ON THE TEXTS OF THE GREAT AND HOLY SYNOD

This is the second letter from Metropolitan Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktou written to the Archbishop of Athens
and the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece concerning the texts for consideration at the Great and Holy Synod
(see below).
The Metropolitan has "serious reservations" concerning two texts prepared for the Great Synod, "Relations of the
Orthodox Church with the rest of the Christian world" and "The mission of the Orthodox Church in the modern
world."
The text raises many questions, posed by the Metropolitan, such as,
- Does it imply there there are churches besides the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church?
- Is it pushing the idea of "baptismal unity" in an indirect and veiled manner?
- Will those who reject the text and continue to follow the Holy Fathers be accused of shattering the unity of the
Church and be condemned?
In conclusion, the Metropolitan calls for the revision of the text Relations of the Orthodox Church with the rest of
the Christian world to clearly express that the Orthodox Church alone is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic
Church, and that theological dialogue with the Christian world is done in order for the Christian Communities
outside of her to return to this unity.
Read the full letter below:
-----------------------------SACRED METROPOLIS
OF NAFPAKTOS AND SAINT VLASIOS
Nafpaktos, 18th of January 2016
To the Holy and Sacred Synod
of the Church of Greece
Ioannou Gennadiou 14
115 21 Athens
Your Beatitude, President of the Synod,
Following the Session of the Sacred Synod in the month of January, we were given the texts which were prepared
and prepare for the future convening of the Holy and Great Synod on the day of Pentecost this year, barring any
unforeseen developments.
Among these are also the texts prepared by the 5th Pre-conciliar Pan-Orthodox Meeting, which took place in
Geneva from the 10th to the 17th of October of the previous year (2015), during the time period of our own
Synod.
The texts-decisions were: 1. Autonomy and the manner in which it is granted, 2. Relations of the Orthodox
Church with the rest of the Christian world, 3. The mission of the Orthodox Church in the modern world, 4. The
importance of fasting and its application today.

In the accompanying letter addressed to Your Beatitude, signed by Metropolitan Jeremiah of Switzerland,
Secretary of Preparations for the Holy and Great Council, and dated 5-11-2015, it states: For certification of the
decisions of your representatives, which have been hand delivered, the proposed texts have been attached in
order that Your Church be informed, give due consideration and make pertinent decisions.
Thus, besides the ratification of the decisions by the representatives of our Church and to inform the Church,
these texts were also sent in order to obtain relevant views and decisions from our Church, namely from the
Eminent Metropolitans of the Hierarchy of the Church of Greece. It is understood, then, that these texts-decisions
are to be given to the Members of our Hierarchy for discussion, because the Church will make decisions to accept
and to vote on them, with the one vote it has, at the Session of the Holy and Great Synod of the Orthodox
Church.
Two of these subjects, namely autonomy and the manner in which it is granted and the importance of fasting
and its application today do not involve any serious problems. However, I have serious reservations about
theological, ecclesiological and anthropological subjects in the other prepared texts.
Here it will suffice simply to outline a few subjects, which I shall analyse in greater detail at the appropriate time.
Specifically:
1. The text-decision Relations of the Orthodox Church with the rest of the Christian world speaks of the selfunderstanding and union of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church (article 1) and, as it says, according
to the ontological nature of the Church this unity cannot be broken (article 6). Yet at the same time it speaks of
the theological dialogues between the different Christian Churches and Confessions and the participation of the
Orthodox Church in the Ecumenical movement in the belief that through dialogue she thus bears her active
witness to the plenitude of Christs truth and her spiritual treasures before those who are external to her, and
pursuing an objective goal to tread the path to unity (article 6).
This raises the questions: Does the above phrase: to tread the path of unity mean that those outside of Her (the
Orthodox Church) will return to unity? If so, how can it state elsewhere that the bilateral theological dialogues of
the Orthodox Church, with its participation in the Ecumenical Movement, take place with the aim of seeking, on
the basis of the ancient Church of the Seven Ecumenical Councils, the lost unity of Christians (article 5)? In
other towards, is the unity of the Orthodox Church taken for granted or is it sought because it was lost?
This is also connected with the subject of the relationship of the Orthodox Church with the other Christian
Confessions. While The Orthodox Church, being the One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, in her profound
ecclesiastical consciousness firmly believes that she occupies a central place in matters relating to the promotion
of Christian unity within the contemporary world (article 1), it is simultaneously stated that The Orthodox Church
acknowledges the existence in history of other Christian Churches and confessions which are not in communion
with her and believes in a speedy, more accurate elucidation of all ecclesiological topics, especially the
teaching on Sacraments, grace, priesthood, and apostolic succession (article 6).
This means that the Orthodox Church acknowledges the other Christian Churches and Confessions, and within
this perspective the relations of the Orthodox Church with the other Churches is determined, in agreement with
the 7th canon of the 2nd Ecumenical Council and the 95th of the Quinisext Ecumenical Council (article 20).
Question: Why does the opening phrase with the rest of the Christian world close with the phrase existence of
other Christian Churches and Confessions? Are there Christian Churches besides the One, Holy, Catholic and
Apostolic Church? Furthermore, does the calling to mind of particular Canons of the Ecumenical Councils [7th of
the Second Oecumenical Council and 95th of the Quinisext Council] suggest baptismal theology as the basis of
the unity of the Orthodox Churches with the other Churches and Confessions? After the Quinisext Ecumenical
Council, did not other doctrines also slip in among Roman Catholics, as well as other canonical traditions of
worship? Is it possible that the decision of the Patriarchs in 1756, by which we receive the heterodox into the

Orthodox Church by baptism, is being indirectly revoked? And will those who continue to believe according to the
teaching of the Holy Fathers shatter the unity of the Church and be condemned? (article 22).
It is necessary, therefore, that the content of this text be further clarified in relation to the title, lest it create
confusion and ambiguity. Although the title is clear: Relations of the Orthodox Church with the rest of the
Christian world, there are some ambiguities in the content, such as the recognition of other Churches besides
the One Orthodox Church, and the establishment of unity from [within] the existing division. It is possible that this
confusion came from the merging of two subjects for discussion at the Holy and Great Council into one text.
Nevertheless, the content of the two texts need to be brought into harmony.
2. The text The mission of the Orthodox Church in the modern world generally presents the orthodox teaching
on the prevalence of peace, righteousness, freedom, brotherhood and love between peoples, and on the rejection
of racial and other forms of discrimination. Surely, the Holy and Great Synod has to take such a decision, since
we live in a divided, fragmented, and intolerant world and in an environment that is steadily polluted to the
detriment of man and the creation of God.
I notice, however, that all of this is based on a flawed anthropology. Instead of the text making reference to the
value of man, it refers to the value of the human person (Title and chapter 1, article 4), the sacredness of the
human person (chapter 1, article 3), the lofty value of the human person (chapter 1, article 5), and elsewhere.
Of course, in the beginning it is noted that in the term person is condensed the content of the creation of man
according to the image and likeness of God (chapter 1, article 1). However, it continues by stating that the
sacredness of the human person, which derives from the creation of man as the image of God, and from his
mission in Gods plan for man and the world was the source of inspiration for the Church Fathers (chapter 1,
article 3).
The Fathers, however, constantly insist on emphasising the meaning of man, while person is attributed to God.
I am not aware of patristic texts that speak of the sacredness and the value of the human person, something
which is the product of Roman theology, as Lossky clearly attests, and which in reality is a view pertaining to
post-patristic theology.
The wording value and sacredness of the human person in the text is associated with the cacodox correlation
between the human person and the communion of the Divine Persons. It says, One of the loftiest gifts of God to
the human person both as a concrete bearer of the image of a personal God and as a member of a community of
persons in the unity of the human race by grace reflecting the life and communion of the Divine Persons in the
Holy rinity, is the gift of freedom (2, article 1).
This article makes reference to the communion of the Divine Persons, while the correct terminology would be
the unity and distinction of the Divine Persons. In the Triune God, there is a communion of nature and not a
communion of persons, since the persons also have their incommunicable hypostatic properties. Also
problematic is the statement that the human person is concrete bearer of the image of a personal God and a
member of a community of persons in the unity of the human race by grace reflecting the life and communion of
the Divine Persons in the Holy Trinity (Chapter 2, article 1). Furthermore, the statement that the person is
associated with freedom and uniqueness, which express relationship and communion (Chapter 1, 1) and that
freedom is an ontological component of the person (Chapter 2, 3). If this were the case, then in God each
person would have their own freedom, and hence the unity of the Holy Trinity would be broken. If the human
person is associated with the divine Persons in the text, then the freedom of the person results in a cacodox
viewpoint. Moreover, , the will is an appetite of nature and not of the person.
I gave an explanation on this subject to the Hierarchy last October, and showed the problems relating to the term
person in regards to man, and the Hierarchs did not object further on the subject.

I maintain that these passages should be removed from this important text, and that the word man be
substituted for the word person. There is no better expression, which is both biblical and patristic and which is
perceived also by western theologians and Christians of other Confessions, who are not used to the meaning of
person with regards to man.
Your Beatitude,
With respect I submit these few, but fundamental remarks of mine, which I consider to be important. If these
passages which express a modern theological direction of certain newer theologians, and which differ from
Orthodox patristic teaching, remain, then the texts issued by the Holy and Great Synod will create various
theological problems, because together with everything else, they will support a theology which is foreign to the
tradition of the Church, they will support the so-called post-patristic theology and it will be shown that this was the
aim of those who arranged these texts.
In closing, I opine that the text Relations of the Orthodox Church with the rest of the Christian world must be
altered to clearly express that it is the Orthodox Church which is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church,
and that theological dialogue with the Christian world is done in order for the Christian Communities outside of
her to return to this unity.
Furthermore, with regards to the text The mission of the Orthodox Church in the modern world, the expression
value and sacredness of the human person should be replaced by the expression the value of man, and what
is written about the communion of persons, the unity of the human race by grace reflecting the life and
communion of the Divine Persons in the Holy rinity, should be removed.
Writing the above, I remain,
Least among the brethren in Christ,
+ Hierotheos of Nafpaktos and Saint Blasios