On the day the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 epidemic a pandemic, [1] it became clear that all of humanity was facing dramatic changes affecting the free movement of people and the functioning of basic social life.
States initially applied different approaches to restrictions, gradually unifying measures to slow the spread of the virus and issuing strict orders for social exclusion and banning gatherings in one place. These orders automatically closed Christian churches in Western Europe. In the Balkans, secular authorities banned lay people from attending services (Greece, Serbia and Romania [2]). The Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem also closed its doors to pilgrims, as did the Holy Mountain and its monastic republic. In Bulgaria, Georgia, and Russia, churches remained open, but high-ranking officials urged Christians to refrain from public worship. [3] In view of the spreading contagion, the Moscow Patriarch Kirill also made a serious appeal, emphasizing in his sermon that Christians should not visit temples during this period. [4]
Moreover, there have been a number of debates both in the media and in church circles about whether the infection can be transmitted through Holy Communion. The most authoritative opinions were formulated as theologians. [5] These were the articles and speeches on the social networks of Archim. Prof. Kiril (Govorun), who claims that the possibility of infection through Holy Communion is real, that the virus is God’s creation and that the Holy Gifts are not illusory bread, but real, which sometimes molds: “Those who believe that the virus can not to be transmitted through the sacrament, proceed from the fact that the Body of Christ is absolutely good, and the virus is a contagion, ie evil. And good cannot transmit evil. But the virus is a contagion only for us, and not even for everyone, because most of us will transmit it without even noticing it. And so the virus is part of God’s creation. As a physical reality, the virus is as good as anything created in this world. However, they (viruses) can kill our body because it has not yet risen. Moreover, they can be transmitted through the Eucharistic Body of Christ (Holy Gifts), because viruses are not an ontological evil, but part of God’s creations. Such a particle is the Penicillium, with which the priests know very well that it can mold the Eucharistic Body of Christ. Christ’s, including the Eucharistic (Holy Gifts), is not subject to the laws of nature. “[6]
On the other hand, the opposite opinion was expressed by Prof. Prot. Nikolaos Ludovikos, who completely denies the possibility of infection through Holy Communion, based theologically on the action of God’s grace, which sanctifies and protects the one who partakes of communion: involuntarily (or hypothetically maliciously) mixed with viruses and microbes, the existing grace does not allow them to be harmful to the health of the believer precisely because, as St. Simeon the New Theologian points out, they are already a reality and presence of the Kingdom of God (cf. Christ: “And if they drink anything deadly, it will not hurt them” (Mark 16:18). An attempt to refute the allegations of Fr. Prof. N. Ludovikos made Assoc. Teodor Stoychev in his article “The Holy Eucharist is not a magical ritual” [8] as his position was close to the position of Fr. Prof. Kiril (Govorun).
The words of Father Prof. Govorun and Father Assoc. Prof. Stoychev represent a serious risk of making the Incarnation meaningless, as it is also the basis of the Eucharistic theology of the Church. Personally, I cannot agree with them.
Here I would apply the summary analysis of Fr. Dr. Chrysostomos Kutlumusianu, who writes: “When Christ is offered as bread, He does not change the nature of bread, but its” economy “. The human nature of Christ was passionate, but at the same time it was one with the Godhead, and therefore could not be embraced by death. And just as His body was dead and resurrected because it was not separated from the Godhead, so, when we receive this body, we anticipate the resurrection. Just as Christ suffers as a human being and yet acts as God, so the enlightened elements, although subject to “suffering” and decay, act upon us as uncreated divinity. “[9]
Thus, the foundation and identity of the Church cannot be a cause of infection, but can only be a cure for immortality (φάρμακον ἀτανασίς), as St. Ignatius of Antioch says. [10]
With regard to the infection of people gathered in one place due to the virulence of the virus, the following is observed. Despite the appeal of Patr. Cyril, in the Russian Church the question of whether temples should be visited en masse for worship during the Easter period was extremely acute. The disputes were ongoing by fierce defenders of the thesis that the danger of the virus is exaggerated. [11]
Unfortunately, some members of the Russian clergy denied the scientific data on the spread of the virus and its danger, as well as medical recommendations, and ridiculed them. [12] The clergymen in question called for mass participation in the services and denounced as unbelievers those who remained in their homes for fear of infecting themselves or infecting someone. They rejected the advice of the medical authorities not to kiss the icons, the cross and the hand of the priest, as well as to disinfect the Holy Communion spoon.
There were similar opinions in the BOC. On the door of the Sliven Cathedral was placed the inscription: “Zone free of COVID-19”, [13] and the Lovchanski Mitr. Gabriel declared that in the church “there has never been a transmission and spread of infection… There have never been epidemics in the church” and that a person can be infected only if his faith is weak. [14]
However, despite these statements, the first infections of clergy began, as well as deaths (in Russia, Patriarchal Secretary Alexander Ageykin, Ep. Veniamin Zheleznogorski, former Metropolitans Jona Astrakhanski and Kamizyakski died, and Ep. Milutin Valevski died in Serbia). The Kiev-Pechersk Lavra became a source of infection, and its trustee Mitr. Paul (Swan), who flatly and demonstratively refused to obey the appeal of Patr. Cyril and the Medical Council became infected. One hundred and fifty of his wards in the monastery fell ill; all the priests were infected. Three of the fraternity died (archimandrite, hierodeacon and monk). Unfortunately, the situation with the disease is escalating in other emblematic monasteries of Russian Orthodoxy, such as the Trinity-Sergius Lavra. In the monastery, perhaps the most tragic thing in the situation was that an infected novice set himself on fire in a state of affect and died from his burns. [15] Infected people were also found in the St. Elizabeth’s Monastery in Minsk and the Seraphim-Diveevsky Monastery. [16]
The rector of the Moscow Theological Academy, Ep. Pitirim (Cottage cheese). After his healing, he again appealed to Christians on social media not to come to the temple, thus pitying the bishops, priests and medics who die treating the sick. He emphasized that he was infected in the temple, and described the difficult situation in the Academy and the monastery. [17] “This whole situation has borne bitter bitterness. Some said the closure of the temples was a persecution of Orthodoxy, and suspected a global conspiracy. Beyond fantasies and fears, the reality is different and this is the pandemic. No one is forcing us to deny Christ, to deny the Eucharist, through which Christ reappears and is present in this world. In this situation, we as a Church are called to suffer a kind of sacrifice, non-participation for a certain period of time in the services, in order to overcome the obstacle to this participation – the virus that causes COVID-19. Unfortunately, through our fears and divisions, we were able to demonstrate our selfishness when we criticized, on the one hand, those bishops who called their children to stay at home and, on the other, those clergy who called people to come to the temple. The division was a fact. “[18]
While the infection of entire church communities in Russia is already a reality, partly due to the underestimation of the infection, in the Balkans (Serbia, Greece, Romania) this has not happened, mainly due to the imposed restrictive measures.
As for the Orthodox parishes in Western Europe, as early as March 18, 2020 (Wednesday of the third week of Lent) for those municipalities that belong to the diocese of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople due to the high risk of transmitting COVID-19 ordered the cessation of all public worship by the end of March, leaving the temples open for private prayer and the Stauropean monasteries to continue worship within the monastic community, but to close their doors to worshipers. All strictly follow the prescriptions of the health services. [19] These measures were confirmed and extended by a second communiqué of 31.3.2020. [20]
Despite the restrictions imposed, it is natural that worship services, although without the laity, did not cease to be performed during Lent.
The only ones who took part were a priest (bishop, deacon), a singer (psalter) and a cleric (or two singers), behind closed doors. [21] The unique situation in church history, in which millions of Christians remain locked up in their homes, during the most intense period of Lent, naturally led to the services being broadcast online on social media. Initially, individual parishes and monasteries began broadcasting daily worship, and then large patriarchal, metropolitan, and episcopal centers joined.
In view of the pandemic and the service, the Bishop of Pergamum gave an extremely valuable interview to the Serbian media. John (Ziziulas), who emphasized that the Church is impossible without its Liturgy (Eucharist); that it is acceptable for her to be served by a priest with two or three laity, but he describes the broadcast on the Internet or on television as ungodly. [22] In the conversation, the bishop advised the priests to regularly invite a limited number of lay people (laity) from the parish, and those who can not attend, to read the text of Easter morning in their homes, but without watching the Liturgy on the Internet. In this way, according to him, Christians can take turns five people a week (according to the requirements in Serbia, a maximum of five people can gather in one place). [23]
Unfortunately, in view of the restrictions in the various countries, the council of the esteemed Mitr. John (Ziziulas) turned out to be completely inapplicable. As for the Orthodox diaspora in Western Europe, almost everywhere Orthodox parishes use temples of the Roman Catholic Church or Protestant churches that were closed during the crisis. The majority of priests still have the opportunity to celebrate the Liturgy in their homes, in the circle of their relatives, and some of them, at the request of parishioners, broadcast it on social networks, fully aware of the theological problems of this, as parishioners themselves can not accept Holy Communion.
Such was the blessing of His Eminence Mitr. Anthony, who in his archpastoral message to the clergy, monastics and dioceses of the Western and Central European Diocese of the BOC (March 18, 2020) wrote: services and the Holy Liturgy in your home, only in the presence of your family. If possible, let them contact the members of the church community and inform them about the time of the service, so that at this time everyone can abide in common prayer. If possible, the services may be transmitted online. “[24]
All this raises a number of questions that we are trying to answer, and above all with the necessary humility. Obviously, we must accept that the Lord has allowed us not to partake of the Holy Mysteries for a period of time and to be grateful for His good providence for us. He knows best the reason for this assumption, but He also sees our desire to unite with Him. We must recognize the current impossibility of participating in worship as a kind of sacrifice, as crucifixion, as deprivation of something important that we cannot do without: we must realize that non-participation in worship is dictated by one goal and that is to save the lives of others, to we see ourselves as a possible threat to them and thus, by depriving them of us, we also protect them from the threat we pose to their health. [25]
At the same time, it must be emphasized that deprivation of the Eucharist is accompanied by special pain and deeds, as we realize that we are depriving ourselves of Holy Communion for the sake of the other in order to keep it from disease – something that sounds paradoxical outside the pandemic context. This makes the period of Lent and Easter even more difficult for us, and, like St. Mary of Egypt in the desert, we experience what it is like to asceticize without the consolation of the Holy Gifts.
If the situation with COVID-19 continues or a second or third wave is observed, the Church will have to find a solution to the impossibility of communion for the laity. If the temples are closed for longer periods, one option is to ordain more deacons to teach the Holy Gifts at home, as was the case in the ancient Church. On the other hand, I would like to apply the words of St. Basil the Great, who speaks of the communion of the laity at their own hands – something that can be applied to the economy during the pandemic: “And that it is not criminal at all. , if someone during persecutions due to the absence of a priest or minister (= deacon) necessarily accepts the Communion with his own hand, it would be superfluous to prove, because the centuries-old custom shows it in action. As all those who are silent (monastic) in the deserts, where there is no priest, keeping Communion in their home, join themselves. And in Alexandria and Egypt, each of the laity most often has Communion in his home and joins himself when he wants. Since, once a priest has performed and taught the Sacrifice, the one who has accepted it as whole, by partaking of the sacrament daily, must justly believe that he has accepted and partook of the Sacrifice by the one who has taught it. As in the Church the priest teaches a part, and the recipient with full right holds it and thus with his own hand puts it to his mouth. Because it has the same power whether one of the priests accepts one part or many parts at the same time. “[26]
The purpose of the quarantine and the inability to gather should bring gracious repentance so that we can realize what the Liturgy really is for us. [27] Let us understand that so far we have had the awareness of the Eucharist as a given, that we have often been irresponsible in our preparation.
But this whole situation could not overshadow this year’s Easter holiday, which was unique. The real threat of the virus made the weaknesses of our unbelief exposed, our faith in the omnipotence of science and medicine, our faith in ourselves and our own strength collapsed, that is, we humbled ourselves and wanted to be with Christ.
When the Lord Jesus Christ heals physical illness, He wants to heal man from death (physical, spiritual). He does not come only as a healer, but as one who raises the dead – the daughter of Jairus (Luke 8: 41-56), the son of a widow (Luke 7: 11-17), the four-day-old Lazarus in the tomb (John 11: 1- 57). He comes to defeat our enemy, the last enemy – death (1 Cor. 15:26). Therefore, no matter how difficult it is for us, we must not have reason to be afraid. It is extremely important now, during this pandemic, and then to base our lives on the gospel, on the person of Christ, who gave us the opportunity to participate in His life.
Thus, the fact of the Resurrection gives us the answers to all questions. Christ conquered death – being eternal, he humbled himself completely and accepted death in order to destroy its very essence. He allowed it to pass through Him to destroy it. In this way He has answered the most essential existential search for our being, and that is to live without fear of death. The martyrs and ancient Christians undoubtedly remain an example of such a life for us.
In 262 there was a civil war in Alexandria, and at the same time persecution of Christians and plague. It was the time of Lent, and St. Dionysius of Alexandria wrote letters to Christians: “Soon famine and plague were added to the scourge of the Civil War.” Many of our brothers, out of an abundance of mercy and brotherhood, did not feel sorry for themselves and supported one another, fearlessly visiting the sick, serving them fearlessly, caring for them for Christ’s sake, dying joyfully together, filled with the suffering of others. relatives and voluntarily took on their sufferings of martyrdom… It was completely different for the pagans, the sick drove them out of the house, threw out their loved ones, took the half-dead out into the street, left the corpses without burial – they were afraid of death. “[28]
The example quoted above shows what we should be and what our ideal should be. It is not a question of voluntary infection, but of not being afraid of death, of loving our neighbor even during a pandemic, and of rejoicing. This means responding to the angel’s wonderful greeting to the myrrh-bearing women who came to anoint the dead body of Jesus, and then to the greeting of the Risen Lord Himself, Who appears and tells them, “Rejoice” (Matt. 28: 9).
Therefore, even in these sorrows, our joy must be complete, and if we do not have joy, then we certainly trust in something other than Christ. Let us remember that nothing can separate us from His love, nothing can separate us from Him, because He rose from the dead and with His death overcame death, and He did this for us.
* The text was written through the prism of a priest who performs his ministry in Western Europe.
This text was first published in the journal Christianity and Culture, no. 4 (151), 2020, pp. 5-12.
[1] This happened on March 11, 2020.
[2] On March 22, the Romanian Orthodox Church decided that services should be held behind closed doors, without the participation of lay people, after consultations and on the recommendation of the state authorities.
[3] The Metropolitan of Plovdiv also issued such an appeal. Nicholas, followed by Metropolitans Nahum, Anthony and Cyprian. See: Address of the Metropolitan of Plovdiv Nikolay to the clergy and the flock of the Savior of the Diocese of Plovdiv – plovdivskamitropolia.bg, March 19, 2020
[4] See: Patriarch Kirill urged to refrain from visiting temples – https://ria.ru, March 29, 2020
[5] From the town of θεολογούμενον – theological opinion, which is based more or less on the tradition of the fathers, but does not have the character of a conciliar definition.
[6] See: Gazeta.ua.
[7] See: Ludovikos, N. “On Communion during an Epidemic” – In: Orthodoxy.bg.
[8] Stoychev, T. “The Holy Eucharist is not a magical ritual” – In: Doors of Orthodoxy.
[9] See: Koutloumousianos, C. “The Bread, the Wine, and the Mode of Being” – In: Public Orthodoxy.
[10] Ephesians 20 – PG 5, 756A.
[11] The so-called “covid dissidents” or “virus dissidents” by Sergei Chapnin – according to the definition of Archdeacon Andrei Kuraev
[12] At the sermon of Fr. Andrei Tkachev came out among the believers with a gas mask – see: “Priest Andrei Tkachev came to preach in a gas mask for the sake of hype and new subscribers” – In: YouTube.
[13] See: Dariknews.bg.
[14] See: Mediapool.bg.
[15] See: “The novice of the courtyard of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra committed suicide” – In: RIA Novosti.
[16] See: “Russia offers humanitarian aid to the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra” – In: Doors of Orthodoxy.
[17] “The second and most important lesson of the pandemic. I have been widely criticized for urging people not to visit temples during the epidemic. They even asked for “concrete evidence” that I was infected in the temple and not elsewhere. At the moment the anamnesis of the disease is precisely established, let’s try to trace the genesis. Throughout the past Lent, I celebrated all the liturgies. Herod has served with me for the past week. Innocent and the newly ordained monk Micah – the most zealous. Innocent fell ill first, followed by me and then Micah. Among the first covid patients at the academy was a master’s student who sang in laurels. Most students became infected in choirs, where the conditions for the spread of the infection are ideal. The priests took a lot of risks and risk taking a confession. Infected are those who risk more than others, who do not flee from the people, who humbly sacrifice themselves to the disease with the faint hope that the sick parishioners have remained at home. But those hopes were dashed. See the whole address here: “The Rector of the Moscow Theological Academy Ep. Pitirim after his healing: Have mercy on your bishops and priests “- In: Doors of Orthodoxy.
[18] This split was also contrary to the words of the apostle, who says: “I beseech you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, spirit and in one thought ”(1 Cor. 1:10).
[19] See: thyateira.org.
[20] See: thyateira.org.
[21] To this day on Mount Athos there is a practice in separate cells inhabited by stricter ascetics to celebrate the Holy Liturgy in the presence (with the participation) of two or three monks.
[22] Nikola Stanković, Metropolitan John (Ziziulas): “The Church without the Holy Eucharist is no longer a Church” – In: Orthodoxy.bg.
[23] Ibid.
[24] “Archpastoral Message to the Clergy, Monasticism and Dioceses of the Western and Central European Dioceses in Connection with the COVID-19 Pandemic” – In: Official Website of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church – Bulgarian Patriarchate.
[25] From the beginning of the pandemic and the first tests, it was known that most of those infected had no symptoms at all, but at the same time they released the virus into the environment and there was a significant risk of infecting those around them.
[26] Letters 93, To the Patriarch of Caesarea, “On Communion” – PG 32, 483B-485A (my translation of: ђevtiђ, A. Divine Liturgy, 1, p. 94).
[27] This impossibility of common worship should also tell us about the tragedy in the context of the interruption of communication between the Moscow Patriarchate and Constantinople and the supporters of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine.
[28] See: Eusebius of Caesarea, Church History (7, 22, 1-12), St. Petersburg. 2013, pp. 337-341.
________________________________________
Written by Fr. Dobromir Dimitrov, Bulgarian Orthodox Church
Transation: Petar Gramatikov
Short address of the original publication in Bulgarian: https://dveri.bg/6ur6h
