The Life of Saint Photius the Great
Written by Saint Justin Popovich
Introduction
Our God-bearing Fathers, who governed all things in the Church of God in a proper and God-pleasing manner, have left to us as a sacred heritage the God-given teaching just as they themselves had received from the Holy Apostles, that the confession and defense of the True Orthodox faith is the greatest of virtues. No other virtue, they tell us, is so great before God and so profitable for the Church. But the truth is God and Love and confession of God’s truth; that is to say, the true faith of the Church frees, saves, and enlightens us men. This holy teaching is proclaimed especially by those holy fathers who spent their entire lives struggling to preserve Christ’s true and saving faith by which alone men are saved and enter eternal life. This holy tradition of the fathers, confirmed as it is and testified to by their entire lives, offers the greatest lesson for our own generation: a generation which, lacking zeal for the love of the truth, has grown cold and hardened in its indifference for the correct faith. Among the ancient and great fathers of the Church, perhaps the greatest zealots for the correct faith and the truth of God were Athanasius the Great and Basil the Great. Yet our Holy and God-bearing father, Photius, the Confessor and Defender of the Orthodox Faith of Christ, is in no way inferior to them. Like them, he labored in all the virtues that please God and bring deification. But above all, he strove for divine truth, the true dogma of the Orthodox faith, bequeathed to the Church as a holy inheritance by the God-inspired Apostles and Fathers. So it is that the holy Photius wrote in his famous letter to Nicholas, the Pope of Rome, “Nothing is dearer than the truth,” and in the same letter, he noted, “It is truly necessary that we observe all things, but above all, that which pertains to matters of the faith, in which but a small deviation represents a deadly sin.”
Invoking the help of our Holy Father, Photius, we shall describe his holy life and apostolic labors in defense of the Orthodox faith for the instruction and the spiritual profit of our generation waxed cold toward the truth. We know that Saint Photius was a sign which is spoken against, both during his life and afterwards, for many enemies spoke and wrote against his holy person. Impartial historical truth, however, will best show the spiritual greatness of our holy father and his exceptional importance for the Orthodox faith and Church.
The Life of Saint Photius
Our God-bearing father, Photius, was born in Constantinople around the year 820 to prominent, wealthy, and pious parents. His father, Sergius, was attached to the imperial court as guardian of the Emperor and of the Palace. Sergius’s brother was Saint Tarasius, the Patriarch who presided over the Seventh Ecumenical Council in 787, at which the heresy of iconoclasm was condemned. Saint Photius’s mother, Irene, was a God-loving and virtuous woman. Her brother, Sergius, was the husband of the Irene, who was the sister of Saint Theodora the Empress, who, together with the Patriarch Saint Methodius, reinstated the Orthodox veneration of the holy icons at the council of 843. Saint Photius greatly venerated the memory of the Holy Patriarchs Tarasius and Methodius and imitated them throughout his entire life. Before Saint Theodora had reinstated the veneration of the holy icons, many Orthodox Christians, especially clergy and monastics, endured numerous sufferings and persecutions. Among the sufferers for the venerable icons were Saint Photius’s parents. Being truly pious and upright, they loved and honored the holy icons and the righteous monks who defended them. Saint Photius’s mother often received monks into her home, sought their holy prayers, and gave them alms. Besides Photius, there were four other children: Constantine, Sergius, Tarasius, and Theodora. The parents nurtured their children in faith and piety established with prayers and good deeds. In the time of the iconoclast Emperor, Theophilus (829–842), when persecutions again raged against the Orthodox, Saint Photius’s parent were deprived of their wealth, tormented, and together with their children exiled to wild and waterless places where they finished their days in the true faith as confessors and martyrs, not once consenting to reject the holy icons. This unwavering constancy toward the icons impelled the illegal and false iconoclast councils to hurl anathemas at the father of Saint Photius, at young Photius himself, and at his brothers just as had formerly happened to Photius’s uncle, the Patriarch Tarasius. Saint Photius noted these events in his letters, and I mention them here only to show that from his childhood, Saint Photius confessed, defended, and sustained the holy, apostolic faith and the true doctrines of the Fathers.
As a child, young Photius was inclined to the quiet, prayerful, and monastic life, and according to his own words: “Even as a child, I longed to be free of life’s concerns and affairs and to pay attention only to that which was my concern, for from childhood on there grew in me and with me a love for the monastic life.” Naturally talented, young Photius thirsted for virtue and knowledge. Being capable and gifted, he began to pursue both the worldly and spiritual sciences while still a boy and even his enemies attest to the breadth of his studies and wisdom. Nicetas of Paphlagonia, his fiercest enemy, acknowledged, “Photius was not of low or obscure origins, rather he was the child of noble and highly renowned parents. In world wisdom and reasoning, he was viewed as the most capable person in the Empire. He had studied grammar and poetry, rhetoric and philosophy, the heathen arts, and almost every other worldly science. In all of these, he not only surpassed all others of his time but even competed with learned men of earlier times. He succeeded in all things, and all things benefited him: his natural capabilities, his diligent learning, and his wealth by which every book was able to find its way to him.” After having studied literature and mathematics and Aristotelian philosophy as well as the other disciplines, Photius pursued the divine science of the Holy Scriptures and the theology of the Holy Fathers of the Church under the wise and learned men of his time. He himself says that he learned theology from a wise and experienced elder; thus, Photius’s learning and wisdom quickly became known, and many youths began to visit his home to imbibe his secular and spiritual accomplishments. Despite his young years, Photius instructed them in the ways of wisdom, and with them, he read many wise and profitable books, interpreting the language and sense of each. His brother, Tarasius, often listened to these lessons. Later, whenever Tarasius was going to be away from Constantinople, he would ask Photius to recommend which books he should read while on his journey and what Photius’s opinions were on each. In fulfillment of his brother’s many requests, Photius wrote the beautiful and rich volume called the Myriobiblios (or Bibliotheca). Photius’s desire to become a monk would surely have been fulfilled by this time had he not been hindered by the Orthodox Emperor Michael III (842–867). That ruler summoned Photius to his court and compelled him against his will to accept high ranks and duties. First, he became chief privy councilor and later chief chancellor, positions given only to persons very loyal to the court. Indeed, Photius’s wisdom and capabilities were so evident that the Emperor sent him to Baghdad as an imperial ambassador to negotiate with the Persian Caliph for an end to the persecution of Christians in the Muslim lands. Accompanying him was his young and gifted pupil, Constantine the Philosopher, later to be known as Saint Cyril, the Apostle to the Slavs. While serving at the imperial court, Photius also held the professorial chair in the University of Constantinople, which the Caesar Bardas, who was the Emperor’s uncle and guardian, had restored in the imperial palaces. The learned Thessalonian, Leo the Mathematician, along with Constantine the Philosopher (Saint Cyril, who was likewise from Thessaly), also taught there during this time. Although Photius was caught up in the many duties of state at the palace, he lost no opportunity for reading wise and profitable books or for teaching his numerous pupils. At the same time he also began to write many spiritually profitable books and to interpret the divine depths of the Holy Scriptures. At the request of his friend, Amphilochius of Cyzicus, he wrote the Amphilochia, in which he answers 326 questions and problems drawn from the Holy Scriptures. Other books he wrote are Against the Manichaeans, The Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit, and the Explanation of the Epistles of the Holy Apostle Paul. He collected and compiled, moreover, the Nomocanon of the Church’s laws and canons, wrote many epistles and discourses, and even compiled many Church hymns and songs. But of Saint Photius’s wisdom and many-sided learning, let this be enough, for it is more fitting to speak of his other deeds and feats which surpass everything said about him above.
After a hard battle of many years duration, the Church had been delivered from the deadly heresy of iconoclasm. Even so, many things remained to be settled and returned to their former state of order. In the words of the holy Patriarch Nicephorus the Confessor, “During the time of the struggle out of necessity in the Church that would not have been permitted in a time of harmony.” The battle with the heresy of iconoclasm not only led many to ruin, but it also gave some laymen, as well as monks and clergy, the opportunity to start trouble for their own benefit, and it spread confusion and disorder in Church life. Under the pretext of struggling against heresy, such people continued to upset the Church even after the storm had already passed, even though the true faith again reigned and order, obedience, and brotherly harmony prevailed. Owing to the exaggerated strictness of some and the extreme laxity of others, divisions into mutually estranged groups began to appear, occasioning much damage. The resolution of such problems was the task awaiting Saint Photius upon his election as Patriarch, which occurred in the following manner:
The complete victory of Orthodoxy over iconoclasm was gained during the Patriarchate of Methodius (843–847). This Holy Patriarch governed God’s Church with grace and moderation. Iconoclasts who repented were received with love back into the bosom of the Church. Some of the strictest monks, however, reproached Saint Methodius for his leniency and even broke off communion with him. When Methodius reposed, he was succeeded by Ignatius, the son of the former Emperor Michael I Rangabe (811–813), who had become a monk after his father’s fall. Methodius was close to those strict monks and was a man of righteous life, but he was unable to reconcile the estranged factions in the Church. As Saint Photius noted, “There were quarrels and differences among all, one with another, and they all strove to break communion with one another, and in such state of affairs, a pastor was needed who could unite the divided members of the Church and to begin to still the storm.” This discord was yet continuing when in August 857, Patriarch Ignatius quarreled with the Caesar Bardas and was removed. Later, he himself submitted his voluntary resignation. For more than a year, the Patriarchal throne remained vacant. Then, the eyes of the whole Church fixed upon the one man found worthy of the Patriarchate, the sole figure capable of ending the discord and reconciling the estranged parties. This was, of course, Photius, the learned and wise professor, imperial secretary, and counselor. So it was that everyone, those in the estranged groups, the court, and the Emperor himself, turned to him.
The humble Photius long and persistently declined to accept the difficult responsibilities of the Patriarchal Throne. Concerning his refusal, he meekly wrote to the Caesar Bardas as follows: “Even before this, I knew that I was unworthy of the hierarchical rank and pastoral duty. Being thus forced and compelled, I refused to accept. I wept, I protested, and did everything else so as not to proceed to this forced election. I prayed that this cup would pass me by, weeping for fear of the great concerns and trials I knew would await me, but nothing came to my aid.”
In a letter announcing his election as Patriarch of Constantinople to Nicholas, Pope of Rome, Saint Photius described his reluctance and refusal: “Whenever I pondered upon elevation to the hierarchical rank and upon the nothingness of man, and whenever I measured my own helplessness and weakness, horror would seize me, and I would feel gripped by terror, for before my eyes I seemed to behold men of flesh and blood performing the work of the Cherubim, even now I see myself bound and laden with these same burdens, and I cannot express the pains and sufferings that overwhelm me. From my childhood, I have desired the peaceful and solitary life. Therefore I never thought to prepare myself to receive the hierarchical dignity. Now, however, I have, against my will, accepted the archpastorship and the government of the people of God, for I am compelled to that by force. Behold, I have resigned myself to it. As soon as my predecessor stepped down from his dignity and his responsibility, for some reason, all the clergy, with an array of bishops and metropolitans at once, besieged me mightily. Before them, and together with them, our pious Emperor, who otherwise always shows himself humane and meek towards others, acted very inhumanely and abruptly towards me. Even before that swarm of clergy, I did not yield a jot, but all my evasions and pleas to be left in peace were fruitless, for they simply demanded and told me that, willy nilly, I must accept the burden of authority over them. Nothing availed me, not even the tears which poured from my eyes while I plead. And so it came to pass that, against my will, they obtained what they wanted.”
After this long and persistent entreaty by all the bishops, clergy, and people for Photius to accept the Patriarchate, which had been vacant for more than a year, at last, he submitted reluctantly. Then, lawfully and canonically, he was elected in the year 858. Within a week, he was tonsured a monk and consecrated as Patriarch, passing rapidly in order through the degrees of the priesthood on consecutive days. On the first day, he was tonsured a monk, and on the second, he was made a reader. On the third day, he became a subdeacon, and on the fourth, he was ordained to the diaconate. On the fifth day, he was raised to the priesthood, and on the sixth, he was consecrated a bishop. His consecration as bishop was performed on the Feast of the Nativity by the Metropolitan of Syracuse, Gregory Asbestos, Avalampios of Apamea, and Basil of Gortyna. Photius’s election as Patriarch was accepted almost universally despite other disagreements and discord. Both factions saw in him a guarantee of the true faith, for he was the son of parents martyred by the iconoclasts. They also saw in him a pastor who, since he had not previously mingled in quarrels and disputes, could now reconcile the estranged parties and benefit the Church by uniting the divided flock of Christ. Some five bishops, followers of the former Patriarch, Saint Ignatius, were not pleased at the election of Saint Photius, but Ignatius’s other followers supported the new Patriarch, although later, some of them turned against him. After his election as Patriarch, Saint Photius convened a council in 859, which was assembled in the Church of the Holy Apostles. Then, according to the ancient and established ecclesiastical custom, he notified the Bishop of Rome and the four Eastern Patriarchates of his election by letters. In his letter, cited above, to Pope Nicholas, he asserted that, of all communions, the best is the communion of faith and love, and he sent forth his confession of the Orthodox faith in the Holy Trinity, in the Incarnation of the Son of God, and in the Seven Holy Ecumenical Councils. In other words, he accepted and confessed all the councils of the Church and accepted up to that time, and he confessed, rejected, and anathematized all those the Church had rejected and anathematized. The Saint ended his letter with a prayer that God might grant peace to His Church, lead the faithful to salvation, and unite them in the Head of All: Christ. The letter, accompanying one sent by Emperor Michael III, arrived in Rome early in 960, but before it reached Rome, some disobedient monks arrived from Constantinople, among them a certain archimandrite Theognostus. This Theognostus and the monks with him counted themselves followers of the former Patriarch Ignatius and, together with the five bishops mentioned above, refused to recognize Saint Photius as Patriarch, even though Ignatius himself had submitted his resignation and recognized Photius as the lawful Patriarch. When Theognostus and those with him reached Rome, they obtained an audience with the Pope and, in his presence, began to curse and deride Photius because of his supposedly uncanonical election. The Caesar Bardas held Ignatius responsible for the conduct of Theognostus, exiled him to the Aegean islands of Mityline, and began persecuting and torturing some of his clerical and monastic followers.
Greatly displeased, Saint Photius wrote to Bardas demanding that these persecutions be stopped, otherwise he would abdicate the Patriarchal Throne. When Pope Nicholas heard from Archimandrite Theognostus how Photius, the layman, had been chosen as Patriarch, he was pleased for evil reasons. The Pope had long awaited an opportunity to interfere in the Church of Constantinople in order to subject it to his sway. Ambitious and proud, Nicholas thirsted to subject the entire world to his rule. In furthering his machinations against the Western rulers, he used a certain false document forged in the papal chancery, the so-called “Donation of Constantine,” in which Saint Constantine the Emperor purportedly gave the city of Rome and the entire Western Empire to the Bishop of Rome. For Pope Nicholas sought, moreover, to take from the Eastern Byzantine Emperor all of southern Italy, Sicily, and the entire Balkan peninsula together with all the Slavic lands which had just begun to accept the Christian faith from Constantinople. The extent of Nicholas’s love of power can be seen in his use of certain false documents. The so-called “Isidorian Decretals,” according to which all earthly and ecclesiastical authority belonged to the Popes of Rome. Without the Roman Pope, supposedly nothing in the Church could be decided. According to Nicholas, in fact, Christianity could not even exist without Rome. In his pride and demonic lust for power, therefore, Nicholas eagerly seized the opportunity as he imagined it to extend his power over Constantinople. Alleging that he was defending the former Patriarch Ignatius, he sought to dethrone Saint Photius. To that end, he wrote to Saint Photius and Emperor Michael and arrogantly attacked Photius for accepting the Patriarchate, especially since Photius had been elevated so quickly from layman to Bishop. Since Emperor Michael had invited Nicholas to attend a council in Constantinople in order to confirm the condemnation of the iconoclast heresy, the Pope sent two clerics to Constantinople to examine the entire matter and to submit a report to Rome on which he himself would pass final judgment. These clerics were Bishops Rodald and Zacharias, who arrived in Constantinople at the end of 860.
Maintaining his meekness, his love for order, and the cannons of the Church, Saint Photius called the second council to convene in the Church of the Holy Apostles in the spring of 861 with the approval of the Emperor Michael. This assembly later came to be known as the First-Second Council. Many bishops, including the representatives of Pope Nicholas, were in attendance. All confirmed the determinations of the Holy Seventh Ecumenical Council, once more condemning the iconoclast heresy, and accepted Photius as the lawful and canonical Patriarch. At this council, 17 holy canons were promulgated with the purpose of bringing disobedient monks and bishops into harmony with ecclesiastical order and tradition. The disobedient monks were expressly forbidden to desert their lawful bishop under the excuse of the bishop’s supposed sinfulness, for such brings disorder and schism to the Church. The Holy Council added that only by a conciliar decision could the clergy reject a bishop whom they thought to be sinful. This rule was adopted in direct response to those unreasonably strict monks who had separated themselves from their new Patriarch and his bishops. The Holy Council, however, did distinguish between unreasonable rebellion and laudable resistance for the defense of the faith, which it encouraged. In regard to this matter, it decreed that should a bishop publicly confess some heresy already condemned by the Holy Fathers and previous councils, one who ceases to commemorate such a bishop even before conciliar condemnation not only is not to be censured but should be praised as condemning a false bishop. In so doing, moreover, he is not dividing the Church but struggling for the unity of the faith. This is canon 15.
Foreseeing that Nicholas’s lust for power would not be satisfied with this, even though the Pope’s own emissaries and the entire council recognized Photius’s lawful election, Photius wrote Nicholas a meek and loving letter explaining everything in a brotherly manner as the following excerpt shows. “Nothing is more honorable and precious than love, as both common opinion recognizes and the Holy Scripture witnesses, For by love the divided our united and the estranged reconciled. Love is that which unites presses its own closer to itself. For love thinketh no evil, rather it beareth all things and endureth all things, and according to the blessed Saint Paul, never faileth. Love makes true friends of those who have the same faith in God, although distance separates them and they never behold each other, and it leads them to unity, identifies them in thought and makes true friends of them. Nothing hinders brothers from speaking to one another and children can speak boldly to their fathers if only they speak the truth. Therefore, I will freely say something in my own defense, first of all, so that Your Excellency should sympathize with me. I was forced against my will to take on this burden, so do not accuse me of seeking it. For truly I experienced force of what kind and how much only God knows to whom even the deepest secrets are known. I was violently besieged on all sides, and they watched me as if they were about to commit a crime. I was elected even though I declined, I was consecrated even though I wept. Everyone saw all of this and knows it for it did not happen in a corner somewhere but in the open now, is it truly right to attack sufferers? I lost my peaceful life, my beloved prayerful quiet, and the pure and intimate friendship of comrades. Life among friends and beloved was dear, and it was amiable to be with acquaintances, but now? How can I speak of it without tears? How could I not mourn that previous peaceful life now lost? I knew from the first that the Patriarchal Throne was exceedingly stormy and surrounded by great cares. I knew of the difficulties of governing the masses of people, their mutual quarrels, their envy, rebellions, and mutterings if something is not to their liking, and the scorn and haughtiness that follows unless one gives them their own way. What am I to do now that I have been placed in power? At times I will have to be strict even towards friends. I will have to disregard even kinsman since I must be sharp and hard with transgressors. All of this will bring out their hatred and envy. What else could I have done? Even if I had fled this election and declined to accept consecration and wept and not recognize their authority, nevertheless, in spite of all this, one cannot escape that which is preordained. You write that I did not have to allow such force and injustice to overwhelm me. Tell that to those who did this to me. You say that the canons were violated and that I, a layman came so quickly to the bishopric, but we ask which canon have we violated? For up until now, the Church of Constantinople has never accepted any such canon. Therefore a rule that does not exist cannot be broken. If, because of this, I should be dethroned, then our Holy and Blessed Fathers and Patriarchs Nicephorus and Tarasius would have been in danger of being removed, for they were chosen for the hierarchy while layman being the brightest luminaries of our generation and brilliant confessors of the true faith and of piety, and in their lives and words, the truth was maintained. Can one say of them who were brilliant stars while still in this earthly life that they were uncanonically elected contrary to the order of the Church? God forbid that anyone should so speak about them, for they were strict guardians of the canons and laws, champions of the true faith, and judges of heresies. Even among the Latins, there had been hierarchs who, although layman, were elevated to the rank of bishop, for example, Saint Ambrose, the adornment of all the Latins. So also Saint Nectarius, whose episcopal election was confirmed by a full Ecumenical Council while he was still a layman. In that instance, would not one have to condemn the entire council according to your reasoning? Both of these saints, moreover, were not only layman before their election, but they also had not yet even been baptized. So it was that, along with baptism, they were made worthy of the hierarchical grace. After all, I must say obedience to rules cannot be required of those to whom the rules are not given. Firmly and without innovation we must hold in common that which is most important to the faith and not explore too much the differences in minor matters. That which is common to all must necessarily be preserved in its entirety, most of all, in all that concerns the faith, the least departure from which is a grave sin. All that is prescribed by common ecumenical decision must be held by all, but if one of the fathers prescribes something for himself or if something is ordained by some local council, then that must be held by those who have accepted it, and it is not a grave matter if it is not held by those who have not received it. So for example, some have the custom of cutting their hair and shaving while to others this is prohibited by certain conciliar decrees. Or, for instance, we are forbidden to fast on Saturdays while you fast on that day. Likewise, in Rome, one does not find lawfully married priests while we have accepted that those who have been married once can be elevated to the priesthood. At the same time, however, we exclude from holy communion those who live adulterously or reject lawful marriage. With us, it is not permitted to consecrate as a bishop someone who has not previously been ordained as a priest. With you, however, that rank is sometimes passed over so that even deacons are all of a sudden raised to the episcopate, which to us would be unforgivable. Also among us, monks, in general, do not eat meat, not because of uncleanliness but for asceticism. Among you, it has been noted that your monks do eat meat, so it is clear that not to observe what does not damage the faith does not constitute departure from harmony and catholicity. Since we see that different customs and rules exist in different places, we, if we judge correctly, will condemn neither those who hold such rules themselves nor those who have not accepted them. Even so, I must say that some of the customs we have observed among you are not without fault or above reproach since some of them can be considered incorrect and, therefore, must be rejected. How, for instance, can some observe Sabbath rites although they are Christians and not Jews? Or who would be bold enough to shudder at lawful marriage, which the goodness of the creator made and established, unless he follows the teaching of shameless and godless men? Or who can dare to despise and scorn the dogmas of the Lord, the fathers and the councils? Let us not name them individually here concerning the elevation of a layman to the rank of a hierarch, let it be known that this is entirely in accord with the Holy Fathers. Not only do their words confirm this, but their very deeds and actions which at various times have served for the great benefit of the bride of Christ, the Church. All that we have set inside it has not been for the sake of bickering, but rather to show the true state of the matter. If this has offended anyone, then one can, out of love for his brother change that which, when corrected, will cause no harm. So from this time, by conciliar decree, the custom will be established among us that no one from the laity will be immediately elevated to the rank of Bishop.”
Saint Photius concluded his letter to Pope Nicholas as follows. “It is necessary that in all things you hold fast to the correct and true canons of the Church and to the order of the Church and that you not receive those who come to Rome from Constantinople without letters and recommendations from Constantinople’s Patriarch. For as things are now in this regard, the seeds of hatred are being sown under the pretext of hospitality. I do not oppose anyone coming to you whatever they desire out of respect for you, but no one from my jurisdiction should wander without cause or without my knowledge and blessing. Such as in opposition to the canons, both ours and yours. For it often occurs that when certain people here have soiled their lives with passions and then have to answer for it, they then pretend to be honest refugees coming under the pretext of prayers and reverence, concealing shameful deeds with eloquent affectation. Such persons traveling to Rome ostensibly for prayer are fleeing the judgment they would find here. Your Beatitude must put a stop to this, returning such once to us. In this way, you will aid their salvation and maintain common concern for all.
This divinely wise letter, so full of brotherly love and truth, had no effect on the proud and arrogant Nicholas, for the love of power had already darkened his mind and soul. Instead of giving a brotherly response to the fraternal love of Photius, whose righteous stand even the papal emissaries confirmed when they returned from Constantinople, the Pope’s hatred and anger increased all the more. After convoking a council in Rome in August 863, he unjustly condemned Photius and recognized Ignatius as Patriarch, an action which reveals his inordinate love for authority. His depraved lust for power will be seen even more clearly when we come to the question of Christianizing, the Slavic peoples, especially the Bulgarians.
While Pope Nicholas in Rome schemed to realize his dreams for power and to subject the Church of Constantinople to himself, our Holy Father Photius, the Equal-to-the-Apostles, was performing in the East the great apostolic and evangelical work of God, for not only was he adoring the temples of God, putting the affairs of the Church in order, composing divine services, and battling against new heresies and remnants of old ones, but at the same time with his whole heart and soul, he devoted himself to the spreading of Christ’s Gospel among people who had not yet heard it. To that end, he, together with the Emperor, sent the two renowned Thessalonian brothers Constantine, his pupil and friend who was later renamed Cyril, and Methodius, a monk from Mount Olympus in Bithynia, to the Khazars in the South of Russia. There these blessed brothers preached the Holy Gospel with success so that, by 860, many of those pagans accepted the faith. Thus, Saint Photius began to Christianize the great Russian nation, sending them their first bishop and pastor. A little later, when emissaries of the Moravian Prince Rastislav came to Constantinople to request of the Emperor and Patriarch a preacher of the Gospel and clergy who knew the Slavonic language so that the evangelical faith and customs could be established among the Slavs in Moravia, the Holy Patriarch and the Emperor sent to them the same Holy brothers. Thus, they became the spiritual parents of all the Slavic peoples everywhere, for Cyril and Methodius and their disciples spread the Gospel of Christ, not only among the Slavs of Moravia but throughout the entire Balkans and surrounding areas. Only a year later, in 864, the Bulgarian Prince Boris and his people received Christianity from Photius. Boris’s godfather at his baptism was the Emperor Michael himself, so Boris took the name Michael. To the Emperor’s newly baptized spiritual son, Prince Boris-Michael, the Holy Patriarch sent written instructions filled with divine wisdom describing the obligations and the duties of a Christian ruler.
These great evangelical feats of Saint Photius, which were equal to those of the Apostles, begot still greater envy in malice in the power hungry Pope Nicholas. Since no one in Constantinople paid any heed whatsoever to the Pope’s condemnation of Photius, Nicholas grew all the more enraged, and he again sent the Emperor a slanderous epistle concerning the holy Photius. By cunning political schemes, the Pope induced the Bulgarian Prince Boris to separate from the Church of Constantinople and to receive the Roman clergy that Nicholas sent to Bulgaria. This malicious and uncanonical act he accomplished in the following way: To extend his authority over the newly formed Bulgarian Church and ultimately over the entire Balkans, the Pope sent many Frankish clergy and bishops who arrived in Bulgaria and immediately began to persecute the priests installed by Photius and to uproot Orthodox rites and dogmas. They refused to recognize the validity of the Orthodox priests and persuaded the people to reject them because they were lawfully married. These false bishops pretended not to recognize chrismation performed by the Orthodox priests, and they began to chrismate the people again. Out of opportunism, they relaxed the laws of fasting and allowed moral laxity. On the other hand, they instituted fasting on Saturdays as well as many other customs foreign to the Church, but the greatest evil they did was to begin to preach the newly devised Western heresy that imagines that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son as well as from the Father, heedless that they were corrupting the Holy and Universal Nicene Creed.
As spiritual father of the Bulgarians, Saint Photius, in his great zeal for the true faith and the doctrines of the fathers could not endure the crimes of the papal clergy committed with the consent of the Pope Nicholas. Accordingly, he made ready to do whatever was lawful to save his spiritual children, and, to this end, he determined that a council should be convened to settle the question. He sent an encyclical epistle to all the Eastern Patriarchs inviting them either to come or to send deputies to a great council in Constantinople so that, united, they could examine and condemn the heresy of Pope Nicholas.
In that epistle, Saint Photius wrote as follows: “Countless have been the evils devised by the cunning devil against the race of men from the beginning up to the advent of the Lord, but even after that, he has not ceased through errors and heresies to beguile and deceive those who listened to him. Before our time, the Church witnessed variously the godless errors of Arius, Macedonius, Nestorius, Eutyches, and of the foul host of others against which the Holy Ecumenical Councils were convened and against which our Holy and God-bearing fathers battled with the sword of the Holy Ghost. Yet even after these heresies had been overcome and peace reigned, and from the imperial capital, the streams of Orthodoxy flowed throughout the world, after some people who had been afflicted by the jacobite monophysite heresy returned to the true faith because of your holy prayers, and after other barbarian people such as the Bulgarians had turned from idolatry to the knowledge of God and the Christian faith, then was the cunning devil stirred up because of his envy. For the Bulgarians had not been baptized even two years when dishonorable men emerged out of the darkness, that is, the West, and poured down like hail, or better charged like wild boars upon the newly planted vineyard of the Lord, destroying it with hoof and tusk, which is to say by their shameful lies and corrupted dogmas, for the papal missionaries and clergy wanted these Orthodox Christians to depart from the correct and pure dogmas of our irreproachable faith.
The first error of the Westerners was to compel the faithful to fast on Saturdays. I mention this seemingly small point because the least departure from tradition can lead to the scorning of every dogma of our faith. Next, they convinced the faithful to despise the marriage of the priests, thereby sowing in their souls the seeds of the manachean heresy. Likewise, they persuaded them that all who had been chrismated by priests had to be anointed again by bishops. In this way, they hoped to show that chrismation by priests had no value, thereby ridiculing this divine and supernatural Christian mystery. Where does this law forbidding priests to anoint with holy chrism come from? From what lawgiver, apostle, father, or council? For if a priest cannot chrismate the newly baptized, then, to be sure, neither can he baptize. Or how can a priest consecrate the Body and Blood of Christ our Lord in the Divine Liturgy if at the same time he cannot chrismate with holy chrism? If this grace, then, is taken from the priests, the episcopal rank is diminished. For the bishop stands at the head of the choir of priests, but the impious westerners did not stop their lawlessness even here.
They attempted by their false opinions and distorted words to ruin the Holy and Sacred Nicene Symbol of Faith, which by both conciliar and universal decisions possess invincible power, by adding to it that the Holy Ghost proceeds not only from the Father, as the Symbol declares, but from the Son as well. Until now, no one has ever heard even a heretic pronounce such a teaching. What Christian can accept the introduction of two sources into the Holy Trinity? That is, that the Father is one source of the Son and the Holy Ghost, and that the Son is another source of the Holy Ghost, thereby transforming the monarchy of the Holy Trinity into a dual divinity. And why should the Holy Ghost proceed from the Son as well as from the Father? For if His procession from the Father is perfect and complete, and it is perfect because He is perfect God from perfect God, then why is there also a procession from the Son? The Son, moreover, cannot serve as an intermediary between the Father and the Ghost because the Ghost is not a property of the Son. If two principles, two sources, exist in the divinity, then the unity of the divinity would be destroyed. If the Ghost proceeds from both the Father and the Son, His procession from the Father alone would, of necessity, be either perfect or imperfect. If it is imperfect, then processions from two persons would be much more contrived and less perfect than procession from one person alone. If it is not imperfect, then why would it be necessary for Him to proceed from the Son also? If the Son participates in the quality or property of the Father’s own person, then the Son and the Ghost lose their own personal distinctions. Here, one falls into semi-sabellianism. The proposition that in the divinity there exists two principles, one which is independent and the other which receives its origin from the first, destroys the very root of the Christian conception of God.
It would be much more consistent to expound these two principles into three, for this would be more in keeping with the human understanding of the Holy Trinity, but since the Father is the principle and source, not because of the nature of the divinity but because of the property of the hypostasis, and the hypostasis of the Father does not include the Son, the Son cannot be a principle or source. The filioque actually divides the hypostasis of the Father into two parts, or else the hypostasis of the Son becomes a part of the hypostasis of the Father. By the filioque teaching, the Holy Ghost is two degrees or steps removed from the Father and thus has a much lower rank than the Son. If the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son also, then of the three divine persons, the Holy Ghost alone has more than one origin or principle. By the teaching of the procession from the Son also, the Father and the Son end up being closer to each other than the Father and the Ghost. Since the Son possesses not only the Father’s nature but also the property of His person. The procession of the Ghost from the Son is either the same as that from the Father or else it is different, in which case there exists an opposition in the Holy Trinity. A dual procession cannot be reconciled with the principle that that which is not common to all three persons belongs exclusively to only one of the three persons. If the Ghost proceeds also from the Son, why then would something not proceed from the Ghost so that, thereby, the balance between the divine persons would be maintained.
By the teaching that the Spirit proceeds from the Son also, the Father appears partial toward the Son. The Father is either a greater source of the Ghost than the Son or a lesser source. If greater, the dignity of the Son is insulted. If lesser, that insults the dignity of the Father. The Latins make the Son greater than the Ghost, for they consider Him a principle, irreverently placing him closer to the Father. By introducing a dual principle into the Holy Trinity, as they do, the Latins offend the Son, for by making Him a source of that which already has a source, they thus render Him unnecessary as a source. They also divide the Holy Ghost into two parts, one from the Father and one from the Son. In the Holy Trinity, which is united in an indivisible unity, all three hypostases are inviolable, but if the Son contributes to the procession of the Ghost, sonship is then injured and the hypostatic property damaged.
If, by the beginning of the Son, the power was thereby given to the Son that the Holy Ghost would proceed from Him, how then would his sonship itself not be destroyed when He, who Himself has a source, became a source of another who is equal to Him and is of the same nature as He? According to the filioque teaching, it is impossible to see why the Holy Ghost could not be called a Grandson. If the Father is the source of the Son, who is the second source of the Ghost, then the Father is both the immediate and mediated source of the Holy Ghost. A dual source in the divinity inescapably concludes in a dual result. Therefore, the person of the Ghost must be dual. Accordingly, the teaching of the filioque introduces into the divinity two principles, a Dyarchy which destroys the unity of the divinity, the monarchy of the Father.
Having explained here only briefly the Latin understanding, I believe its detailed presentation and refutation until we are assembled together in council. These so-called bishops thus introduced this foul teaching together with other impermissible innovations among the simple and newly baptized Bulgarian people. This news cut us to the heart. How can we not grieve when we see before our eyes the fruit of our womb, the child to whom we gave birth through the Gospel of Christ, being rent asunder by beasts? He who, by his sweat and suffering, revived them and perfected them in the faith suffers the greatest pain and sorrow upon the destruction of his children. Therefore, we mourn for our spiritual children, and we will not seize from this morning, for we will not give sleep to our eyes until, to the extent that lies in our power, we return them to the house of the Lord.
Now, concerning these forerunners of apostasy, common pests, and servants of the enemy, we, by divine and conciliar decree, condemn them as imposters and enemies of God. It is not as though we were just now pronouncing judgment upon them, but rather we now declare openly the condemnation ordained by the ancient councils and of Apostolic Canons. If they stubbornly persist in their error, we will exclude them from the communion of all Christians. They introduced fasting on Saturdays, although that is prohibited by the 64th Apostolic Canon, which says, ‘If some cleric be found fasting on Sundays or on Saturdays except the one great Saturday before Pascha, let him be defrocked and if he be a layman, let him be excommunicated.’ Likewise, by the 55th canon of the Holy Sixth Ecumenical Council which says, ‘Since we have learned that in the city of Rome, some during the great fast, in opposition to the ecclesiastical order handed down to us, keep the fast even on Saturdays, the Holy Ecumenical Council orders that, in the Roman Church, the Apostolic Canon which prohibits fasting on Saturdays and Sundays be followed exactly.
Likewise, there is a canon of the regional council of Gangea, which anathematizes those who do not recognize married priests. This was confirmed by the Holy and Sixth Ecumenical Council, which condemned those who demanded that priests and deacons cease to cohabit with their lawful wives after their ordination. Such a custom was being introduced even then by the Roman Church. That council reminded the Roman Church of the evangelical teaching and of the canon and polity of the Apostles, and ordered it not to insult the holy institution of Christian marriage established by God Himself.
But even if we did not cite all these and other innovations of the Romans, the mere sighting of their addition of the filioque phrase to the Nicene Symbol of Faith would be enough to subject them to a thousand anathemas, for that innovation blasphemes the Holy Ghost, or more correctly, the entire Holy Trinity. Having presented this matter before our brotherhood in the Lord, according to the ancient custom of the Church, we invite and ask you to come and join in council with us for the purpose of condemning these foul and godless teachings.
Do not abandon the order established by the Holy Fathers, which they, by their acts and deeds handed down to us as a legacy to preserve, rather straightway send your representatives and deputies, adorned with piety in the priestly rank, and by the goodness of their life and words, and by common concilliar decree, this new rot of iniquitous belief will be excised from the Church. Once we have rooted out this godlessness, we can hope that the newly baptized Bulgarian people will return to that faith they first accepted, and not only the Bulgarian people but also all of the formerly terrible people, the so-called Rus, for even now they are abandoning their heathen faith and are converting to Christianity, receiving from us bishops and pastors as well as all Christian customs. Consequently, if you now move to help erase this newly begun evil, then the flock of Christ will yet more increase and the apostolic learning will reach the ends of the world. With this purpose, then, send your representatives and deputies equipped with the authority of the Apostolic Thrones which you inherited by the Holy Ghost, so that these and all other matters be brought to judgment by lawful authority.
From the Italian region, we have received a conciliar letter citing many grave matters against the Bishop of Rome. Accordingly, the Orthodox there asked us to free them from his great tyranny, for in that area, sacred law is being scorned and Church order trampled upon. We were told this earlier by monks who came to us from there and now we have received many letters stating frightening news about that region and asking us to relay their message to all the bishops and to the Apostolic Patriarchs as well. For that reason, I communicate to you their request via this epistle. Once a Holy and Ecumenical Christian Council has been assembled, it will fall upon us together to resolve all these matters with the help of God and according to the rules of the previous councils, that in so doing a deep peace again may prevail in the Church of Christ.
It is necessary, moreover, to confirm the Holy Seventh Ecumenical Council to the end that all the faithful in the Church everywhere reckon and include that council as ecumenical together with the other six. For we have heard that in some places, it is not yet so counted, although its decisions are accepted and honored. This was the council that overcame and destroyed the great heretical godlessness of iconoclasm. Representatives of the other four Patriarchates attended its sessions. After they were all assembled together with our uncle, the Most Blessed Tarasius, Archbishop of Constantinople, this Great and Ecumenical Council crushed the antiChrist’s blasphemous heresy. Therefore, this council must be declared and numbered with the six preceding ones so as to show the union of Christ’s Church and deny the godless iconoclast of the claim that their heresy was condemned by only one throne. Thus, do we seek and propose as brother to brethren and we dutifully besiege your holiness and ask moreover that you remember our humble self in your prayers.”
The response of the Eastern Patriarchs to this epistle was to send their delegated representatives to the council, which the Ecumenical Patriarch had proposed. When the deputies arrived in the summer of 867, the Great and Ecumenical Council was convened with around 1000 bishops, clerics, and monks attending. Patriarch Photius presided, and the Emperor Michael was present. The Holy Council first examined the heretical teaching and activities of the Frankish missionaries sent to Bulgaria by Pope Nicholas. It condemned the heretical Latin teaching on the Holy Ghost, the filioque, and solemnly condemned all earlier heresies. Pope Nicholas of Rome was condemned, defrocked, and anathematized as the leader of this blasphemous heresy and the creator of discord in the Church. Also condemned was Nicholas’s lust for power, his pride, and his desire to rule the entire Church of God and subject it to himself. When the council ended, Patriarch Photius delivered a solemn thanksgiving for the victory of the Orthodox faith over all heresies, and he magnified the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, by whose grace the Holy Ecumenical Councils had been assembled and had exterminated the diabolical blight of heresy.
By this council, our Holy Father Photius and the fathers with him demonstrated that, without exception, all bishops of the Church, including the Bishop of Rome, are subject to the conciliar authority of the Church, especially when some new heretical teaching appears. A similar case occurred earlier before the time of Pope Nicholas when the Bishop of Rome, Honorius, was condemned by the Sixth Ecumenical Council for embracing the monothelite heresy. Honorius’s condemnation, moreover, was affirmed by the Seventh Council. Saint Photius dictum, “Everyone must know his own measure, pronounced that the First-Second Council of 861 and adopted by that council and entered into the holy canons, is applicable to the Pope of Rome. For in the Church of God, there is no other head than our Lord Jesus Christ who governs His Church by the Holy Ghost through the fathers and the councils.
At this time, the Emperor Michael had taken a certain Macedonian known as Basil to be co-ruler with him. In the beginning, Basil was the Emperor’s groom, but later he gradually gained the royal friendship and was elevated to co-ruler. But Basil yearned to become sole Emperor and, driven by a lust for power, he killed the Emperor’s uncle, Bardas. Not long after that, one night in September 867, he seized an opportunity to kill Emperor Michael himself, thus succeeding to the imperial power. And as soon as he had seized the sole rule, Basil bent all his efforts to safeguard the tenure of his ill-gained throne. Desiring to ensure his position at any cost, he intended to turn to Rome for support. Knowing that the Roman Pope hated Saint Photius and preferred Ignatius, Basil violently removed the godly Photius from the Patriarchal Throne and exiled him to an abandoned monastery on the Bosphorus called Skepis. After installing Ignatius again as Patriarch, Basil intended to establish relations with the Roman pontiff Hadrian who had been elected after the death of Pope Nicholas. At Hadrian’s instigation, Emperor Basil and Patriarch Ignatius in 869 summoned a council in Constantinople, to which the Pope’s emissaries came immediately. Even so, very few bishops attended since most of them had no wish to be present. Though invited, the exiled Saint Photius declined to take part in the council. Only when a representative of the imperial government sent some layman to bring him forcibly did Photius come, but he maintained a serene silence during all the proceedings. When asked why he kept quiet, he gave only this soft reply, “God hears the voice of those who keep silent.” The papal emissaries retorted, “But by your silence, you will not escape condemnation.” The Holy Patriarch responded, “Neither did Jesus escape condemnation by keeping silent.” After another long silence, the Emperor’s representative asked him, “Tell us, as is your right, Lord Photius, what you have to say.” Still calm, Photius replied, “My rights are not of this world.” Then they gave him several days in hopes that he would, so to say, “repent,” after which they summoned him again before the council, together with his friend Bishop Gregory of Syracuse.
On his way to the session of the so-called council, the saint leaned on his pastoral staff. Seeing what Photius was doing, the papal emissary, Marinus, arrogantly demanded that the staff be taken from him since it was a sign of pastoral dignity. This was done immediately, but the action neither angered nor sorrowed Saint Photius. To the papal emissary’s demand that both he and Gregory submit their written repentance, they answered him, “Let those repent to have something to repent of.” Once again, the Emperor’s emissary asked Saint Photius whether he had anything to say, he answered, “They brought us here already slandered. In view of this, what else can be said?” The council now turned to the question of the bishops who remained loyal to Saint Photius and had them brought to the court of judgment. One of these hierarchs, John of Heraclea, was urged by the papal emissaries to anathematize Photius, but John responded, “He who anathematizes his hierarch, let him be anathema.” Then the other bishops who sided with Saint Photius declared, “We cannot agree to this insanity.” Thereupon, the papal legates anathematized Saint Photius and his bishops and proceeded before the eyes of all to burn the tome and acts of the council held against Pope Nicholas in 867. Following that desecration, the false council now progressed to other uncanonical acts. Especially contrary to Church order was the extortion from the council by the papal emissaries of privileges of all kinds which no previous council had ever recognized or given to a pope. For this reason, this pseudo-council was soon recognized for what it was, and it was rejected by the entire Church. Only a few years later (879 and 880), this uncanonical council was publicly annulled by both the Roman and Constantinopolitan Churches at a lawful council, as shall be seen presently.
Meanwhile, the false council decreed that Saint Photius returned to his exile, where he spent the bitter days in solitude under a strict military guard. Although many of his friends, bishops, and clerics were also in exile because of him, the Emperor allowed none of them to dwell with Photius and even prohibited his having any books with him. From exile, the saint wrote to the Emperor that his sufferings had surpassed all usual limits since he was not permitted what even slaves are allowed, and he humbly asked that at least he be granted to read soul-profiting books. During the whole of his banishment, however, the saint of God never became despondent or permitted malice to enter his soul. At all times, he remained modest and at peace, steadfastly convinced of the great justice of God. From exile, moreover, he comforted his friends and his fellow sufferers as his holy predecessor on the throne of Constantinople, John the Goldenmouth, had done when he found himself banished.
Saint Photius wrote as follows to the other exiled bishops: “Persecution is hard, my brethren, but the blessedness of the Lord is sweet. Trying and hard is this exile, but joyous is the Kingdom of Heaven. These numerous misfortunes surpass all other troubles, but that joy and gladness lightened the hardship of our trials and become an occasion for gladness for those living for the sake of the hope from above. Therefore, brethren, let us endure these sufferings that we may be made worthy of the reward so that, with Paul, we may be able to cry out, ‘I have fought the good fight. I have finished the course. I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid out for me a crown of righteousness.’ What is more dear and joyous than this victorious Voice? What is stronger for shaming the common enemy of our race. I have finished the course. I have kept the faith, O Voice that calms every storm of sorrow and gives blessing to every spiritual joy. O Voice that drives all persecutor to fright and crowns the persecuted; that heals all the sick and sets aright all the fallen and stumbling. Would that I were worthy as you, my good fellow sufferers, to possess deeds befitting these words, worthy to cry out to the Lord in prayer and to our most Holy Lady and Mother of God and to all the saints. Amen.”
The great humility of the exiled Patriarch could be seen from the following event. In the year 870, a terrible and destructive earthquake shook Constantinople in its surroundings. Many pious Christians saw in this misfortune God’s punishment for the unjust exile of the Holy Patriarch. But they knew from history and from the lives of the saints that a similar incident had occurred at the unjust exile of the Holy Patriarch, John the Goldenmouth. Hearing of such talk among the people, Saint Photius told them not to believe it. “Who are we?” he asked. “Although we have endured untold hardships, nevertheless, we are nothing that could provoke such divine wrath.” Saint Photius also resembled the Holy Goldenmouth in that he was a great pastor, a gifted preacher, and a great theologian and father of the Church, not lagging behind him either in his way of life or in virtue. Like the Holy Goldenmouth, he gave thanks to God for everything. For just as the Holy Goldenmouth had said, “Glory to God for all things,” the Holy Photius similarly repeated “Glory to the Savior our God for all things.”
Thus, Saint Photius spent several difficult years in exile until the Emperor Basil began to change his behavior toward him. The honorable councils of the Patriarch Ignatius had much influence on the Emperor. The Patriarch’s conscience told him that he shared the guilt for the persecution of Saint Photius. He persuaded the Emperor to bring the saint out of exile and the Emperor did recall the Holy Photius in 873, bringing him to the royal palace and allowing him again to teach at the Academy of Magnara. Basil even entrusted to Saint Photius of the education of his sons, Constantine, Leo, and Steven. So it was by God’s grace that the two Patriarchs were reconciled, forgiving each other in a brotherly manner. Seeing that he was already close to death, the Blessed Patriarch Ignatius advised Emperor Basil to install Saint Photius as Patriarch after his own death. The blessed Ignatius reposed in peace on October 23rd, 877, and three days later, Saint Photius was returned to his Patriarchal Throne.
Saint Photius immediately inscribed the name of Ignatius in the Church diptychs so that the Blessed Patriarch Ignatius was numbered among the saints of the Church. Saint Photius immediately informed the Eastern Patriarchs and John, who was now the Roman Pope and a pious Orthodox man, of his return to the Patriarchal Throne. Saint Photius was pleased to learn that the new Pope did not confess the filioque heresy, and he allowed no change in the Symbol of Faith. For this reason, together with the Emperor, he invited the Pope and the Eastern Patriarchs to a council in Constantinople. A great council was convened in November 879, at which some 400 bishops gathered, including emissaries of the Eastern Patriarchs, Bishops Paul of Ankyra, Eugene of Ortis, and the priest and cardinal Peter represented the Pope. Saint Photius presided.
Unanimously, the Holy Council immediately recognized and confirmed Saint Photius with this declaration: “From the very beginning, we have been united to our Holy Master and Ecumenical Patriarch and have never been separated from him. We were ready even to shed our blood for him, but no one demanded that from us. Even those who were led into rebellion against him now condemn their former stand and frame of mind and, with all their heart and unwavering intention, now recognize him as their master, hierarch, and pastor. We consider those who still waver to be enemies of the Church and it is therefore necessary to sever them from her to this.” The Holy Patriarch answered, “Let God consign previous events to oblivion. As for us, let us find strength in forgiveness and not call wrongs to mind. It would be best to remain silent about these affairs or at least to speak about them only briefly and with restraint. Since we are sinful and insignificant people, it will be best to stay quiet about the enmity we caused only in the case of great needs should we speak about it at all.”
Then was read the letter of Pope John, which had also been signed by the Western bishops. In that document, John recognized Saint Photius and annulled all that up to that time had been done, written or spoken against him. Afterwards, the Holy Council passed this resolution: “We decree that the council, which was held in Rome in the time of Pope Hadrian against the Most Holy Patriarch Photius, and the council held in Constantinople against the same Photius are completely rejected and annulled and are not to be included or numbered with the Holy Councils. Neither are the convocation of bishops that took ill-note of Photius to be dignified by being designated by the title ‘councils.’ When these decisions were read, all the fathers present exclaimed, “So we all think, so we all proclaim, and we are in complete agreement. In this matter, Pope John had gladdened us more than anyone. For even before he spoke these words, we had annulled, rejected, and anathematized as uncanonical all that had been written, spoken, or done against our Most Holy Patriarch, and by so doing, we joined ourselves with him in the same holy communion and became his coworkers.”
Then all the bishops who earlier had been exiled and condemned for having been consecrated by Saint Photius were restored and recognized by the council. The entire council marveled at the wisdom and sanctity of the Blessed Patriarch. Metropolitan Procopius of Caesarea in Cappadocia said of him, “Truly, he that took on the responsibility and concern for the entire world is like unto our Archpastor Christ God,” to which the papal legates added, “And we who live on the other side of the world feel the same way.” Then, with one voice, the Holy Council exclaimed, “No one doubts that God dwells in him.” The Roman emissary spoke again, “The mercy of God and His inspiration is drawn to such holiness, to the pure soul of the Most Holy Patriarch so that he can enlighten and illumine all creation. For as the sun, though found only in the heavens, nevertheless brightens all the earth, so our Master, the Lord Photius, sits in Constantinople but brightens all creation and gives her brilliance.
At this council, other important questions were decided. Particularly important was the passage of a conciliar decree to the effect that no one could in any way alter the Holy and Ecumenical Symbol of Faith. Rather, the Nicene Instrument was confirmed and sealed, and all the godly hierarchs present declared, “By all means, let the Symbol of Faith of the Council of Nicaea, established and confirmed by all the other Ecumenical Councils, be also proclaimed at this Great and Ecumenical Council. The emissaries of Rome added, “As our Glorious and Great Emperor and God commands us, and as it is agreeable to our clerical brethren, it is appropriate that no new Symbol be composed. Let that ancient one, which is held and believed by the entire world, be proclaimed and again confirmed. The Most Holy Patriarch Photius then said, “By the decision of all our brothers and fellow clergy, let the Symbol of Faith be proclaimed.”
And then Peter, the God-loving deacon and first secretary read as follows, “Possessing the honorable and divine teaching of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, established in our minds by certain reason and purity of faith, and accepting and guarding that teaching by the infallibly correct reasoning of the sacred decrees and canons of His Holy Apostles and Disciples, and according to the most sincere and unwavering belief, obeying and holding to the unchanged inviolate doctrine and canons of the Most Holy Seven Ecumenical Councils which were guided and directed by the inspiration of the one and same Holy Ghost, we reject all those who were expelled from the Church, and we accept and consider worthy those who, being harmonious teachers of piety, have rendered due honor and true respect to the Nicene Creed. Believing this as we do and so proclaiming in both mind and word, we accept and to all loudly and clearly declare the Symbol of the Most Certain Christian Faith, which from the beginning has come to us from the fathers, removing nothing, adding nothing, embellishing nothing, distorting nothing. For both removal and addition, even if there be no appearance of heresy by the cunning of the devil, leads to the scorning of that which is not to be scorned and is an unjust insult to the fathers. To correct the words of the decrees of the fathers as a thing far worse still. Therefore, this Holy and Ecumenical Council, with love of God and with correct mind, accepting and duly honoring the ancient Symbol of Faith, and on it establishing and erecting the fortress of salvation, teaches all to believe and proclaim that which the Holy and Ecumenical Symbol of Faith says and confesses.”
Then is proclaimed the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Symbol of Faith without any addition or subtraction of words.
After the reading of the Symbol, the Holy Fathers again said, “So we believe; we have signed ourselves with the Sign of the Cross in this confession of faith, and by it, the word of truth conquers and destroys every heresy. We consider those who so believe to be our brothers, fathers, and co-inheritors of heavenly citizenship. Were someone bold enough to compose an exposition of faith other than this Sacred Symbol, which from the beginning came to us from our blessed and holy fathers, and then call it the Symbol of Faith, stealing the dignity of these God-inspired men and including it in their own private formularies and try to foist it on believers or on those returning from heresy as if it were common teaching, thereby audaciously distorting with either false words, additions, or subtractions the treasure of the Sacred and Honored Symbol, such a person we depose completely if he be a clergyman, and if he be a layman, we impose upon him an anathema in accordance with the already prescribed condemnation of the Holy Ecumenical Councils.”
And then again, all the Holy Fathers exclaimed, “So we all think, so we believe; in this confession were we baptized and received the priestly rank. As to those who think otherwise or who dare to substitute another Symbol for this one, we impose upon them an anathema.” This decree was, of course, enacted against the newly risen Latin heresy, which corrupted the Holy Symbol of Faith and denigrated the Apostolic and patristic teaching on the Holy Ghost.
Patriarch Photius never ceased to fight against God-hating heresies, be they Manichean, monophysite, or Latin (filioque). Accordingly, he wrote the Mystagogy, a treatise on the mystical teaching of the Holy Ghost in which the heretical Latin contrivances and blasphemies are unmasked, and the Orthodox confession of the holy fathers is defended according to which the Holy Ghost proceeds only from the Father as proclaimed by the words of the Lord Himself. On this same matter, he wrote to the Archbishop of Aquileia in Italy and to other bishops. When the Roman legates demanded that the Bulgarian Church be placed under the jurisdiction of Rome, Photius responded that, at present, there could be no discussion of that matter since the decision was to be left up to the pious Emperor. Even so, to prevent future, power-hungry Popes of Nicholas’s stripe from seeking authority over God’s Church, at Photius’s suggestion, the council enacted a canon according to which the Bishop of Rome could enjoy only those privileges which he canonically possessed up to that time, that is the primacy of honor. By this rule, the council forbade Rome to presume to extend or amend her prerogatives in any way, either at the present time or in the future, for God’s Church differs from worldly governments or authority. In her, the law and rule of the Gospel reign, “Whosoever will be great among you, let him be your servant, and whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant.”
So ended that Holy and Great Council called by Saint Photius, and its decrees and canons were recognized by the entire Church, East and West alike. Thereafter, our Holy Father Photius governed God’s Church peacefully and serenely for several years more, but at last, a time for him to be made worthy of the glorious crown of confession and martyrdom was at hand. When Leo succeeded his father, Basil, the new Emperor arrogantly removed the Holy Patriarch from his throne and imprisoned him in an abandoned monastery near Constantinople, where the saint spent the last five or six years of his long life tormented by persecutions and sufferings.
He drank, until the end, the cup of the confessor of Christ and, in peace, gave up his blessed soul into the hands of his Lord on February the Sixth, 891. His holy relics were later translated and enshrined in the Church of Saint John the Forerunner in Constantinople, in the vicinity of the monastery dedicated to the Prophet Jeremiah. Not long after Photius’s blessed repose, the Holy Orthodox Church ranked him among God’s saints and began to glorify his holy memory. Later, his holy name was inserted into the Synodikon, from which every year on the Sunday of Orthodoxy is read, “To Ignatius and Photius: Most Holy and Orthodox Patriarchs, Eternal Memory! To all that is written or spoken against the Holy Patriarchs Tarasius, Nicephorus, Methodius, Ignatius, and Photius, anathema!”
Even in the holy service in which the Church celebrates his memory on February 6th, Saint Photius is called, “Champion of Orthodoxy,” “Defender of those who believe rightly,” “Pillar and Foundation of the Church,” “An Instrument of Grace,” “Chosen Vessel,” “Divinely Sounded Harp of the Spirit,” “Fiery Orator,” “Most Wise Hierarch,” “Illustrious Teacher of the World,” “In word and doctrine, a trumpet which proclaimed the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father, even as the Son of Thunder had spoken with divine authority.” Most Steadfast Adversary of the Heresies, thou didst censure the error of heresy and defended the Holy Symbol of Faith against heretical additions and corruptions. O Great Photius, Most Holy Father, thou art illustrious in word, and the namesake of light.
Through his holy prayers, may the Lord have mercy upon us and save us. Amen.
