Page:Orthodox Eastern Church (Fortescue).djvu/381

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
THE ORTHODOX HIERARCHY
343

ex-Patriarch, Joachim III (1878-1884), but (it was said at the time) Germanos managed to get his name struck off too; so at last Anthimos VII (Metropolitan of Leros and Kalymnos) was elected. There was a tumult at his enthronement; the people wanted Joachim, and would cry "Unworthy" (Ἄνθιμος ἀνάξιος) instead of the proper form. Germanos had prudently retired to Vienna. However, Lord Anthimos began the reign in which he chiefly distinguished himself by his unpardonably offensive answer to the Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII (p. 435). In two years the popular party succeeded in having him deposed. The immediate reason was the affair of Ambrose of Uskub (p. 326), in which he was accused of betraying the cause of Hellas. No accusation could have been more unjust. The cause of Hellas is the one thing that no Œcumenical Patriarch ever betrays; he was only helpless before the Porte and the Russians. He did his best to keep his see. As soon as he heard that the synod wanted him to retire he suspended the leaders of the opposition and ordered them to go back to their dioceses. Of course they refused to obey. Poor Anthimos did all a man could. He went to the Yildiz-Kiösk and implored the Sultan to protect him, but the Sultan had other things to think about, and, on February 8, 1897, he went to swell the number of ex-Patriarchs, who wait in hope of being some day re-elected.[1] There were now three—Joachim III, Neophytos VIII, and Anthimos VII. Constantine V (Valiades) was elected Patriarch in April. Lord Constantine seems to have been one of the best of all the later Œcumenical Patriarchs. He set about reforming the education of priests, insisted that the services of the Church should be celebrated with proper reverence, and modified some of the incredibly pretentious etiquette which his court had inherited from the days of the old Empire.[2] There seemed no possible reason why he should be deposed, except that the parties of the ex-Patriarchs wanted their candidates to have another

  1. Gelzer saw him too, sitting on the same bench as his old rival, Neophytos VIII (o.c. ibid.).
  2. This was the Patriarch whom Gelzer saw in 1899, and of whom he gives a charming account (Geistl. u. Weltl. pp. 25-30).