Epistle on Pascha by St. Meletios I Pigas of Alexandria (+1601)

 Source: https://orthodoxmiscellany.blogspot.com/2025/03/epistle-on-pascha-by-st-meletios-i.html

To Sylvester, the Most Blessed and Most Holy Pope and Patriarch of the great city of Alexandria, Judge of the Universe, father and master in the Lord, [from] Meletios, the great Protosynkellos and Archimandrite of Alexandria [and future Pope of Alexandria], offering due reverence.

Correctly, truly, and piously did Basil the Great say in the First Discourse Against Eunomius that we live in silence if we are established in the patristic dogmas and traditions, with simple and uncurious faith, and this does not even require discussion. [1] He speaks of the fact that if we omit nothing from the patristic teaching and adhere to the path of the Holy Fathers, then nothing in ecclesiastical matters falls into disorder, and nothing hinders the goal of our salvation. And our firmest hope for salvation consists in our being taught to follow the ancient dogmas and traditions of the Fathers. But if any of the newly arisen teachers invent some new dogmas and teachings that please them (as it is said in Latin, omnia nova placent), [2] such teachers ensnare only the souls of fickle men, who waver as easily as a reed even at the slightest breath of wind, but in no way the souls of steadfast, pious men adorned with wisdom. For such men are "very discerning" [3] and see far ahead, knowing that from innovations, calamities and turmoil in the Church will inevitably arise in the future. For men of sound judgment perceive that all these disruptions of order in the Church and innovations of vain men truly result in disorder, internal strife, and the intrusion of heresies. Therefore, together with the Apostle, one may call the inventors of novelties the offspring of "vain talkers and deceivers" (Titus 1:10). I believe that God justly forewarned against this wicked inclination of human ambition when He commanded in Holy Scripture: "Ask your father, and he will declare to you; your elders, and they will tell you" (Deut. 32:7). If Arius had known how to ask questions of his fathers, he would not have burst forth with those blasphemies against God by which he committed blasphemy. If Macedonius had inquired of the elders, he would not have spoken recklessly about the Spirit. Why did the most impious Nestorius become so unrestrained? Was it not because he became an apostate from his fathers? And what shall we say about Dioscorus? Did he not suffer the same fate, having strayed from the straight path out of his unwillingness to confess with the fathers the same faith—the faith that aids us and is true, the faith of those who know and confess our Lord and Master Jesus Christ as one and identical in hypostasis, yet consisting of two distinct natures, united inseparably in an ultimate union? For the same Christ is both the Son of God and the Son of Man. He is consubstantial with God the Father according to divinity, and consubstantial with His Mother according to humanity. And the hypostasis is one, fulfilling the great mystery of the all-divine Trinity, for this hypostasis existed before the incarnation apart from human nature, and it is itself God. And it remains one after the incarnation, for it abides within the same bounds of the Holy Trinity, neither being stripped nor separated from the unity of the Holy Trinity, but with human nature it is entirely united in one hypostasis. For God the Word became flesh, yet the divinity suffered no transformation: God is immutable and is not subject to dissolution or mixture. The divinity is impassible, but He, remaining God as He was, became man as He had not been before: two natures coincided in one hypostasis unconfusedly, indivisibly, and inseparably. The Trinity remained the Trinity, for the hypostasis of the Son is one, [4] and the grace of the flesh is one, and therefore the hypostasis remained one even after the assumption of the flesh.

If Dioscorus had remained in silence within the patristic dogmas, and if in like manner every community of other heretics had known how to follow the Fathers rather than inventing new fabrications... For the Fathers, who instructed us unto salvation, neither saw, nor knew, nor taught, nor transmitted anything of what the heretics proclaim. And therefore, if the heretics had heeded the Fathers, they would not have introduced new teachings, nor would they have become leaders unto perdition for all those who believed them. They would not have divided the indivisible unity of the Church, that is, of all the faithful, concerning whom the Savior prayed to the Father, saying: "keep them... as one," and "that they may be one" (John 17:11). They would not have grieved the Holy Spirit, nor the depths of God's compassion, who "does not desire the death of the sinner" (Ezek. 33:11), but "desires all to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:4). Furthermore, they would not have sown such great scandal even among the pagan nations. For the pagans readily use as an excuse the turmoil in the Church, justifying thereby their own folly and unbelief, stumbling because of us and blaspheming the holy name of God (cf. Rom. 2:24). Behold the "noble and good" "achievements" of all innovations! And if such innovations appear even once in our universe, they will not only disturb our entire Church and our entire world, but will also offend the heavenly firmament, unsettle the incorporeal ranks of the heavenly hosts, and even grieve the most blessed and peaceful nature of God, provoking it to wrath. Therefore, we are burdened with countless afflictions, occurring daily and not diminishing. And if the ancient calamities, of which we have heard and which we know, have not convinced anyone, then much less will the new calamities, which press upon our Church from every side, serve to persuade them. The very state of affairs compels us to utter the words once spoken by the God-bearer David on another occasion. Everything we have heard and seen, we now witness in our days, when our sins have brought upon the Church fierce turmoil, the mockery of the pagans, and the sudden and unexpected upheaval of the entire world under heaven. And the father and progenitor of all these calamities is the most recent of innovations: the alteration of the Paschalion. It arose in ancient Rome, which does not stand silently upon the faith of the Fathers but follows its own faith. Rome has forgotten the words of the Prophet, who admonishes young men not to seek ambition, "not to boast by dishonoring their father" (Sir. 3:10). And if truly, as we are bound to do according to the word of the Savior, we must judge "the tree by its fruits" (Matt. 7:16), then in every case, the correction of the Paschalion is an evil tree, for it has already borne many evil fruits. I shall not even speak of the removal of ten days from the year. For this removal clearly does not correspond to our, that is, the ancient, calculations, as our received reckoning demonstrates; and in general, it is in no way possible to either subtract or add days.

But what is certainly outrageous is that the revision of the Paschalion has become the cause of myriad evils. It was followed by turmoil and agitation in the Church, the mockery of the pagans, disgrace before the holy Fathers, the leading astray and delusion of the children of the Church, and finally—rebellion and division, a very great rapprochement with Judaism, [5] and the wrath and indignation of God. Even if not all these calamities had occurred, but only one, would this present old age of the world and its "evil days" (Eph. 5:16) witness anything more grievous and sorrowful? What "fountains of tears" (Jer. 9:1), to use the words of Jeremiah, could lament such a great evil? What wailings? What lamentation? And was all creation, in its present extreme decrepitude, [6] yet prepared, at the very twilight of its years, to encounter such a rebellion against certain dogmas of the faith, such transgressions and blasphemies (though in both ancient times and now, has it not seen an unstoppable audacity of defiance!), and finally, such great contempt for the patristic traditions? Whence comes the hope upon your faces, O reckless ones? What is in your hearts? And you, with bold assurance, hoped to enter into that peaceful kingdom—how then did you voluntarily become the initiators of such great scandals? And will you be able to look the holy Fathers in the face there, if in former times you perverted their dogmas, [7] and now shamelessly renounced even their traditions? But, they say, the undertaken change of the calendar does not affect the faith, and therefore this innovation is harmless. O "hard-hearted children of men" (cf. Ps. 4:3—where it says "sons"), even if there were no harm in the innovation, but only some permissible alteration, in any case, there would be no benefit. And then, why are innovations needed? If the introduction of novelty does no harm, then its repeal will do no harm either. As the Apostle says regarding such neutral matters: "Whether we eat, we gain nothing; whether we do not eat, we lose nothing" (1 Cor. 8:8). If the innovation is not dangerous, then its abolition will not be dangerous. If it has harmed nothing, then neither will it harm anything in the future if it is annulled. And if the introduction of this innovation is fraught with danger, as every novelty is, then surely danger must be avoided. For, as Basil the Great said, "Even something small ceases to be small when it causes great harm." [8] But it is no small thing to trouble the Church and sow discord within it, to trample upon the traditions of the Fathers and to despise divine ordinances. God commanded: "Do not move the ancient landmarks which your fathers have set" (Prov. 22:28). There is nothing more pious and more justifiable than to agree with the Fathers and the elders in neutral matters, for what necessity is there to argue with them and to "jump and leap lightly along blooming paths"? [9] One should be ashamed even of the folk proverb, which instructs not to stray from the old path and not to prefer a new one. It would be patristic and sound to change only that which has deviated from the straight path and whose alteration does not affect the essence of the matter. But if the canon of the entire Church is affected, what can be said? Should we not completely and unconditionally reject all modern fabrications and adhere to the patristic tradition? Out of reverence for tradition and in fear, should we not "cease from investigating investigation after investigation" (cf. Ps. 63:7)? But you request, Master, that I set down some warning for our holy Church of Jesus Christ our Savior, by which it has been guided from ancient times. For the Copts say that your God-loving soul and apostolic heart are deeply contemplating, with great generosity, the establishment of salvific measures for their return to the Church. Both the present time and all future generations will see your deeds as a perfect exemplum [10] of the love that has always been inherent to Christians, as well as a remarkable zeal and effort in the salvation of those around you. And I myself, being in all things a well-wisher and zealot for all your intentions and concerns, O Master and Father in Christ, have resolved to show the same diligence that you have already displayed in many ways in the defense of the dogmas of Orthodoxy, leaving no faculty of soul or body idle, considering that the path to truth is accomplished through labors in the blessing of God. For this concerns the strengthening of the Church. I have defended the traditions of the Fathers as much as possible and have been an advocate of the holy Fathers, whom their own children now insult. As for the present question, considering all that has been said above, it is necessary in all things to follow the holy Fathers, and not the so-called "rules" derived from the precise observations of diligent astronomers. For it is not astronomers but the Fathers who are the instructors of the Church, as one of the hierarchs of the Roman Church recently stated regarding this whole matter. I did not wish, for the sake of brevity, to present here the ancient studies on this question. Especially much has been written on this subject by the wise Nikephoros Gregoras, experienced in astronomy, [11] whose works have now proven useful to the Latins. I am familiar with the ancient writings of wise men, which state that in antiquity there were many disputes over the establishment of astronomical periods: they all demonstrate to us the irregularity and inequality of the cycles of the sun and the moon—and, of course, these writings were known to the holy and God-bearing Fathers. Those who now refer to the unusual length of the year [12] clearly reveal nothing but their vain curiosity. They have devised a correction to the Paschalion, apparently unaware that in three hundred years their correction too will deviate from the course of time, and once again, astronomers will need to engage in astronomical research and speculate about further corrections, bound by the same necessity. And so, again and again, endlessly, new corrections will be required. In the preface to the Gregorian calendar, it is mentioned that the corrections were made according to the measurements and general cycles devised by Aloysius Lilius, the brother of Anthony, and that this calendar will serve impeccably for all eternity. This assumption will prove short-lived, for Gregoras had already studied this question long ago and, recognizing the groundlessness of the calendar, rejected his own proposal. They claim that precisely those corrections have been undertaken that will prevent the calendar from ever falling behind or advancing ahead of time, ensuring that always and forever the equinox and the full moon will fall on the same day, and consequently, the celebration of Pascha will never shift. But they are mistaken and make themselves objects of ridicule. In any case, after hundreds of cycles of the lunar calendar’s return to the solar, the advance of the calendar will accumulate into an entire day—something of which some are unaware. I consider it more just and more reliable to follow the wise and holy Fathers, who foresaw and foretold every discrepancy of time, and therefore handed down to us the canon, which we must preserve: we cannot celebrate Pascha before or together with the Jews. And it does not matter whether the Jews follow a correct or an erroneous calendar. Our Fathers, following the divine Apostles, as we know, could neither anticipate the Jewish rites nor coincide with Jewish worship. I believe it is better to heed them rather than men who remain silent about the deviation in chronology, which has not yet been revealed through experience and will not be evident until it reaches a significant magnitude after a certain number of yearly cycles have passed. When the Fathers established this canon, the deviation in chronology had not yet manifested, as it amounted to only a few minutes. But after about three hundred years, the deviation reached an entire day, and it became apparent that the equinox no longer fell on the same day as in previous years. The equinox occurs one day earlier every three hundred years, which also leads to a shift in the calculation of new moons. Therefore, if the current correction is supposed to result in a calendar that will no longer require future adjustments—unlike the calendar that had significantly deviated from the chronology of the time when the Fathers established the canon—can there be any justification for abandoning the Paschal canon of our Fathers and replacing it with another, which leads to the same deviations? The Latins, of course, deny and conceal this new deviation, simply by removing ten days. And by agreeing with them, we will legitimize future new interventions in the calendar, as is evident from the very invention of new methods for calculating years. Tell me, what is the benefit today of replacing the decision of the holy Fathers with these new calculations, only to abandon them tomorrow as well? Is it not far better to adhere to the canon of the holy Fathers and to preserve the apostolic decree never to celebrate Pascha before the Jewish Pascha, nor for us Christians to celebrate together with the Jews? The Latins can no longer uphold the apostolic prohibition, having introduced their latest rules for calendar correction. At times, they will be forced to celebrate before the Jewish festival, and at other times together with the Jews—this will be demonstrated by time and experience, the common accuser. For with their new correction, they transgress all the apostolic decrees. But they argue that the Jews do not strictly observe astronomical laws and that the date of the Jewish Pascha cannot be corrected. However, I affirm that the wonder precisely consists in this: whether the Jewish calendar is subject to correction or not, we, by following the patristic and most ancient canon, preserve without any violation the apostolic decree. What this decree consists of and how it is observed according to the canonical method of calculation can be briefly examined, omitting details and complex mathematical calculations contained in the ancient writings in our possession. We will recount only that which benevolent readers will deem sufficient for the proof of the truth. The canon of the holy Apostles states literally as follows:

Canon-Decree

If any bishop, presbyter, or deacon celebrates the holy day of Pascha before the spring equinox together with the Jews, let him be deposed.

This canon is also observed by the Latins. [13]

The purpose of this canon, that is, the decree and command of the divine Apostles, is one: the faithful must not celebrate the great and radiant day of Pascha together with the Jews. This canon contains two restrictions, which serve as calendrical guidelines. First of all, Pascha must not be celebrated before the spring equinox (the equinox is called "spring" to distinguish it from the autumnal equinox). The spring equinox occurs when the sun inclines toward Arctos from the southern constellations and, after the winter decline, which was the cause of cold, begins to illuminate our days with its radiance, thereby bringing forth spring. This same great luminary also forms the equinox in autumn when it inclines from the northern constellations toward Arctos, and thus the summer heat of the sun yields to the autumnal retreat of the day, gradually bringing in the winter cold. On these days, the night is equal to the day, like two horses yoked together. Thus, here is the first restriction: "before the spring equinox." And the second restriction: "not together with the Jews"—it is for the sake of this second restriction that the first must be observed. Besides these two apostolic decrees, the Church also observes two others: "after the first full moon" and "on the first Sunday." There exist versions of the Apostolic Canon in which all the conditions are given in a single phrase, as in the Arabic translation. In any case, this is precisely what the canon states. Thus, based on these restrictions, the Church commands Christians to celebrate Pascha after the first full moon on the first approaching Sunday. Then, without any adjustments, we use the calendar that we have and fulfill the patristic canon. If the full moon falls on a Saturday or Friday, then on the first Sunday after that, we do not celebrate Pascha, but Palm Sunday; and on the following Sunday, which will be the second Sunday after the full moon, we celebrate the radiant day of divine Pascha. It is necessary, I believe, first of all, to consider why the patristic canon is not used uniformly, and why we in no way transgress the Apostolic Canon but rather observe Pascha in accordance with the canonical decree of the holy Fathers. The Paschal canon, which we Orthodox follow, was established by the 318 God-bearing Fathers who gathered in Nicaea. As is well known, they formulated this canon and handed it down to the universal Church along with other ecclesiastical decrees. Therefore, we adhere to it and precisely "keep the traditions" (1 Cor. 11:2) of the Fathers, as the Apostle says, as sacred and inviolable treasures. It is evident that this canon of reckoning the days implies a shift of three days in relation to the state of the calendar as handed down by the Fathers. The canon of reckoning the days demonstrates that if the Jewish Pascha falls not only, for example, on March 30, but also on March 27, then a shift of three days must be applied. The reason for this is that the lunar cycle, which returns to the same full moons every nineteen years (a principle observed and understood by the Fathers, who accordingly established the rule of reckoning by nineteen-year cycles), does not bring the moon back precisely to the same full moons on the same days, hours, minutes, and seconds. A certain number of minutes are lacking, and over 304 years, this results in a discrepancy of one full day—though not exactly a full day, as it still lacks a smaller fraction of time (as stated by those who have studied this matter in detail). For this reason, over the course of 304 years, the nineteen-year cycles return to the same full moons, but each successive nineteen-year cycle advances slightly ahead of the previous one by a certain number of minutes, which, after 304 years, accumulate to form the length of an entire day—though even then, not precisely, as it still falls short by a smaller fraction of time, as already mentioned. This loss of a day will occur again over the next 304 years, and these nineteen-year cycles will already differ by one day. Finally, after another 304 years, they will return to the same full moons but with the loss of yet another day, so that in the next period, the deviation will amount to two full days, and the difference of one more day will continue to accumulate gradually. Ultimately, after 304 years, the same deviation will occur again, with the same fractional calculation of time.

Whoever wishes to examine this question with complete accuracy may refer to the works of the most-wise Psellos, who expounded Ptolemy and other most skillful laborers in astronomy, as well as to the writings of Isaac Argyros. Maximus the Great wrote an entire treatise on this subject. It was not possible to establish another canonical reckoning of days that would be free from the deviation described. As we already stated at the beginning, if one ignores minutes or fractions, then over 304 years, an entire day imperceptibly accumulates, which eventually becomes impossible for anyone to overlook. This is the cause of the apparent inconsistency—that is, the seeming error—of the patristic canon of reckoning the days. However, this did not arise from the holy Fathers' ignorance of astronomy, but from the inherent imperfection of measuring days, hours, minutes, and seconds, which the Romans began to calculate based on the movement of the two luminaries, that is, the moon and the sun. The annual cycle does not consist precisely of 365 days and a quarter of a day. Rather, it falls short of this number of days and hours by approximately one three-hundredth of a day, which over slightly more than 300 years shifts the equinox by one day. These fractions accumulate to form a full day over the specified number of years.

This can be illustrated clearly in the following table of equinoxes:

Year from the Creation of the World | Equinox

4756 | March 25
5056 | March 24
5356 | March 23
5656 | March 22
5956 | March 21
6256 | March 20
6556 | March 19
6856 | March 18

This flaw cannot be smoothed out, nor can it be avoided, for no one can alter or remake the nature of the stars, the luminaries, the celestial bodies, and the constellations, as this would mean the destruction of harmony and the transformation into chaos of that which the world-fashioning wisdom of God has fittingly arranged. This harmony throughout the world is in constant motion so that, as Gregory the Theologian said, we may measure the unmoving. [14] We have demonstrated that the flaw in the reckoning of days by the holy Fathers is not their fault but is due to the discrepancy in the natural movement of the luminaries as a measure of days and hours. For we calculate days and hours following the Romans, and as a result, every three hundred or three hundred four years, as we have already stated, a day is added. Thus, it remains to be seen how, if the reckoning of years by the Fathers is precisely this way, the canon of the holy Apostles concerning Pascha is observed without exception. The Prophet Moses—or rather, God through the Prophet—commands the sons of Israel in the twelfth chapter of Exodus to celebrate the Pesach, that is, the "Passover," on the fourteenth day of the first month (Exod. 12:6–27). First of all, it is necessary to determine the new year, then the first month of the year, and on the fourteenth day of that month to celebrate the Old Testament Pascha of the Lord. But the canon of the holy Apostles commands that we do not celebrate alongside the Jews; and to avoid this, it has been decreed to observe the equinox. We must celebrate the radiant day of the Resurrection not before the Jewish feast, nor on the same day, but later, so as to observe what is expressly stated. We must take into account both the equinox and the Jewish Pesach solely to ensure that we do not celebrate together with them and, even more so, that we do not anticipate their non-festal festival. The patristic canon of chronology teaches us to find the day after the equinox, that is, after the Jewish Pesach, after which the Church may celebrate the divine Pascha of Christ on the next Sunday. However, this rule regarding the nearest Sunday is not followed in all cases if we wish to adhere strictly to the patristic reckoning of years. For this patristic reckoning speaks of the full moon after the spring equinox, but this full moon, as recorded in the canon concerning the calendar, after a thousand years from the time of the canon’s establishment, has already shifted by three whole days. And if you follow this chronological canon, you will encounter cases where the lunar cycle is completed just before the nearest Sunday, on which, if one were to follow the letter of the chronological canon, Pascha should be celebrated. Let us give an example. The canonical calendar shows you that the Jewish Pesach will occur during Palm Sunday week. According to the canon, the Pascha of the faithful may only be on the following Sunday, but this does not coincide with the lunar cycle, which, according to the canonical reckoning, completes its cycle in Palm Sunday week (Lazarus Saturday). [15] However, in reality, it now occurs three days earlier, since the position of the luminaries has deviated precisely by this much from the calculations of the canonical calendar. And if Pesach is celebrated three days or fewer before the canonical Palm Sunday week, that is, during Lazarus Week, then you can uphold both the patristic reckoning and the apostolic canon, which commands that the faithful must celebrate Pascha neither before the Jews nor together with them. To do this, it must be arranged that after the full moon comes Palm Sunday week, and only on the following Sunday is the sacred Pascha celebrated. For according to the canonical decree of the holy Fathers, the apostolic canon must be observed with exactness. And what the ignorant call a flaw in the Fathers' reckoning of years—being unaware of the extraordinary aspects of the physics of celestial bodies—is, in fact, the clearest reason to uphold the apostolic canon. For we can relate to what was stated by the holy Fathers in the essence of their words, with an unclouded mind, and distance ourselves as far as possible from the unsacred festivals of the Jews.

Since the patristic reckoning of years is as it is and cannot be otherwise—as one of the most esteemed men has said, it "is not subject to correction, even if it is erroneous"—it thus preserves the Church from rebellions and turmoil. And the "error" in the reckoning of years is, in fact, the error of the Jewish Pesach. But we distance ourselves as far as possible from the false worship of the Jews, which is the sole purpose of the decree of the holy Apostles. It is impossible to create another reckoning of years that would fulfill all the necessary requirements of the patristic calculation. It must, in the most reverent manner, uphold all the decrees of the holy Fathers. And whoever dares to introduce a new reckoning of years into use will provoke only new disputes, disturb the entire Church, cause scandal among the pagans, and bring dishonor upon the holy Fathers. Thus, he will make himself guilty of such great evils and will stand condemned before the dreadful and righteous judgment of God, before whom not even the slightest scandal caused to anyone remains hidden, and where the guilty will face the watchful ranks of angels and severe retribution.

This is what we were able to record, Master and Father in Christ Jesus, in obedience to the command of your blessedness. We pursue the common benefit, and we seek to incline toward humility those who, out of their own malice and reckless vanity, intend to introduce changes, all for the glory of the Lord God and our Savior Jesus Christ, who has granted peace to the Church and, as an expression of His own will concerning Pascha, has appointed the times. [16] For in the lands of Egypt, on the banks of the Nile, near the Pyramids, there occur annual resurrections of dead bodies, beginning on that great day of the saving Passion within the week and continuing to appear until the completion of Pentecost. To what else can these events justly point, if not to the world-saving time of the Passion and Pascha, at which they were established? The all-foreseeing providence of God has ordained these occurrences in a land that has almost always flourished in impiety, so that all the impious might be given a sign of the universal Resurrection, and all those of sound mind—a sign of the Resurrection of our Savior. For to the former, it is doubtful that the dead shall ever rise again, but for us, it is absolutely certain when we celebrate the triumph of Christ’s Resurrection. One should not be surprised that God granted the Egyptians annual symbols of the universal Resurrection during the sacred days of the Savior’s Passion. We know from the letter of Paschasius to the great Leo, Pope of Rome, [17] that such a great feast was, among other things, marked by divine signs. For once, during the time of Zosimus of Rome, the Western Christians acted imprudently and, contrary to the position of the Eastern Christians, relying on their own votes and opinions, began to celebrate the feast of Pascha on a different day, thereby transgressing the rule that it must be celebrated at the time when, in Melitene, water miraculously begins to flow forth each year. When the Western Christians celebrated Pascha on a different day, a great multitude of catechumens, [18] awaiting the outpouring of the water, gathered together. But they remained unenlightened by divine Baptism, for the water did not appear. Yet after some time, when the Radiant Day arrived for the Eastern Christians, the water flowed forth at the appointed hour, thereby exposing the Western Christians, who had pursued vain intentions. In agreement with our reasoning is also the sacred column of dust that rises annually on Lemnos, an island of the Propontis, on the day of the Transfiguration, precisely at the beginning of the Divine Liturgy. We call it a sacred column because it appears by the will of God, near the church of the Savior, as soon as the time of the feast arrives. And the officials of the Italian authorities, appointed for this task, collect the dust that scatters from it and imprint its traces and impressions—what the Italians call terra sigillata. [19] We rest silently upon the patristic definitions, confirmed by testimonies and divine signs of our Savior, to whom, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, be glory, dominion, honor, and worship, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

[At the bottom of the page, in the hand of Theophilos, Patriarch of Alexandria: I am amazed that this most wise Patriarch has passed over in silence the testimony that surpasses all testimonies—namely, the Most Holy Light. [20] It shines forth annually, on Great Saturday, over the Life-giving Tomb in Jerusalem. Unless, of course, he deliberately chose not to mention it...

A(lexandrian) Ph(eophilos)].

NOTES

1. Meletios conveys the general meaning. In Basil the Great: "The tradition of the Apostles and the simplicity of faith are sufficient for us, and this requires no discussion, but, as always from the very beginning, it must be honored with silence" (29, 500).

2. Omnia nova placent – "All that is new is pleasing."

3. An expression from the first line of The Odyssey by Homer (about Odysseus).

4. The source of this expression is not established.

5. That is, the possibility of Pascha coinciding with the Jewish Pesach.

6. That is, at "the end of times."

7. That is, they introduced the dogma of Filioque.

8. The citation is not established; it is likely a free rendering of the thought of St. Basil the Great.

9. The poetic citation is not identified. The epic word tropos (atarpos) also means "route," "direction," or "way of life."

10. A Latinism used in the original.

11. In the original: "astrologers," a word that meant both astronomers and astrologers.

12. That is, not reducible to a whole number of days.

13. Further in the manuscript, space is left for the Latin text, which for some reason (perhaps due to the scribe’s ignorance of Latin?) is not included.

14. A quotation from the Moral Poems of St. Gregory the Theologian: "Everything moves so that we may find the foundation of rest" (780, 11).

15. The name for Palm Sunday Week as used in the Greek Triodion.

16. In the margins of the manuscript is written: "Note carefully and visibly all that the blessed memory Meletios speaks of, for to this day they still conduct themselves nobly, as I myself saw in 1612." Below this is a later note: "I believe this was written by Paisios of Alexandria."

17. A marginal note: "See: Tomos of the Second Ecumenical Council, folio 74."

18. Catechumens—those undergoing instruction before Baptism. They awaited Holy Baptism, which was usually performed at Pascha. According to this testimony, they were baptized in Rome in the water of this source.

19. Terra sigillata—"sealed earth" (Latin).

20. This refers to the descent of the Holy Fire.

Source: Александрийский том о праздновании пасхи 1595 года [The Alexandrian Tomos on the Celebration of Pascha, 1595], translated from Greek by Archimandrite Porphyrius Uspensky (Kiev: Printing House of the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra, 1865).

Online: https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Meletij_Aleksandrijskij/Poslanie-o-Paskhe/