The Pope’s visit (to Cyprus) becomes a scandal for the faithful
Metropolitan Athanasios: I have refused to attend the celebrations marking his visit
An interview with Antigoni Solomonidou-Drousiotou
The
Metropolitan of Lemesos, Athanasios, distances himself from the Church
of Cyprus’ official position on the forthcoming visit to the island of
Pope Benedict. He plainly declares that he opposes the visit, explaining
that Catholicism is a heresy and the visit of the Head of the Catholic
Church to Cyprus will scandalize the minds of innocent, faithfully
people. At the same time, he stresses that neither adverse reactions nor
rude or bad manners must be shown.
Why does the visit of Pope Benedict the 16th to Cyprus scandalizes the Church and its flock?
I
believe that his visit will create a number of problems in the
conscience of many faithful Christians. It would have been better if he
didn’t come, because I believe his visit will not be of any benefit,
since I have never seen any positive intervention of the Vatican
regarding our national issues. His visit has already caused a lot of
unease, which is something we really do not need at this time.
Are we in danger of something?
I
am not saying that we are in any danger with his visit, or that we are
going to denounce our faith or that the Orthodox Church will fall. But
it gave the opportunity to some cycles of Old Calendarists to accuse us
that we have receded from Orthodox principles and that this caused
anxiety among the people. The Pope has of course been invited by the
Cypriot President and the Archbishop has given his approval.
Did you discuss this at the meeting of the Holy Synod?
During
the last meeting the issue of whether we should attend the celebrations
was raised. I have refused to attend and said that I have not been
informed. We had only learnt about the visit from the newspapers.
Do you often learn the news from the newspapers?
The
Archbishop of Cyprus has increased duties and we certainly do not want
him to descend to our own level. But we preserve our personal right to
say that we didn’t know that the Pope was coming and that if he had
asked us, I would have personally stated my objection, because it would
create a scandal in the minds of innocent, pious orthodox Christians, as
we see that it is already happening.
Should
there not be any communication between the Churches? We live in the
21st Century after all; we belong to the European Community.
We
can hold a dialogue with anyone, even more so with heterox people and
people with different faiths. It is one thing to embrace a dialogue and
another to receive the Pope as a proper Bishop, who for the Orthodox
people is a heretic, estranged from the Church, and therefore, not even a
Bishop.
Is this because of the Schism (of 1054)?
He
has been estranged from the Church for centuries; he is not a proper
Bishop and has no relation with the reality of the One, Holy, Catholic
and Apostolic Church of Christ. It is one thing to receive him as a
proper Bishop and another thing to talk with him as a heterodox in order
to reveal to him the truth of the Orthodox Faith and tradition.
The Ecumenical Patriarch has met the Pope and so the dialogue between the Churches began.
As
I have stated, the dialogue itself is not a bad thing when it takes
place under the proper conditions; but it is wrong to tell these people
that we recognize them as a Church, that we recognize the Pope as a
Bishop, as a brother in Christ, in clergy and in Faith. I cannot accept
this because it is a lie; all the fathers of the Church teach exactly
the opposite. Papacy is a heresy and the source of many other heresies
which afflict the world today. A new Saint, Saint Justine Popovitch has
said that there were three tragic falls during the history of humankind:
That of the first created Adam, that of Judas, the disciple of Christ
and the fall of the Pope, who as a first Bishop of the Church, defaulted
from the faith of the Apostles, detached himself from the Church and
dragged masses of people with him since then.
What does the Pope say about the Orthodoxy?
The Pope said that we are an inadequate Church.
The Lord is One?
Yes,
the Lord is One and His Church is One. That’s why we say in the Symbol
of Faith “to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church”. This One
Church is the Orthodox Church; there are not many Churches.
Isn’t it selfish to assume that we are it?
It
is not selfish. When you say that the Italians are not Greeks, which is
the truth, you are not offending them. If I say to the other person:
‘It doesn’t matter that you are Catholic and that we all belong to the
same Church’, I ridicule him, since all the fathers of the Church teach
us that there is only One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of
Christ.
Why this is the Orthodox Church and not the Catholic?
Because
the Orthodox Church preserves the Apostolic Faith and the prophets’
knowledge unaltered to this day. The papists, unfortunately, after they
have been severed from the Church, have included many heretic dogmas in
their faith; they changed the Symbol of Faith and most of all, they
elevated the Pope to the position of the One and Only representative of
God on earth. They say the Pope does not make mistakes and that whoever
does not keep communion with the Pope, does not communicate with God.
They have officially declared these dogmas in their synods. When you
have added many things in the Symbol of Faith, which have not been
written there by the fathers and many other bad beliefs, this
constitutes heresy.
How does the Orthodox Church deal with heretics?
With
a lot of love. We love the Pope, we love the papists as we love every
human being; we do not despise them, we do not reject them as people but
we do not accept their heresy, we do not accept bad beliefs or errors.
Just because we love them, we must tell them the truth.
Everyone has his own truth.
That’s
why we have a dialogue so that it is proven, through historic evidence,
which Church has preserved the faith and the knowledge of the Apostles.
Do you believe that this dialogue will bear fruit?
It
could, if it took place under the proper preconditions. But,
unfortunately, as it evolves today, it does not bear fruit. That’s the
reason why it is being going on for so many years and nothing has been
achieved.
Does each one of them speak only for himself?
They
must talk, equipped with the Holy Scriptures, with the spirit of
modesty and love, aiming to prove Christ’s truth. Then everything can
become easy.
Doesn’t this dialogue take place in the spirit of modesty and love?
I
do not know. I do not participate in these discussions, but I have not
seen any tangible results deriving from their conclusions. Just because I
disagree, it does not mean that I am out of order and cut off from the
Church.
There is a movement, which writes books against the Pope and is preparing protests.
I
do not agree with all these. No nastiness must take place, no rudeness,
no misconduct. But it is one thing to voice our opinion and another to
misbehave. I clearly and publicly state my opposition to the Pope’s
visit and declare with my whole soul that the Pope is a heretic, he is
not a Bishop, he is not an Orthodox Christian; these are declared by the
Fathers. If am wrong, I am ready for censure. But this must be done in
the spirit of the Fathers not on the basis of globalization. It does not
mean that because I disagree, I am out of order and not part of the
Church.
Don’t you think that your statements will ignite more scandal to the minds of those already scandalized?
We
say what we have to say in all honesty and responsibility, we do not
ignite any fires; I do not want to be presented as agreeing and that I
consciously accept the Pope’s presence in Cyprus. During the meeting of
the Holy Synod the Archbishop himself has dealt with our objections in a
very democratic way.
Did you agree to the Archbishop’s visit to the Vatican?
We have not been asked and he was not obliged to ask us. We found out from reports in the newspapers.
What was the result of his visit to the Vatican?
I do not know.
Didn’t he brief you?
He
did, but personally I didn’t show much interest. The Pope always utters
formalities, as it is going to happen now when he comes to Cyprus, but
nothing substantial will come out of it, because he is the Head of the
Church and not a political person. He cannot enter into dispute with the
political status quo. When has the Pope defended the Orthodox Church?
We had been under occupation so many times, when did he defend us? Not
to mention that we fared very badly during the Frankish rule, because of
the various Popes and their decrees, with which they wanted to make us
vanish. Tonight we commemorated the 13 martyrs of Kantara, who had been
murdered under the orders of the Pope. We lived through 400 years of
tough Frankish rule. It had been worse than Turkish rule. But I do not
want to go back to these; I am voicing objections today for purely
theological reasons. When we have been ordained Bishops, we have given
an oath to preserve the Orthodox Faith.
Will the priests who will welcome the Pope not preserve the Orthodox Faith?
Saint
Paul said that he who does not consume sacrificial meat must not
criticize those who do. I do not condemn those who will be present, but I
also do not want to be condemned for not participating. The Vatican
does nothing in vain.
A
circular was read in Church last Sunday in which the Bishops, who will
participate, were named one by one, something which surprised the
congregation.
We
had all decided to issue a circular to the congregation so that the
people stay united and not be swayed by the Old Calendarists, who want
to separate them from the regular Church. What has not been made clear,
however, was that not all of us had been briefed regarding the
invitation to the Pope and had agreed with it.
Why do you think the Pope is visiting Cyprus?
As
you are aware the Papists are going through a serious crisis with all
the scandals which have broken out against the Catholic Church.
The scandal regarding child abuse?
I
do not want to go through this, but the press is publishing woes every
day. I am not condemning, but the Pope regards himself as the first and
only Vicar of Christ on earth and that’s the reason he goes on these
trips.
He mentioned that he wanted to follow on the steps of Saint Paul.
Except
that Saint Paul, was not travelling in a bulletproof car, worth 500
thousand Euros. Cyprus’s government will purchase this car, as we have
read, just for his two day visit. I have been scandalized by this
information and I said that a bullet proof car does not suit a Christ’s
Vicar, and that the public should bear the burden of such cost in the
present economic crisis.
The
Pope’s representatives have announced that he is coming to Cyprus to
promote the humanitarian and Christian principles and values and that he
wants to follow Saint Paul’s footsteps as well as meet with the
representatives of the Orthodox Church in the spirit of brotherhood and
with good intentions.
We
do not dispute his good intention. I wish it is like this and that he
resembles Saint Paul and gets acquainted with the treasures of the
Orthodox Church. We wish he returns to the Orthodox Church and become an
Orthodox Bishop again as he was before the Schism. This is the only
proper reunion.
What do you think is hiding behind this visit?
The
Vatican does not act in vain or undertake unintentional moves. All of
his trips aim to present him as a Christian world leader. At the moment
he is neither a proper Bishop, nor Orthodox, and therefore he is in no
position to want to present himself as the First Bishop.
Do you think there might be political intentions behind this;
I
do not know, but I believe that we are not going to derive a political
advantage out of this visit; only incredible costs and great discord
among the faithful.
The Archbishop has said that those who oppose the visit will take themselves out of the Church.
Wait!
The Church, as the Archbishop himself stresses, is a democratic
institution. It is one thing to voice our objections in mannerly way and
another thing to misbehave. The Archbishop knows his limits very well.
Does the Holy Synod accept the different view?
The Archbishop is a democratic man and respects our views. He deals with us with a lot of love.
How
could he be a democrat, when he has been elected as Archbishop in the
way we all know? Formally he has been properly elected by the majority
vote. In practive though, the way he was elected was not at all
democratic.
I
am not going to go into this. My position is very sensitive. I can say
however, that inside the meetings of the Synod, the Archbishop behaves
in a democratic way. I do not feel that he does not respect out views.
He listens to us.
And he does what he wants in the end?
No. He upholds the decision of the Synod, even though he himself may hold a different view.
Was the new constitution of the Church written in a democratic way?
It
was not written by the Archbishop but by a committee of the Synod and
was presented for discussion during numerous conferences. The decisions
are taken by majority.
People get the impression that the constitution was written in order to prevent you from ascending to the Archbishopric throne?
I wish that God will grant many years to the Archbishop and that we do not need new elections.
He himself had said that he was going to keep the throne only for five years. That is until the end of 2011.
The
Holy Scriptures say that a thousand years are like one day! He must be
the one to answer as to what he intends to do. I wish that we do not
have to undergo the process of elections any time soon. Every Archbishop
is elected through the will of God and not through any human
intentions. If God wishes either A or B become Archbishop he will, even
if we try to prevent him. The purpose of our lives is not to become
Archbishop.
What is the purpose of your lives?
To be saved, to be with God, to love God and our brothers.
Do you think the Archbishop is trying to give the Church a ‘leader of the nation’ role?
I
do not think he has these tendencies. He has abolished the title of
“the Ethnarch” for himself. He knows his limits very well, but he loves
and cares for his country.
He
has recently stated that there is an organized effort to smear the
Church’s prestige and integrity, by reviving the old and tried motto of
its unpaid bills to the state. He attributed political incentives behind
this campaign.
If he has spoken this way, this is a very serious allegation which everyone needs to consider very carefully.
Do you agree or disagree that the Church must repay its old unpaid bills to the state to the amount of 163 million?
I
was not participating in the committee which had considered the issue.
If, according to the law, the Church owes the state, then it must pay
up. But if the law does not state this, then the Church must deal with
the issue in a discrete manner and in accordance with the peoples’ needs
in this present economic crisis. The Church must be very careful in its
statements and deeds which may infringe on common sentiment. On the
other hand, the state must be clear in its assertions and not mislead
people by stating that the Church does not pay its taxes.
Mislead people?
It is wrong to say that the Church does not pay taxes, because it does.
Does the Limassol Metropolis agree to the imposition of capital gains tax?
I
am not acquainted with these financial terms. When we sell some
property we pay up our duties. We are not in possession of companies
which make profit, we do not own hotels and factories, we have no
investments and that’s why our financial state is terrible.
Where does your income come from?
We
own one property with some rental income; we also get donations from
people who love the Church and from the sale of pieces of land.
No comments:
Post a Comment