[Preorbtat]

ATHENS (Reuters) - At least seven Greek monks were injured on Wednesday when opposing groups of monks in the Mount Athos monastic community clashed inside a disputed chapel. The monks of the Esfigmenou monastery, which has broken away from the 19 other monasteries on the male-only community and refuses to recognise the Ecumenical Patriarch as the head of the Orthodox faith, said they had come under attack.

"We were inside the chapel when a group of monks broke in with sledgehammers and crowbars and attacked us," Father Methodios, the abbot of Esfigmenou, told state television.


"How could they do this during this time of peace, days before Christmas?"
He said the opposing monks had been appointed to replaced them by the community's top administrative body. Three of those injured belonged to the alleged attackers.
The chapel belonging to the monastery was in Karies, the capital of the community in the mountains of northern Greece. The community has been trying to evict the rebel monks for years, saying they had no place there since they refuse to fall under the patriarchate's jurisdiction.

Under Greece's constitution, the Patriarchate has supreme spiritual authority over the semi-autonomous region.
"We did not provoke them. They came to throw us out of the chapel that is ours and we defended ourselves," Father Methodios said. "They hit us and we defended ourselves."
Holy community representatives could not be reached for a comment. Police confirmed seven monks had been taken to a hospital and several of them were being treated for head wounds.


Esfigmenou monks say the 1,000-year-old monastery is theirs. They have also clashed before with police sent to evict them.
The monks have sharply criticised attempts to improve ties with the Catholic Church and the Pope. The Mount Athos peninsula is considered as Orthodox Christianity's spiritual home from which all females are banned.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX

THESSALONIKI, Greece (AP) -- Two groups of monks clashed on Wednesday at a monastery facility in Mt. Athos, resulting in at least seven injuries, police said.
Fighting broke out between a group of rebel monks occupying facilities of the 1,000-year-old monastery of Esphigmenou, and a group of legally recognized monks on the outside.
The rebel monks, unrecognized by the Orthodox Church, reacted strongly when the outsiders attempted to force their way into the monastery's representative offices in Karyes, the administrative center of the medieval community. They were trying to enter in order to begin construction of a new building.
The clashes turned violent as the occupying monks attacked the intruders with crowbars and fire extinguishers, breaking a door down.
Seven monks were reported injured. Four were taken off the peninsula by boat and hospitalized at Polygiros, including two with head wounds, while three more were being taken to hospital, according to Athos police.
Esphigmenou monastery -- one of 20 in the all-male medieval community in northern Greece -- has been the scene of a long-running dispute between Orthodox Church authorities and rebel monks at Esphigmenou, who bitterly oppose efforts to improve relations between the Orthodox Church and the Vatican.
Both Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, leader of the Orthodox Christian church, and Greece's highest administrative court have ordered their eviction, but the monks have refused to budge.
In October, a Thessaloniki court handed down two-year suspended sentences against nine monks and former monastery members for illegally occupying Esphigmenou's offices.

************************************

Lord have mercy on us.

[Enjknsua]

Can someone help with a question?

I do not remember who the saint was (I wish I could) in reading the lives of the saints, there was one saint who would not budge on his beliefs. Every other priest, bishop, Metropolitan and even the people believed in a heresy. I think it was on either icon veneration or possibly on the divinity of Christ.

Anyway, after a time, he was able to prove the heresy to all and turned the entire "world" back to the true belief. Him alone.

The RC believe the 4 EO heads broke away from them back in 1054. The EO say the RC broke away. I personally believe the latter.

I guess I am asking if the monks in question truly believe they are right, is there not the possibility the rest of the "world" is wrong? I understand they are breaking their obedience to the Patriarchate, but just like the monk above, if it is not correct, someone has to stand up for it.

I don't want this happening on the Holy Mountain anymore than anyone else does. I think it scandalises the Holy Virgin. I am trying to just wrap my mind around who is right and who "might" be wrong and of course how to rectify it.

Thanks for any insight and especially the name of the above mentioned Saint.

Paul

[Preorbtat]

Hi Paul,

I may be wrong (and please someone correct me if I am), but I think the saint you may be thinking of is St. Athanasius, who was called 'God's Hammer' for his unyielding beliefs against Arius at a time when most of the Christian world was succumbing to this heresy. This gave rise to the expression "Athanasius contra mundum" or "Athanasius against the world".

[biannaruh]

My understanding is that the source of the Esphigmenou "rebellion" was originally on the adoption of the Gregorian calendar by the Church of Greece in the 1920s (correct me if I'm wrong). While the matter of the calendar continues to be a vexed question to many Orthodox (though not to me, I have a foot in both Greek and Slavic camps), it hardly counts as a heresy. Irregularity, perhaps. Heresy, no.

Things certainly heated up in Esphigmenou in the 1960s, when Patriarch Athenagoras met with the then Pope of Rome on a number of occasions, allowing a thaw in relations between the two churches, though, as we all know, this did not, and still has not, resulted in mutual canonical recognition, nor is there any eucharistic communion between the two churches. The Esphigmenou brotherhood took it upon themselves to refuse to commemorate the Patriarch (from Athenagoras onwards, including Bartholomew), and regard themselves as the custodians of "true orthodoxy" (hmmm .... where have we heard that before? ). Dare I say it, but this unilateralist approach is utterly opposite to the collegiality of Orthodoxy, it is rather the feature of the post-Reformation churches which have led to the innumerable churches we see today in the Protestant world: "I don't agree any more with the mother church, so I'll set up my own." By contrast, how has the Orthodox Church dealt with heresies in the past? Councils, ecumenical and local, and, in the case of examination of individuals, a conference of bishops or other higher clergy. A conciliar, collegiate response, not a schismatic one. If the errant party (individual or group) refuses to be corrected, then the Church has the right to regard that party as heretic and/or schismatic.

If a priest, bishop, or higher-ranking cleric has fallen into heresy, then the people, and/or his fellow clerics have the right and duty to correct the situation. Similarly with clerics who engage in "conduct unbecoming", of moral or legal/criminal breaches, such as the recent deposing of Irenaeus of Jerusalem. St Mark of Ephesus indeed was the defender of Orthodoxy at the Council of Florence, which attempted to reunite the East with Rome, a union which would have forced unacceptable doctrinal and theological compromises on the Orthodox Church. He was vilified for his efforts, but history quickly vindicated him.

On the other hand, I would not regard the longstanding rebellion at Esphigmenou to be in any way equivalent to the doctrinal heroism of St Mark of Ephesus, or of St Athanasius (I just spotted Antonios's latest post). Rather, it seems to be the action of zealous fanatics who have openly proclaimed their disobedience to their Patriarch. I cannot vouch for the accuracy or otherwise of the reporting as posted by Antonios, but I have come across reports in the recent past which stated that even the monastic body which governs Athos's day-to-day affairs had finally turned against the Esphigmenou brotherhood, supporting the decision of the Patriarchate to bring the rebels back into the fold, or to evict them if they refuse to change their ways.

[Trikaduliana]

Unfortunately the matter is now the subject of an article in The Times (of London of course).

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...513872,00.html

This hardly does our witness any good.

Peter

[9mm_fan]

Unfortunately, this seems less about theology and more about property. Monastics are not supposed to be tied to a place. It is one thing to stay in the monastery, awaiting massacre by pagans or moslems. It is another thing to defy lawful ecclessiastic authority. I would think that, even if the Esphigmanou monastics are right, the thing to do would be to leave the authority of the Patriarch, "shaking the dust off their sandals" and set up shop elsewhere. I don't know but the whole "spirit" here just seems wrong.

[neguoogleX]

What ever happened to "turn the other cheek"?

[immoceefe]

I'm available as an intermediary. I don't charge a lot for my consulting fees.

[Aswdwdfg]

A friend of mine, a Cypriot, and Orthodox, of course, is a professor of applied psychology and a UN peace negotiator - they should send him. Except he's new calendar!

Andreas.

[DF9sLGSU]

Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

What a sad witness this is.

St. Paul, who knew well the material with which he had to deal, had it right: [Galatians 5: 19-25]
19 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness,
20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies,
21 envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
23 gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law.
24 And those who are Christ's have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.
25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
26 Let us not become conceited, provoking one another, envying one another. Perhaps we should pray for those who, for whatever reason, have fallen so far short of showing the 'fruit of the spirit'?

In Christ,

John

[Anckzxik]

I have been to the Holy Monastery of Esphigmenou many, many times.

The article in the Times is quite inaccurate. There is absolutely no banner on the outside of the Monastery which declares that the Pope is the Anti-Christ. There is, however, a banner which reads: Orthodoxia n Thanatos (Orthodoxy or Death) - one can interpret that as they wish. Also the Times article implies that the Pope and the Ecumenical Patriarch 'celebrated a joint Mass' which gives the reader the impression it was a joint concelebration - that is, clearly non-canonical. Also, there is mention of a 'pro-Patriarch monk' who had the 'temerity to demand entrance to the cloister' and was subsequently visited upon by 'beard pulling' and 'throwing of punches...'

The last time I visited and stayed at Esphigmenou was two years ago (was I the pro-Patriarch monk mentioned in the Times?) My stay there was like all my pilgrimages to the Monastery, dating back twenty years.

The monks were extremely friendly, always insistent that I stay longer, and our talk revolved around monastic themes. Never once did I personally hear slander directed toward the Patriarch. The Holy Monastery of Esphigmenou is generally composed of fathers from around the Holy Mountain who found refuge and a common ethos there.

I have never experienced any difficulties with these fathers and I must say that all this unverified source material is misleading and damaging. You do not have to leave Esphigmenou to find Abbots who are in disagreement with the Ecumenical Patriarch.

As to the remark about Prince Philip at the Holy Monastery of Vatopedi and seeking tranquillity there, whilst there I stood directly behind Prince Philip in the line of monks venerating the Icons.

This fact alone caused considerable concern on the Holy Mountain. In the vast majority of Athonite monasteries non-Orthodox are not permitted in the Narthex and are not permitted to venerate the Icons during the Liturgical Services.

Which reminds me of another very sad incident, when the Greek authorities took the upper hand. Approximately five monks had lived at the Skete of the Prophet Elijah, founded by the great Staretz, St. Paisy Velichkovsky, for many years. This is where I first met the Hierarch Mark of Berlin (ROCOR), then quite a young man. The monks there were all from ROCOR, but lived peacefully for years at the Skete.

One day the police (the Greek authorities) drove up, and in one day evicted all the monks, and sent them off the Mountain by boat.

I would estimate that more than 70% of Athonite monks are very reserved in their feelings about the present Ecumenical Patriarch.

It is not only the monks of Esphigmenou who feel the heavy hand of the current Patriarch, simply ask at the other Monasteries and you are welcome to form your own opinion of this current 'dialogue'.

[Enjknsua]

Dear John:
I appreciate you bringing us back around to the gospel. How simple life would be if we just did this.

Olga,
I am sorry, I still don't know that I agree with your view.
The Esphigmenou brotherhood took it upon themselves to refuse to commemorate the Patriarch (from Athenagoras onwards, including Bartholomew), and regard themselves as the custodians of "true orthodoxy" (hmmm .... where have we heard that before? ). Dare I say it, but this unilateralist approach is utterly opposite to the collegiality of Orthodoxy, it is rather the feature of the post-Reformation churches which have led to the innumerable churches we see today in the Protestant world: "I don't agree any more with the mother church, so I'll set up my own." By contrast, how has the Orthodox Church dealt with heresies in the past? Councils, ecumenical and local, and, in the case of examination of individuals, a conference of bishops or other higher clergy. A conciliar, collegiate response, not a schismatic one. If the errant party (individual or group) refuses to be corrected, then the Church has the right to regard that party as heretic and/or schismatic.

If a priest, bishop, or higher-ranking cleric has fallen into heresy, then the people, and/or his fellow clerics have the right and duty to correct the situation. If you use this opinion and apply it to St. Anthansius, then he would have been excommunicated since the rest of the "world" did not keep the faith. In the end though, he was proven the victor of the controversy though he was the sole believer.

I am not trying to debate, I am just suggesting these particular monks have a view they believe strongly enough in to abandon their loyalty/obediences and perhaps someone should pay attention and figure out what is in their craw who is not religiously political (is that a real term?) in the Patriarch's camp.

I am the terminal peacekeeper sometimes to a fault. If these monks are in the wrong, then so be it. If not? Who is willing to listen to them now that the liberal media is "on top of the story?" They will be vilinized even if they are found to be in the right.

in love,
Paul

[jeaccatty]

Can someone help with a question?

I do not remember who the saint was (I wish I could) in reading the lives of the saints, there was one saint who would not budge on his beliefs. Every other priest, bishop, Metropolitan and even the people believed in a heresy. I think it was on either icon veneration or possibly on the divinity of Christ.

There are a number of answers to that question. Someone mentioned St Athanasius, and that is one. Also coming to mind are St Maximos the Confessor and St Mark of Ephesus. (not to mention the similar Prophet Elijah who complained to God that everyone in the land had gone over to the worship of Baal and only he alone remained faithful - and God told him that he was not alone but that there were thousands who had not bowed to the false God)

Apr David

[Trikaduliana]

I find the scandal not so much in the failure of these monks to commemorate the Ecumenical Patriarch, which is a judgement they must make before God, but for the physical violence which is reported as taking place.

And it was as scandalous when Ethiopian and Eritrean monks came to blows on the roof of the Church of the Resurrection in Jerusalem.

And it was as scandalous when Bulgarian Orthodox clergy came to blows at a funeral, and indeed when any Christians resort to physical violence, or indeed to a violence of words and spirit.

This is never, ever, justified as far as I can see.

Peter

[DF9sLGSU]

I find the scandal not so much in the failure of these monks to commemorate the Ecumenical Patriarch, which is a judgement they must make before God, but for the physical violence which is reported as taking place.

And it was as scandalous when Ethiopian and Eritrean monks came to blows on the roof of the Church of the Resurrection in Jerusalem.

And it was as scandalous when Bulgarian Orthodox clergy came to blows at a funeral, and indeed when any Christians resort to physical violence, or indeed to a violence of words and spirit.

This is never, ever, justified as far as I can see.

Peter

Dear Peter,

Indeed, and it is so sad, as it always is when Christians behave in this way. There may be, and are, explanations for this, but no justification - surely?


In Christ,

John

[xochgtlm]

It turns out that the monks there are not without a website, and they are trying to make their case on it, and indeed, it does appear that they are being ousted from their monastery of 1500 years... They have pics of monks there who are over a hundred years old, who have spent 80 years there [if I remember it right]... Throwing them onto the streets of Athens in an eviction procedure seems harsh, and on what grounds?

It is an ugly business...

And I cannot help but feel that all is not what it appears...

http://www.esphigmenou.com/

Reader Arsenios

[Raj_Copi_Jin]

I have come to the conclusion that I am not against unification of the Church, as long as Catholic Church comes back to pre-schism doctrines and regulations which existed since our Lord Jesus Christ. I follow the new calendar on advice of my spiritual father as he was conserned about me getting confused between two different calendars as I attend both Greek and Russian Churches and need to follow one of the two existing calendars for Holy Days and fasts and feasts.
The more I read about the rebelious monastery the more I feel sad about the whole situation that may not end up good for either side. We are Christians and suppose to treat each other with dignity and respect, love one another as our Lord told us to do.