of humanity with God, and all people with each other’. ‘The Church as the Kingdom of God is likened to leaven which penetrates into all the parts of the whole that is humanity, into the whole world, and acts with that measure of power which corresponds to the moral level of the bearers of Christ’s truth. And although far from all people actively and consciously abide in the Church, the Church abides in all through the love of Christ, for this love is not limited by any part of humanity, but is distributed to all people.’ Hence ‘the activity of the Spirit of God is not limited by confessional limits. His manifestation is completely and, above all, unconditionally revealed in the Church, but the traces of His presence are evident everywhere where there are the fruits of spiritual life: love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness…’ Therefore all people, the whole Body of humanity (Adam), are invisibly united with God and is a certain ‘invisible Church’. The organization of the Church is understood by Nicodemus as ‘the visible Church’, in which ‘baptism defines the visible belonging to Christ’. Metropolitan Nicodemus consciously confesses the ‘baptism’ of Protestants to be true, turning to his ‘brothers in Christ’, the Protestants, the members of the WCC: ‘Through the mystery of holy Baptism we are engrafted onto the saving Divine Vine…’ But the visible Church ‘is called to realize the fruits of the Incarnation and Redemption in the life of her immediate members.’ [the ROCOR writer then brands this as “sergianism”]…
***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****
It just so happens, that Met. Nikodim’s teaching as expressed above agrees in every particular with what I – a young mother of 5, at that time, as best I remember, nearing the end of my graduate studies which resulted in my being thrown out of Georgetown, a Jesuit University – learned from a Dominican priest, Fr. Jerome Hamer, then a professor of ecumenism in the Dominican Theological Institute, Le Saulchoir, in Paris. I became very close friends with him as I worked on the talk he had given on this, to improve its English, and also to address areas where the (however idiotic!) theological quarrels of the time had assigned nuances to the theological terminology such that these artifices must needs be observed that the message be correctly understood. According to Wikipedia:
Jean Jérôme Hamer, OP, S.T.D. (1 June 1916 - 2 December 1996) was a Belgian Cardinal who was Prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life from 1985 until 1992….
He was appointed secretary of the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity on 12 April 1969. Then, on 14 June 1973, he was appointed titular archbishop of Lorium and secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. [As such he was in a position to become Prefect upon the demise of his immediate superior. However, when this eventuated, Pope John Paul II appointed Ratzinger Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith instead of Card. Hamer, and thereafter assiduously groomed Ratzinger to become Pope, also appointing to the College of Cardinals such hierarchs as would achieve that goal.]
Archbishop Hamer remained at this position, [secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith] until [upon the demise of his superior] Pope John Paul II [elevated Ratzinger, and] appointed Hamer Pro-Prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life in 1984 [a position in which my poor friend had principally the onerous task of dealing with all the Catholic nuns screaming to be ordained priests, until his retirement.]
***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****
So years later, then Archbishop Hamer delivered my first missive to Pope John Paul II – this being followed by many, many more (Pope John Paul II sent me two letters asking me to continue writing to him, and from the Vatican news service it was clear that he was making use of what I sent him. Notably in the two documents which appeared the summer after I began, during the previous Great Lent, sending from 2 to 4 or 5 letters a week: the encyclical Ut Unum Sint, (“That They May Be One”) and the Apostolic Letter Orientale Lumen ("Light of the East"). I also wrote to Pope John Paul II after I was received into Orthodox Communion, to tell him that I was not “leaving” the Catholic Church, my action was in fact supported by Catholic canon 844. I thus intended to witness to the unity of the Church by being faithfully Catholic and faithfully Orthodox at one and the same time.
The (now outdated!) ROCOR writer finishes his spiel:
The death of Nicodemus in 1978 in Rome at the feet of Pope John-Paul I, from whom he received the Catholic last rites, was a graphic symbol of the true direction of inter-Christian ecumenism – aided and abetted, on the Orthodox side, by the KGB. His place both as chief ideologist of the MP, Metropolitan of Leningrad and leader of the “Nikodimovshina” school of theology, was taken by his pupil, the future “Patriarch” Alexis II (Ridiger). And when Pope John-Paul died a few days after Nicodemus, Alexis celebrated a festive service for the repose of his soul in the Moscow Cathedral of the Epiphany, while and another of Nicodemus’ disciples, the present Metropolian [now Patriarch] Cyril (Gundyaev), celebrated a similar service in the Alexander Nevsky Lavra in Leningrad.
Alexis, an Estonian by birth (he was bishop in Tallin before his transfer to Leningrad), had been a KGB agent with codename “Drozdov” since 1958 and an active ecumenist for almost as long as his mentor. He was a delegate to the Third General Assembly of the WCC in New Delhi in 1961, (with Metropolitans Nicodemus and Anthony (Bloom)), a member of the Central Committee of the WCC from 1961 to 1968, president of the World Conference, “The Church and Society” in Geneva in 1966, and a member of the Commission “Faith and Order” of the WCC from 1961 to 1968.
[Seeing this line of thinking as a politically opportunistic “theology of peace” the writer asks:]
“But is such a faith compatible with the Orthodox teaching on the uniqueness and singleness of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church? Yes, admits [why “admits”?!] Metropolitan [later Patriarch] Alexis, ‘the oneness and unity of the Church is an ecclesiological axiom’, but in actual fact ‘an invisible unity as the unity of Christ and the Holy Spirit lives in the visible multitude of Churches, each of which has its particular face’, affirms the metropolitan, citing his brother in ecumenism, Professor Archbishop [now Metropolitan, first hierarch of the Autonomous Ukrainian Church, in union, as is ROCOR, now, with the Moscow Patriarchate] Vladimir (Sabodan). Before us here is, using the language of Soviet theological thought, the ecclesiology of ‘the traumatized Body of Christ’ [I don’t think so!!!], a fruit of the refined minds of the ‘ecumenist theologians’ of the MP – the main teacher and implanter of the ecumenist heresy in the MP was Metropolitan Nicodemus (Rotov).”
http://www.romanitas.ru/eng/NEW%20ZION%20IN%20BABYLON%20-%20ch.%205.htm
***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****
Except that, may I point out to you, Met. Jonas, nobody in his/her right mind calls it heresy anymore. Some befuddled souls (not to mention any names) are still trying to dope out what gives here – but anyone with any savvy recognizes that either we come together as the many brethren of whom Christ is the first born Rm 8:29 – or …… but there isn’t any “or else”, do we think God is so stupid as to plan the whole thing from all pre-eternity – and then at the end not be able to pull it off?????????????????????
Besides, at the end of the Apocalypse what He is saying is: “See, I am making ALL things new!” Rv 21:5
Even including YOU, Met Jonah!!!!
