|
The Synod of Ferrara-Florence
took place 385 years after the
Schism between Rome and
Constantinople, and the
heretical positions of the
Latins were well known to Saint
Mark.
Nonetheless the Saint made a
great effort to persuade the
Latins, sometimes by
overstepping the sacred Canons,
which exclude any contact with
heretics. He did this with the
hope of their return (not for
union). Thus:
1.
He recognized the heretical
Papacy as a “sister Church”.
Mark of Ephesus himself
characterizes the Churches of
the East and West as "Sister
churches", which must with the
help of God reconcile and for
peace to be restored between
them (Acta Graecorum, p.52).
Also, in his interaction with
the purpose of true
reunification with the Latins,
he calls them not only brothers,
but friends, fathers and holy
ones (Acta Graecorum, p.216;
Syropoulos' Memoirs VIII,6,
p.394 and IV, 31, p.230).
2. He addressed Pope Eugene IV
with courteous words and titles,
which do not fit a heretic.
Listen to what he says: "Listen
revered Pope of Rome and teacher
of Latindom...." Elsewhere he
says: "His Beatitude the Pope of
the presbyters of Rome." Even
when addressing the emperor John
VIII Palaiologos and Patriarch
Joseph II, he says: "Listen,
holy emperor lord John and holy
patriarch Joseph...."
3. He participated in prayers
with the heretics. The Saint
himself participated in the
inaugural ceremony prayer in
Ferrara, but not in the common
liturgy with the Pope at the end
of the Synod in Florence
(minutes of the Synod of
Ferrara-Florence, columns
475-478). The funeral and burial
of Patriarch Joseph II took
place in June 1439 in the
Catholic Church of Santa Maria
Novella in Florence, and of
course Saint Mark was present
and participated in the service
with the Latins.
4. One should also not forget
that during the theological
dialogue with heretics, the
Fathers used several times
phrases of courtesy towards
them, without of course
over-stepping strict Orthodox
ecclesiology or their
ecclesiological opinions. It was
quite characteristic for Saint
Mark Ephesus to use such
phrases, as when he told the
Pope: "Holy father, receive your
children."
|
|
5. The presence of Saint Mark at
the sessions of the Synod of
Ferrara-Florence was complete
and universal at all the
sessions, except two, when he
was banned from participating.
Thus:
A) At the Synod in Ferrara there
were fourteen sessions from
4/9/1438 - 12/13/1438, and Saint
Mark participated in ALL of
them.
B) At the Synod in Florence
there were numerous sessions
from 02/26/1439 - 07/06/1439,
and Saint Mark attended them
all, except TWO sessions
(03/21/1439 and 03/24/1439), in
which he was denied
participation by the emperor,
who shut him in his cell with a
guard.
|
|
Conclusion: Saint Mark
participated in all the
sessions, except for two, though
this was not his fault. He was
involved in all the others and
was never absent voluntarily. He
may have wept over the
predicament of the Orthodox
hierarchs, but he was obedient
to the dictates of the emperor.
6. He accepted the baptism of
the Latins as valid, even after
the Synod. Mark of Ephesus
preferred oikonomia in regards
the issue of the baptism of the
Latins, despite his strict
adherence to the Orthodox Faith,
testifying it to be the
"universal practice of the
Orthodox Church", and he admits
that "we chrismate those who
come over to us from them (i.e.
the Latins) ... as being
heretics" (Karmiris,
“Dogmatics”). In other words, he
accepts the Latins like the
heretical Arians according Canon
VII of the Second Ecumenical
Synod, although aware of the
method of sprinkling, which he
repudiates. Hence, Dositheos of
Jerusalem appears to be opposed
to Mark of Ephesus, since the
latter accepts the baptism of
the Latins (by sprinkling);
Dositheos by exactitude and Mark
by oikonomia.
|
SUMMARY
|
|
Mark, the Metropolitan of
Ephesus, was fully prepared for
the Dialogue. He was an honest
and loyal man with a good
character, and he worked for the
good of the entire Church. With
his participation he wanted to
restore the communion and
confession of the sister Church
of the West. Yet Saint Mark
criticized the fact how both
sides tried to find the most
powerful arguments in order to
destroy the views of the
opponent, and thus with these
conflicts they lost their main
purpose, i.e. to solve problems.
|
|
|
|
Saint Mark did not seek a
superficial and false
reconciliation, nor a political
contractual coexistence. Neither
did he act egotistically, to
show himself off. His pursuit
was to agree on the truth and
restore harmony and unity
through dialogue. He did not
seek dialogue to defeat his
opponents with the strongest
arguments and thus be
triumphalistic and egotistical.
This proves his benevolent
intention which he based on the
spirit of the ancient and great
Fathers of the Church.
|
|
|
|
What therefore brought Saint
Mark to this Synod, where he
bore the heaviest burden in the
negotiations and dialogue, was
his ecclesiastical conscience
and conviction, that the
restoration of full ecclesial
communion between the Churches
of East and West should become a
reality based on the love and
truth of the faith. For this
purpose, he did not hesitate to
accept the heretical Church of
Rome as a sister Church, and he
did not hesitate to admit that
the Body of the Church "was
divided". Nor did he even
hesitate to admit that he was
the child of the (heretic, of
course) Pope ("holy father,
receive your children").
Unfortunately, however, neither
the Synod in general, (and even
worse) nor his brethren from the
Eastern Church followed his
example. Eventually he was not
heard, since the emperor forbade
him a place at the two most
important sessions. The fact
that he was left alone does not
diminish his stature nor the
correctness of his faith, which
is not simply decided upon by a
majority lawful decision. Truth
does not depend on a numerical
majority. History is a witness.
With absolute conviction
therefore to the correctness of
his faith, he could not renounce
his faith and accept the
decisions of that Synod, by
simply agreeing with the
majority. For this same reason,
for the entirety of Orthodoxy
today it is impossible to agree
and accept those decisions.
|
|
