Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T02:28:45.542Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Metropolitan Pavlos Menevissoglou (1935–2022)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2023

Dimitrios Nikiforos
Dimitrios Nikiforos*
Affiliation:
Director of the Private Office of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Information

Type
Obituary
Information
Ecclesiastical Law Journal , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , January 2023 , pp. 126 - 138
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Ecclesiastical Law Society 2023

On 17 February 2022, the Ecumenical Patriarchate announced with sorrow but also with faith in the resurrection the falling asleep in the Lord of His Eminence Metropolitan Pavlos Menevissoglou,Footnote 1 who had passed away the day before at the age of 87. The deceased was not only a prominent Hierarch of the Church of Constantinople, but also a prolific scholar of Ecclesiastical and Canon Law. The purpose of this obituary is to shed light on the significant contribution of the late Metropolitan to the study of the history of the Eastern Orthodox canonical tradition.

Metropolitan Pavlos was born as Konstantinos Menevissoglou on 27 November 1935,Footnote 2 in Makrohorion (Bakırköy) on the European side of Istanbul, Turkey, where he completed his elementary and the first two years of his secondary education. In 1950, he entered the Theological School of the Ecumenical Patriarchate on the island of Halki (Heybeliada), one of the Princes’ Islands in the Sea of Marmara, where he studied for eight years: four years at high school level (1950–1954) and four years at the Theological Seminary (1954–1958). While he was in the second year of his theological studies, on Sunday 1 April 1956 he was ordained to the diaconate and received the ecclesiastical name Pavlos (Paul). In 1958, he graduated with the highest distinction from the Theological School of Halki, receiving the title of ‘Teacher of the Orthodox Christian Theology’,Footnote 3 after successful submission and defence of his bachelor's dissertation, entitled ‘The Monastic Life according to St Basil’.Footnote 4

The above-mentioned 80-page unpublished dissertation could be considered as the first study of the young deacon Pavlos in the field of Canon Law. Despite the fact that it was written not under the supervision of Halki Seminary's Professor of Canon Law, Fr George Anastasiades, but under the guidance of the Seminary's Professor of New Testament, Konstantinos Kallinikos,Footnote 5 whose influence can be traced especially in the selection of the dissertation's theme and title,Footnote 6 as well as in its first chapter about the formation and development of monasticism,Footnote 7 Pavlos was still able to manifest his great interest for the study of Church Law. The phrase ‘monastic life’ in the title of his dissertation is often replaced in the main text of his work by the notion ‘monastic polity’,Footnote 8 a clear choice in favour of an analysis of the monastic ordinances found in Basil's Ascetica, as well as in his ‘clauses in length’ (ὅροι κατὰ πλάτος) and ‘in epitome form’ (ὅροι κατ᾽ ἐπιτομήν),Footnote 9 not from a moral but from an institutional point of view, as ecclesial regulatory instruments. This is precisely how these texts are treated in the modern literature of Eastern Canon Law, despite the fact that they have never been officially recognised as part of the corpus canonum of the Orthodox Church.Footnote 10

Pavlos’ originality in his bachelor's dissertation becomes more evident after a close look at the bibliographical catalogue at the end of the work,Footnote 11 where one can see how limited the secondary literature on this subject was in the late 1950s, and how artfully he analysed the above-mentioned primary sources, creating thus a small treatise on the fourth-century Basilian monastic institutions, which are frequently termed as ‘legislation’ by Pavlos.Footnote 12 Indeed, the two-partite structure of his dissertation on ‘the monasteries and their administration’ (part I)Footnote 13 and on ‘the personality of the monks’ (part II)Footnote 14 brings to mind contemporary legal monographs about the ‘Law of the Monastics’, more generally, or the ‘Law of Mount Athos’, in particular. Therefore, deacon Pavlos was very modest in his Prologue, when he characterised his work as a ‘rudimentary’Footnote 15 piece. He was cognisant, though, of the fact that the main purpose of the bachelor's dissertation was to immerse him into the method of scholarly academic writing and to assist him in ‘future scientific studies’.Footnote 16 Indeed, the young graduate of Halki would devote his entire clerical life to the service of the Church and of the canonical discipline.

Immediately after his graduation, Pavlos was hired at the headquarters of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Phanar, Istanbul, where he served with great dedication for 16 years, first as secretary of Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras of blessed memory (July to December 1958), then as secretary in the Chief Secretariat of the Holy and Sacred Synod (December 1958 to April 1964), briefly as Codicographer (Clerk) (April to July 1964), later as Undersecretary (July 1964 to November 1970) and finally as Chief Secretary of the Synod (November 1970 to April 1974). Since the position of Chief Secretary is reserved for presbyters and not for deacons, immediately after his appointment, Pavlos was ordained to the priesthood on 30 November 1970, the feast of St Andrew, patron Saint of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, and a few days later, on 4 December 1970, he was tonsured Archimandrite by Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras.

The ministry at the Chief Secretariat requires excellent command of katharevousa Greek,Footnote 17 and the Chief Secretary has to be also well-versed in the Eastern Orthodox canonical tradition. Pavlos had learned at Halki Seminary a high level of katharevousa, as can be testified from all his writings, which are linguistic masterpieces. However, he realised from an early point the need to also receive advanced training in Canon Law. For this reason, in parallel with his administrative duties at the Chief Secretariat, he continued his theological studies at the School of Theology of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, where he submitted and defended his doctoral thesis in June 1972, receiving the title of ‘Doctor of Theology’ with distinction on 27 January 1973, while he was Chief Secretary.

Interestingly enough, though, he chose a topic for his thesis not purely in the field of Canon Law, but actually in its intersection with Liturgical Theology: ‘The Holy Myrrh in the Eastern Orthodox Church, Especially in Accordance with the Sources and the Practice of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Modern Times’.Footnote 18 The Holy Myrrh,Footnote 19 a concentrated aromatic oil brewed from a variety of fragrant substances (in total 57), symbolising the diverse gifts of the Holy Spirit, is used in the Eastern Church mainly in the sacrament of chrismation, i.e. confirmation, which is celebrated together with the sacrament of baptism in a single rite,Footnote 20 as well as in the service for the reception of converts and penitents, but also for the consecration of holy altars and dedication of holy temples. Based on the Orthodox canonical tradition, the sanctification of the Holy Myrrh is a prerogative of the Ecumenical Patriarch, with the special service taking place approximately every ten years at the Patriarchal Church of St George in Phanar, on Holy Thursday morning, during the Divine Liturgy, while the preparation of the chafing of the Myrrh begins on Holy Monday and concludes on Holy Wednesday.

The selection of this particular topic by Pavlos, under the supervision of the renown Professor of Liturgics Ioannis M Foundoulis,Footnote 21 was made precisely in connection with the needs of his ministry at the Chief Secretariat, since, as he explains in the Prologue of his thesis, his participation in the Synodal Committee for the preparation of new Holy Myrrh in 1970 made him realise the lack of specialised studies not only on the subject of the consecration of the Myrrh, but also on its history, theology and ecclesiology.Footnote 22 For this reason, he decided to write his doctorate on this theme.

Pavlos’ thesis consists of four chapters. The first two deal with liturgical issues: the composition and consecration of the Holy Myrrh,Footnote 23 while the last two are focused on canonical matters: the ‘law of the consecration of the Holy Myrrh’, as well as its various usages.Footnote 24 In these last two chapters Menevissoglou reveals his qualities as skilled canonist, with his clarity of thought and expression, thoroughness of analysis, and attention to detail. Especially in the third chapter, Chief Secretary Pavlos shows his mastery of this subject by proficiently explaining how the right of consecration was exclusively reserved from the early centuries of Christianity only to bishops, later to the primates of the local Orthodox Churches and finally only to the Ecumenical Patriarch. Despite the fact that the defence of this special responsibility of His All-Holiness would seem natural for a clergyman of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, Menevissoglou's analysis is characterised by objectivity, as it is based on primary sources mainly from the Minutes of the Holy and Sacred Synod, as well as from documents found in the Patriarchal Archives.

Pavlos’ doctoral thesis was published in the series ‘Analecta Vlatadon’ (No. 14) of the Patriarchal Institute for Patristic Studies (Thessaloniki) in 1972, receiving acclamatory reviews,Footnote 25 and it soon came out in print. The demand for new copies of this book was particularly increased in 1983, due to the decision of the Holy and Sacred Synod to consecrate new myrrh during Holy Week of that year, and led to its reprint by the same press.

Menevissoglou's interest for this topic remained unwavering, and in the following years he published in academic journals and yearbooks a series of smaller studies, which he later re-worked and compiled, together with other unpublished articles that he had written on the same subject, in a volume entitled ‘Studies on the Holy Myrrh’ (Athens, 1999).Footnote 26 This book contains 12 papers which deal with issues either not covered in his thesis or mentioned only briefly and unsystematically there.Footnote 27 For this reason, Pavlos regarded the 1999 edition as a necessary supplement, as a second volume, to his doctorate, especially in those cases, where, following newer scholarly findings, he changed the opinion that he had initially expressed in his thesis.Footnote 28 Menevissoglou received positive feedback about this volume, among others by Professor Foundoulis,Footnote 29 his doctoral supervisor, who praised his former student for his academic accomplishments.

Despite the fact that the subject of the Holy Myrrh remained dear to Pavlos's heart throughout his life and he continued publishing articles on this topic even after 1999,Footnote 30 there was a gradual shift in the themes of Menevissoglou's scholarly interest, with the selection of themes purely in the field of Canon Law, following his election by the Holy and Sacred Synod as Metropolitan of Sweden and all Scandinavia on 30 April 1974, and his episcopal consecration on 12 May 1974. The determining factor for this change was his enrollment at the Law School of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, shortly after the completion of his doctoral studies. The decision of Pavlos to supplement his theological formation with legal training testifies to his belief that a true canonist has to combine the pastoral sensitivity of the theologian with the legal precision of the lawyer, since Canon Law is par excellence the subject of confluence of law and theology.

In 1977, the year of his graduation from the Law School, Menevissoglou published the ‘most legal’ of his studies on the topic ‘Religious divorce and Spiritual Dissolution of Marriage Abroad’.Footnote 31 In this article, Pavlos deals with the issue of the ecclesiastical dissolution of marriage in the cases of pre-existing judicial decisions of divorce, providing legal solution to a canonical problem with significant pastoral implications. This study was warmly welcomed by other Metropolitans of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Europe, facing the same administrative problem,Footnote 32 and its great demand led to its publication as a special offprint.

However, the main bulk of Metropolitan Pavlos’ publications from 1974 onwards was early versions of sections from his magnum opus ‘An Historical Introduction to the Canons of the Orthodox Church’, printed in 1990 as publication of the Holy Metropolis of Sweden and all Scandinavia,Footnote 33 to which the monograph was dedicated on the occasion of the twentieth anniversary since the Metropolis’ establishment (1969–1989).Footnote 34 The drafting of this study, which lasted almost a decade, covered a serious lacuna in the history of the formation of the Orthodox canonical tradition. In 653 pages, Menevissoglou provided an extensive critical survey of the development of the main Eastern collections, as well as of all the core sources of the Byzantine corpus canonum. Despite the fact that in some of its outcomes, in particular in the chapter about the Apostolic Canons, Pavlos’ research has been superseded by newer scientific findings,Footnote 35 it still remains classic reading and a must for any serious scholar of Orthodox Canon Law.Footnote 36 Indeed, Menevissoglou's ‘Historical Introduction’ is a constant reference point in all the subsequent literature in this field, with multiple citations, as well as a source of admiration for the scientific thoroughness and accuracy of its author. This work has been a true landmark in the study of the sources of Eastern Canon Law, as it was highlighted in the many glowing reviews that were published shortly after its circulation,Footnote 37 among others by Metropolitan Pavlos’ Professor and supervisor at Halki Konstantinos Kallinikos, who expressed his praise and gratitudeFootnote 38 to his former student for this ‘rare, seriously scientific, well-documented, well-written … manual, which will have permanent and long-lasting life’.Footnote 39

Menevissoglou's publications in the area of the history of the sources of Canon Law continued with a gap of 16 years, since his next book was printed in 2006,Footnote 40 followed by another three, which were consecutively published in the years 2007,Footnote 41 2008Footnote 42 and 2009.Footnote 43 In all these treatises Pavlos deals with the first printed editions of the Eastern corpus canonum in the West during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuriesFootnote 44 and the influence that they exerted on the post-Byzantine Greek collections of canons, which started making their appearance in the eighteenth centuryFootnote 45 and continued throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.Footnote 46 The Metropolitan did not fail to also cover the manuscript tradition from which the above-mentioned Western and Greek canonical collections of the Eastern canonical corpus were derived, by presenting in great detail two ‘precious manuscripts of sacred canons (Patmos 172 – Athens 1372)’ that were the basis for all these modern editions.Footnote 47

With the above-mentioned books Pavlos made a significant scholarly contribution to a greatly under-studied and even neglected area in the history of the Eastern Orthodox canonical tradition. All these four publications should be regarded as part 2 of Menevissoglou's ‘Historical Introduction’, not simply in terms of content, but primarily because this was the intention of their author, whose original planning was the chapters of these volumes to be included in his 1990 monograph. Nevertheless, the realisation that the addition of such a substantial number of pages to an already 653-page-long study would make it unhandy and impractical, prevented him from carrying on with his initial planning. Instead, the chapters from these books, in most of the cases, appeared first in academic journals as separate studies,Footnote 48 and after the encouragement of Metropolitan Professor Dr Grigorios (Papathomas) of Peristerion, they were re-worked by Metropolitan Pavlos and published as separate volumes in the series ‘Nomocanonical Library’, which is directed by Papathomas.

In this same series also appeared in 2013 the last publication of Menevissoglou in the field of Canon Law, the ‘Lexicon of the Sacred Canons’,Footnote 49 a concordance to the canons, containing in alphabetical order all the words found in the approximately 770 canons of the Eastern corpus, showing in which particular canons these words appear. This concordance was made by Metropolitan Pavlos for personal usage, to assist himself in his administrative and scholarly work. Nevertheless, upon constant encouragement, he was persuaded to publish it,Footnote 50 covering a serious need in the literature and opening new avenues for research, such as in the area of philological and linguistic studies to the corpus canonum.

On 5 May 2014, after 40 years of episcopal ministry in the Metropolis of Sweden, Pavlos was elected by the Holy and Sacred Synod Metropolitan of the historic diocese of Amaseia in Pontus (Turkey),Footnote 51 as part of the Ecumenical Patriarchate's attempt to renew its Hierarchy in Western Europe, with the election of younger Metropolitans for its bishoprics there. Pavlos did not accept his transfer to the see of AmaseiaFootnote 52 and the Holy and Sacred Synod included him among the retired Hierarchs of the Ecumenical Throne.

In the first book that Metropolitan Pavlos published in January 2015, a few months after his retirement, covering in detail his 40 years of ministry as Metropolitan of Sweden and all Scandinavia (1974–2014), he dedicated the last chapter of this autobiographical work to the events surrounding his transfer from the Metropolis of Sweden to the one of Amaseia.Footnote 53 Seeking recourse to Canon Law, Pavlos explained his decision not to accept his election as Metropolitan of Amaseia, arguing that the bond between a bishop and his see is lifelong and it can be broken only with his death (sede vacante) or in the cases of the bishop's resignation, request for transfer to another diocese or permanent suspension/deposition, after judicial decision.Footnote 54 Pavlos emphasised that he had neither submitted his resignation (written or oral), nor he had made a petition or at least given his consent for his transfer to another Metropolis and, of course, there was no pending canonical charge against him.Footnote 55

On these canonical grounds, Menevissoglou proposed to the Holy and Sacred Synod the annulment of his election as Metropolitan of AmaseiaFootnote 56 and his recognition as ‘Metropolitan Pavlos, formerly of Sweden and all Scandinavia’.Footnote 57 The Synod did not accept this solutionFootnote 58 and Pavlos was officially registered as ‘Metropolitan formerly of Amaseia’,Footnote 59 a title that he never recognised, signing instead as ‘Metropolitan Pavlos (Menevissoglou)’.

In the remaining years of his life, Pavlos did not publish any other study in the field of Canon Law. His last book, published in 2017, is a historical overview of the foundation and development of the Ecumenical Patriarchate's Metropolis of Sweden and all Scandinavia (1969–2014).Footnote 60 This study is actually the final outcome of the merging of the re-edited chapters from an earlier book of Menevissoglou on exactly the same topic,Footnote 61 as well as of his above-mentioned 2015 autobiographical work on his 40 years as Metropolitan of Sweden.Footnote 62 Menevissoglou's ‘swansong’, revised editions of which were printed in 2017 and 2020, beyond a valuable contribution to the history of this particular Metropolis of the Ecumenical Throne, reflects also the need of its author to refute the charge that the main reason for his transfer to the Metropolis of Amaseia was the fact that ‘he didn't do anything’ as Metropolitan.Footnote 63

In 300 pages, Metropolitan Pavlos deals in great detail with his efforts to acquire and renovate during his tenure four temples of worship in SwedenFootnote 64 and Norway,Footnote 65 including the Metropolitan Church of St George in Stockholm,Footnote 66 as well as with the organisation of three more parishes in SwedenFootnote 67 and one in Denmark.Footnote 68 Menevissoglou does not fail to also cover his actions to restructure administratively the Metropolis in accordance with Eastern Orthodox Canon LawFootnote 69 and to legally safeguard its status through its recognition initially as a legal person of private law, and after 2007, additionally as a ‘registered religion’.Footnote 70 Pavlos’ analysis clearly shows that all his above-mentioned actions express his unwavering adherence to the canonical tradition of the Church, as well as that his legal training was a critical asset to the success of his endeavours.

In the same vein, in the 14th chapter of his last book, Pavlos did not fail to emphasise that, in parallel to his administrative duties as Metropolitan of Sweden, an essential component of his Hierarchical ministry was his literary work.Footnote 71 The term ‘literary work’ covers for Menevissoglou not only those of his studies related directly to the Holy Metropolis of Sweden and the preservation of its history, but also all his writings in the field of Canon and Ecclesiastical Law.Footnote 72 This is also clear from the catalogue that Metropolitan Pavlos added to the very end of his book with the full list of all his publications,Footnote 73 the great majority of which cover topics from the history and the sources of the Eastern Orthodox canonical tradition. Pavlos’ catalogue of publications includes 10 monographs, one Lexicon, as well as close to 60 articles, starting from the year 1969 and ending in the year 2015, when his last book was published. In short, this catalogue closely follows Menevissoglou's years of ecclesial ministry.

Indeed, from a very early point of Pavlos’ ecclesiastical career, his service as clergyman was uninterruptedly nurtured from his scholarly accomplishments, and vice versa. It would not be an exaggeration to mention that the ‘Metropolitan Pavlos’ could not exist without the ‘canonist Menevissoglou’. Perhaps the most profound evidence to this truth can be found in the last paragraph of the Prologue to his ‘Historical Introduction to the Canons of the Orthodox Church’. There Pavlos confesses: ‘this monograph was written beside our episcopal duties in the Holy Metropolis of Sweden and all Scandinavia; it required a lot of effort and not a little time of rest. We hope that the Lord will accept (even) this offer as ecclesiastical service’.Footnote 74

From this paragraph it becomes apparent that one of Menevissoglou's greatest concerns was the possible treatment of his writings as a sideline, or, even worse, as something foreign to his episcopal ministry, as proof that ‘he didn't do anything’. We end our obituary with the prayer that God may give rest to the soul of the late Metropolitan Pavlos, together with the assurance that he ‘fought the good fight’ (2 Tim 4.7), setting a noble example and high standards of how to inspiringly combine prudent pastoral stewardship with rigorous canonical scholarship, or actually of how to render academic study into ecclesial ministry, as the great teachers of the Church of old.

May his memory be eternal!

References

1 See the Announcement ‘Εκδημία του Μητροπολίτη πρώην Αμασείας Παύλου’ [‘Repose of Metropolitan Pavlos formerly of Amaseia’], <https://ec-patr.org/εκδημία-του-μητροπολίτη-πρώην-αμασεί/>, accessed 20 May, 2022.

2 For detailed biographical information about Metropolitan Pavlos, see Metropolitan Pavlos Menevissoglou, Μητροπολίτου Σουηδίας καὶ πάσης Σκανδιναβίας Παύλου (1974–2014) Τεσσαράκοντα ἔτη Ἀρχιερατείας [Metropolitan Pavlos of Sweden and All Scandinavia (1974–2014): Forty Years of Hierarchical Ministry] (Thessaloniki, 2015), 17–20.

3 ‘Διδάσκαλος τῆς Ὀρθοδόξου Χριστιανικῆς Θεολογίας.’

4 Deacon Pavlos Menevissoglou, Ἡ μοναχικὴ ζωὴ κατὰ τὸν Μέγαν Βασίλειον [The Monastic Life according to St Basil] (Halki, 1957–1958) (unpublished bachelor's dissertation).

5 Brief biographical notes for Professors Anastasiades and Kallinikos, see in Stavridis, Vasileios Th., Ἡ Ἱερά Θεολογική Σχολή τῆς Χάλκης [The Sacred Theological School of Halki] (Thessaloniki, 1988], 360–363Google Scholar and 398–405, respectively.

6 Since Kallinikos’ own doctoral thesis was on the epistles of Basil the Great.

7 A significant part of the dissertation's first part is dedicated to the Scriptural foundations of asceticism. See Menevissoglou, Ἡ μοναχικὴ ζωή, 5–9.

8 See, for example, ibid, 20: ‘τοῦ πολιτεύματος τῶν πολιτῶν τῆς ἐρήμου’ [‘the polity of the citizens of the desert’]; 23: ‘τῆς μοναχικῆς πολιτείας’ [‘of the monastic polity’].

9 Ibid, 21–24.

10 See Rodopoulos, Panteleimon, An Overview of Orthodox Canon Law (Rollinsford, NH, 2007), 55Google Scholar: ‘The [monastic] canons of Pachomios and Basil the Great were never ratified by any synod, but the prestige of their authors and their widespread use has given them, in practice at least if not in law, an authority which is hardly less than those canons … which have been officially recognized by the Church as sources of Law’.

11 It is just one page. See Menevissoglou, Ἡ μοναχικὴ ζωή, 77.

12 See, for example, ibid, 24: ‘βασιλειανὴ νομοθεσία’ [‘Basilian legislation’]; 25: ‘εἰς τὴν νομοθεσίαν αὐτοῦ’ [‘in his legislation’]; 26: ‘τῆς τελείας ταύτης μοναστικῆς νομοθεσίας’ [‘of this perfect monastic legislation’].

13 ‘Αἱ Μοναὶ καὶ ἡ διοίκησις αὐτῶν.’ Part I covers pages 27–50.

14 ‘Ἡ προσωπικότης τοῦ Μοναχοῦ.’ Part II covers pages 51–76.

15 Menevissoglou, Ἡ μοναχικὴ ζωή, 3: ‘πρωτόλειον’.

16 Ibid: ‘ὁ ἄμεσος σκοπὸς τῆς διατριβῆς ταύτης εἶναι ἡ ἐκμάθησις τοῦ τρόπου τῆς ἐπιστημονικῆς ἐργασίας πρὸς ὑποβοήθησιν περαιτέρω ἐπιστημονικῶν μελετῶν’ [‘The direct purpose of this dissertation is to teach the way of scientific work, offering assistance for further scientific studies’].

17 For katharevousa Greek as the official language of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, see Christina Argyropoulou, ‘Γλώσσα και εξουσία μέσα από ποικίλα κείμενα στην καθαρεύουσα και τη δημοτική μορφή της ελληνικής γλώσσας, 1967–1994’ [‘Language and Power through Various Texts in the Katharevousa and the Vernacular Form of the Greek Language, 1967–1994’], Έρκυνα: Επιθεώρηση Εκπαιδευτικών – Επιστημονικών Θεμάτων [Erkyna: Review of Educational – Scientific Issues] 7 (2015): 52–69, at 62, who mentions that ‘the message of the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople is always written in katharevousa and, symbolically highlights the continuity of the Phanariot tradition’ [‘το μήνυμα του Οικουμενικού Πατριάρχη Κωνσταντινούπολης γράφεται πάντα στην καθαρεύουσα και, συμβολικά, αναδεικνύει τη συνέχεια της φαναριώτικης παράδοσης’].

18 Archimandrite Pavlos Menevissoglou, Τὸ ἅγιον Μύρον ἐν τῇ Ὀρθοδόξῳ Ἀνατολικῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ ἰδίᾳ κατὰ τὰς πηγὰς καὶ τὴν πρᾶξιν τῶν νεωτέρων χρόνων τοῦ Οἰκουμενικοῦ Πατριαρχείου [The Holy Myrrh in the Eastern Orthodox Church, Especially in Accordance with the Sources and the Practice of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Modern Times] (Thessaloniki, 1972).

19 For a brief overview about the Holy Myrrh, its way of preparation and the services of consecration, as well as its various usages, see Patriarchate, Ecumenical, Holy Myrrh in the Orthodox Church (Istanbul, Holy Easter 2022), 5–9Google Scholar. This text was originally written in Greek by Menevissoglou in 1973, and since then it has been consistently reproduced for all the subsequent consecrations of Holy Myrrh that took place in the Patriarchal Church of St George, the most recent occurring on Holy Thursday 2022.

20 For the rite of confirmation (chrismation) in the Eastern Orthodox Church, see Doe, Norman, Christian Law: Contemporary Principles (Cambridge, 2013), 243–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 For Professor Foundoulis see the detailed biography by Panagiotis I Skaltsis, ‘Ὁ Λειτουργιολόγος Καθηγητὴς Ἰωάννης Μ. Φουντούλης (1927–2007). Ἡ προσωπικότητα καὶ τὸ ἔργο του’ [‘The Liturgiologist Professor Ioannis M. Foundoulis (1927–2007). His Personality and Work’], in Γηθόσυνον Σέβασμα – Ἀντίδωρον τιμῆς καὶ μνήμης εἰς τὸν μακαριστὸν καθηγητὴν τῆς Λειτουργικῆς Ἰωάννην Μ. Φουντούλην (+2007) [Gladsome Honor – Reciprocation of Tribute and Memory to the Late Professor of Liturgics Ioannis M. Foundoulis], vol. I, Panagiotis I Skaltsis and Archimandrite Nicodemos A Skrettas (eds) (Thessaloniki, 2013), 25–92.

22 See Menevissoglou, Τὸ ἅγιον Μύρον, 13:

ἀσχοληθέντες ἐσχάτως, ἐν τῇ ἰδιότητι ἡμῶν ὡς μέλους τῆς ἐπὶ τοῦ Πατριαρχικοῦ Μυροφυλακίου καὶ Σκευοφυλακίου Ἐπιτροπῆς, ἐκτενέστερόν πως περὶ τὸ ἅγιον Μύρον, καὶ δὴ ἐν σχέσει πρὸς τὴν ἀποφασισθεῖσαν παρασκευήν, ἕψησιν καὶ καθαγίασιν τούτου κατὰ τὴν Ἁγίαν καὶ Μεγάλην Πέμπτην τοῦ σωτηρίου ἔτους 1970, διεπιστώσαμεν τὴν ἐμφανῆ ἔλλειψιν εἰδικῶν περὶ αὐτὸ μελετῶν, ἀφορωσῶν οὐ μόνον εἰς τὸν καθαγιασμὸν αὐτοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι καὶ εἰς αὐτὴν τὴν ἱστορίαν, τὴν ἐκκλησιολογίαν καὶ τὴν θεολογίαν τούτου [having dealt lately, on our capacity as member of the Committee for the Patriarchal Myrrhophylakion and Skevophylakion (Treasury), to a greater extent with the holy Myrrh, and more specifically in relation to the decision about its preparation, chafing and consecration during the Holy and Great Thursday of the year of the Lord 1970, we realized the apparent lack of specialized studies on it, concerning not only its consecration, but also its history, ecclesiology and theology].

23 Chapter A: The Constitution and Composition of the Holy Myrrh [Ἡ σύστασις καὶ σύνθεσις τοῦ ἁγίου Μύρου]; chapter B: The Consecration of the Holy Myrrh [Ὁ καθαγιασμὸς τοῦ ἁγίου Μύρου].

24 Chapter C: The Law of the Consecration of the Holy Myrrh [Τό δίκαιον τοῦ καθαγιάζειν τὸ ἅγιον Μύρον]; chapter D: The Use of the Holy Myrrh [Ἡ χρήσις τοῦ ἁγίου Μύρου].

25 By Metropolitan Chrysostomos (Constantinides) of Myra in the Constantinopolitan newspaper ‘Apoyevmatini’ [‘Afternoon’], 26–27 March 1973 and by Alphonse Raes in Orientalia Christiana Periodica 39 (1973), 509–511.

26 Pavlos Menevissoglou, Μελετήματα περὶ ἁγίου Μύρου [Studies on the Holy Myrrh] (Athens, 1999).

27 Ibid, 8: ‘Ἐν τῇ πραγματικότητι ὁ τόμος οὗτος ἀποτελεῖ τὴν συνέχειαν ἢ τὸ συμπλήρωμα τοῦ προγενεστέρου ἔργου ἡμῶν ‘Τὸ ἅγιον Μύρον ἐν τῇ Ὀρθοδόξῳ Ἀνατολικῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ’, δεδομένου ὅτι εἰς τὰ μελετήματα τὰ περιλαμβανόμενα εἰς τὸν ἀνὰ χεῖρας τόμον ἐξετάζονται ἐπὶ μέρους θέματα, ἅτινα ἢ οὐδόλως ἐξετάζονται ἐν τῷ ἔργῳ ἡμῶν ‘Τὸ ἅγιον Μύρον…’ ἢ ἐξετάζονται μέν, ἀλλὰ παρεμπιπτόντως καὶ οὐχὶ συστηματικῶς’ [‘In reality, this volume is the continuation or the supplement of our prior work ‘The Holy Myrrh in the Eastern Orthodox Church,’ taking into consideration the fact that in the studies included in this volume are examined specialized topics, which either are not covered at all in our work ‘The Holy Myrrh…’ or they are raised, but only in passing and not systematically’].

28 Ibid: ‘ὁσάκις ἐπιστημονικόν τι πόρισμα ἢ ἄλλη ἱστορικὴ εἴδησις ἢ χρονολογική τις ἔνδειξις γράφεται ἀλλέως ἐν τῷ συγγράματι ‘Τὸ ἅγιον Μύρον…’ καὶ ἀλλέως ἔν τινι τῶν μελετημάτων, τῶν περιλαμβανομένων εἰς τὸν ἀνὰ χεῖρας τόμον, τοῦτο σημαίνει ὅτι τὸ μεταγενεστέρως γραφόμενον εἶναι ὀρθότερον ἢ πιθανότερον ἐκείνου, ὅπερ ἐγράφη κατὰ τὸ ἔτος 1972’ [‘In those cases that a scientific finding or another historical fact or a chronological indication is mentioned differently in our work ‘The Holy Myrrh’ from what is written in any of the studies included in this volume, this means that what has been written subsequently is more accurate or more probable than that written in the year 1972’]. Menevissoglou then provides two examples of such cases.

29 Ioannis Foundoulis in Κληρονομία [Inheritance] 31 (1999), 389–391. See also Elisabeth Piltz in Kyrkohistorisk Årsskrift [Church History Yearbook] (2006), 217–218.

30 See Pavlos Menevissoglou, ‘Μνεία ἀνυπάρκτων καθαγιασμῶν εἰς δύο προσφάτους ἐκδόσεις περὶ ἁγίου Μύρου’ [‘Reference to non-existing Consecrations in two Recent Editions about the Holy Myrrh’], Ὀρθοδοξία [Orthodoxy] 9 (2002), 360–363; ‘Μαρτυρίαι καθαγιασμοῦ ἁγίου Μύρου τὸ ἔτος 1703 ἐν τῷ Οἰκουμενικῷ Πατριαρχείῳ’ [‘Witnesses of Consecration of Holy Myrrh at the Ecumenical Patriarchate in the Year 1703’], Ὀρθοδοξία [Orthodoxy] 12 (2005), 807–816.

31 Pavlos Menevissoglou, Θρησκευτικὸν διαζύγιον καὶ πνευματικὴ λύσις τοῦ γάμου ἐν τῇ ἀλλοδαπῇ [Religious Divorse and Spiritual Dissolution of Marriage Abroad] (offprint; Athens, 1977).

32 Ibid, 5: ‘Ἐὰν δίδεται ἐπίσης εἰς τὴν δημοσιότητα, τοῦτο γίνεται κατὰ προτροπὴν φίλων Ἱεραρχῶν ἐν τῇ ἀλλοδαπῇ, ἀντιμετωπιζόντων τὸ αὐτὸ διοικητικὸν καὶ ποιμαντορικὸν πρόβλημα’ [‘This study is published at the exhortation of friend Hierarchs abroad, facing the same administrative and pastoral problem’].

33 Pavlos Menevissoglou, Ἱστορικὴ εἰσαγωγὴ εἰς τοὺς κανόνας τῆς Ὀρθοδόξου Ἐκκλησίας [An Historical Introduction to the Canons of the Orthodox Church] (Stockholm, 1990).

34 See the dedication in ibid, 7: ‘Εἰς τὴν Ἱερὰν Μητρόπολιν Σουηδίας καὶ πάσης Σκανδιναβίας ἐπὶ τῇ πρώτῃ εἰκοσαετίᾳ (1969–1989) ἀπὸ τῆς ἱδρύσεως αὐτῆς’ [‘To the Holy Metropolis of Sweden and all Scandinavia on the occasion of the first twenty years (1969–1989) since its foundation’].

35 See, for example, Heinz Ohme, ‘Sources of the Greek Canon Law to the Quinisext Council (691/2) – Councils and Church Fathers’, in The History of Byzantine and Eastern Canon Law to 1500, Wilfried Hartmann and Kenneth Pennington (eds) (Washington, DC, 2012), 24–114, at 32 (and n. 37), who challenges Menevissoglou's method in Ἱστορικὴ εἰσαγωγή, 109–114 and 119–120, ‘to prove the apostolic origins of the Canons of the Apostles’ on the basis of considering ‘the phrases κανὼν ἀποστολικός or ἐκκλησιαστικός or ἀρχαῖος … in the sources’ of the corpus canonum as ‘references to those collections of canons’. For Ohme, ‘references in texts before 394 that contain these phrases should be understood to mean that a canon rested on an ecclesiastical norm or practice dating from the time of the apostles’.

36 See, for example, from the most recent scholarship in this field, David Wagschal, Law and Legality in the Greek East: The Byzantine Canonical Tradition, 381–883 (Oxford, 2015), 32 (and n. 21): ‘The more comprehensive, but older, Historike is also invaluable’.

37 By his former Professor at Halki Vasileios Stavridis in Ἐκκλησία [Ecclesia] 67 (1990): 590–591; by Athens University Professor Panayiotis Christinakis in Χριστιανὸς [Christian] 29 (1990): 179–180; by the then Eastern-Catholic priest (now Bishop of Gratianoupolis) Dimitrios Salachas in the newspaper Καθολικὴ [Catholic] 2606 (30 April 1991), 3; and in Orientalia Christiana Periodica 58 (1992): 589–591; as well as by Albert Failler in Revue des Études Byzantines [Review of Byzantine Studies] 50 (1992): 310–311.

38 Konstantinos Kallinikos in Θεολογία [Theology] 61 (1990): 532–534, at 534: ‘Εἶναι ἔργο, ποὺ ἀξίζει τὴν εὐγνωμοσύνη μας καὶ τὸν δίκαιο ἔπαινο’ [‘This is a work that deserves our gratitude and rightful praise’].

39 Ibid, 532: ‘σπάνιο, σοβαρὰ ἐπιστημονικό, τεκμηριωμένο, καλογραμμένο … Ἐγχειρίδιο, ποὺ θὰ ἔχῃ μόνιμη καὶ μακροχρόνια ζωή’.

40 Pavlos Menevissoglou, Δύο πολύτιμα χειρόγραφα ἱερῶν κανόνων (Πάτμου 172 – Ἀθηνῶν 1372) [Two Precious Manuscripts of the Holy Canons (Patmos 172 – Athens 1372)] (Katerini, 2006).

41 Pavlos Menevissoglou, Αἱ ἐκδόσεις τῶν ἱερῶν κανόνων κατὰ τὸν 16ον καὶ 17ον αἰῶνα (1531–1672) [The Editions of Sacred Canons during the 16th and 17th Century (1531–1672)] (Katerini, 2007).

42 Pavlos Menevissoglou, Τὸ Πηδάλιον καὶ ἄλλαι ἐκδόσεις ἱερῶν κανόνων κατὰ τὸν 18ον αἰῶνα [The Pedalion and Other Editions of Sacred Canons during the 18th Century] (Katerini, 2008).

43 Pavlos Menevissoglou, Τὸ Σύνταγμα Ράλλη καὶ Ποτλῆ καὶ ἄλλαι ἐκδόσεις ἱερῶν κανόνων κατὰ τὸν 19ον καὶ 20ον αἰῶνα [The Constitution of Rallis and Potlis and Other Editions of Sacred Canons during the 19th and the 20th Centuries] (Katerini, 2009).

44 Menevissoglou, Αἱ ἐκδόσεις, passim.

45 Menevissoglou, Τὸ Πηδάλιον, passim.

46 Menevissoglou, Τὸ Σύνταγμα, passim.

47 Menevissoglou, Δύο πολύτιμα, passim.

48 See Menevissoglou, Τὸ Σύνταγμα, 13–14:

Ἐν τῇ πραγματικότητι τὰ μελετήματα τὰ περιλαμβανόμενα εἰς τὸν παρόντα τόμον καὶ τὰ συναφῆ μελετήματα τὰ περιληφθέντα εἰς προηγηθέντας δύο τόμους, τὸν τόμον ‘Αἱ ἐκδόσεις τῶν ἱερῶν κανόνων κατὰ τὸν 16ον καὶ 17ον αἰῶνα’ (Θεσσαλονίκη 2007) καὶ τὸν τόμον ‘Τὸ Πηδάλιον καὶ ἄλλαι ἐκδόσεις ἱερῶν κανόνων κατὰ τὸν 18ον αἰῶνα’ (Θεσσαλονίκη 2008), ἀποτελοῦν περαιτέρω ἔρευναν καὶ ἀνάπτυξιν κεφαλαίου, ὑπὸ τὸν τίτλον ‘αἱ ἐκδόσεις τῶν ἱερῶν κανόνων’, ὅπερ προωρίζετο ὅπως περιληφθῇ εἰς τὸ σύγγραμμα ἡμῶν ‘Ἱστορικὴ εἰσαγωγὴ εἰς τοὺς κανόνας τῆς Ὀρθοδόξου Ἐκκλησίας’ (Στοκχόλμη 1990). Ἡ ἔκτασις ὅμως τοῦ εἰρημένου συγγράμματος (σελίδες 653), δὲν ἐπέτρεψε τότε τὴν συμπερίληψιν εἰς αὐτὸ τοῦ ὡς ἄνω κεφαλαίου, τὸ ὁποῖον ἐκ τῶν ὑστέρων ἀπετέλεσε τὴν βάσιν καὶ τὴν δομὴν τῶν μελετημάτων ἡμῶν, ἐν σχέσει πρὸς τὰς διαφόρους ἐκδόσεις τῶν ἱερῶν κανόνων κατὰ τοὺς παρελθόντας πέντε αἰῶνας, ἀπὸ τοῦ ἔτους 1531 μέχρι τῶν τελευταίων δεκαετιῶν τοῦ 20οῦ αἰῶνος [In reality, the studies included in this volume and the related studies included in two previous volumes, the volume ‘The Editions of Sacred Canons during the 16th and 17th Centuries’ (Thessaloniki, 2007) and the volume ‘The Pedalion and Other Editions of Sacred Canons during the 18th Century’ (Thessaloniki 2008) comprise further research and development of a chapter, under the title ‘the editions of sacred canons’, which was meant to be included in our book ‘An Historical Introduction to the Canons of the Orthodox Church’ (Stockholm, 1990). Nevertheless, the length of the above-mentioned work (653 pages), did not allow then the inclusion in it of this chapter, which later became the basis and structure of our studies in relation to the various editions of sacred canons during the previous five centuries, from the year 1531 to the last decades of the twentieth century].

49 Pavlos Menevissoglou, Λεξικὸν τῶν ἱερῶν κανόνων [Lexicon of the Sacred Canons] (Katerini, 2013).

50 Ibid, 11: ‘Εἰς τὴν κατάρτισιν τοῦ ἀνὰ χεῖρας ‘λεξικοῦ’ προέβημεν πρὸ πολλῶν ἐτῶν ἀποκλειστικῶς διὰ προσωπικὴν ἡμῶν χρῆσιν. Φίλοι, ὅμως, γνωρίζοντες τὴν ὕπαρξιν τοῦ ‘λεξικοῦ’, πολλάκις ἐζήτουν, καὶ μάλιστα μετ᾽ ἐπιμονῆς, τὴν τύποις ἔκδοσιν αὐτοῦ’ [‘We compiled this ‘lexicon’ many years ago exclusively for our personal usage. However, friends, knowing about the existence of the ‘lexicon,’ many times requested, even with persistence, its printed publication’].

51 See the telegram that Metropolitan Pavlos received in Menevissoglou, Μητροπολίτου Σουηδίας, 209: ‘Ἱερώτατον Μητροπολίτην Ἀμασείας κύριον Παῦλον, εἰς Στοκχόλμην. Εὐχαρίστως γνωρίζομεν ὑμῖν ὅτι σήμερον ἐξελέγητε παμψηφεὶ Μητροπολίτης τῆς Ἁγιωτάτης Μητροπόλεως Ἀμασείας. Συγχαίρομεν καὶ ἀσπαζόμεθα ἀδελφικῶς. Πατριάρχης Βαρθολομαῖος. Φανάριον, 5 Μαΐου 2014’ [‘To the Most Rev Metropolitan Pavlos of Amaseia, in Stockholm. With gladness we notify you that today you were unanimously elected Metropolitan of the Most Holy Metropolis of Amaseia. We congratulate and embrace you with a brotherly kiss. Patriarch Bartholomew. Phanar, 5 May 2014’].

52 Ibid, 210:

Ὁ Μητροπολίτης Παῦλος, ἄνευ τοῦ ἐλαχίστου δισταγμοῦ, δὲν ἀπεδέχθη τὴν ἀπόφασιν ταύτην τοῦ Πατριαρχείου, δὲν ἔδωκεν ἀπάντησιν εἰς τὸ telefax, οὔτε ἐτέλεσε κατὰ τὴν ἐκκλησιαστικὴν τάξιν τὸ λεγόμενον Μέγα Μήνυμα καὶ τὴν Εὐχαριστίαν. Ὡς γνωστόν, ἡ μὴ τέλεσις τοῦ Μεγάλου Μηνύματος καὶ τῆς Εὐχαριστίας σημαίνει ὅτι ὁ ἐκλεγεὶς ἢ ὁ μετατεθεὶς ἀρχιερεὺς δὲν «δέχεται τὸ ἐπίταγμα», ἤτοι δὲν ἀποδέχεται τὴν γενομένην ἐκλογὴν ἢ μετάθεσιν αὐτοῦ [Metropolitan Pavlos, without the slightest hesitation, did not accept this decision of the Patriarchate, he did not send a reply to the telefax, nor did he perform, in accordance with the ecclesiastical order, the so-called Great Message and the Service of Thanksgiving. As it is known, the non-officiation of the Great Message and of the Service of Thanksgiving means that the elected or transferred Hierarch does not ‘accept the injunction’, namely he does not accept his election or transfer].

53 Menevissoglou, Μητροπολίτου Σουηδίας, 207–213.

54 Ibid, 211.

55 Ibid, 211–212.

56 Examples of annulment of episcopal elections by decision of the Holy and Sacred Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in those cases that the elected hierarch did not accept his election see in Archimandrite Pavlos Menevissoglou, ‘Περὶ τὴν ἐκλογὴν καὶ κατάστασιν ἀρχιερέων, σήμερον, ἐν τῷ Οἰκουμενικῷ Πατριαρχείῳ’ [‘On the Election and Installation of Hierarchs in the Ecumenical Patriarchate Today’], Στάχυς [Stachys] 19–26 (1969–1971): 105–137, at 121 (and n. 34).

57 See Metropolitan Pavlos’ letter to His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew in Menevissoglou, Μητροπολίτου Σουηδίας, 210: ‘Παναγιώτατε Δέσποτα, Διὰ τοῦ παρόντος ὑποβάλλω εὐλαβῶς, ὅτι χρηματίσας ἐπὶ τεσσαράκοντα συνεχόμενα ἔτη Μητροπολίτης Σουηδίας καὶ πάσης Σκανδιναβίας, δὲν δύναμαι ὅπως ἀποδεχθῶ τὴν γενομένην προσφάτως μετάθεσίν μου εἰς τὴν Ἱερὰν Μητρόπολιν Ἀμασείας, καὶ ἐκφράζω τὴν παράκλησιν ὅπως συνεχίσω τὴν ἐκκλησιαστικήν μου ζωὴν ὡς Μητροπολίτης πρῴην Σουηδίας καὶ πάσης Σκανδιναβίας. Μετὰ βαθυτάτου σεβασμοῦ. Στοκχόλμη, 5 Ἰουνίου 2014. + Μητροπολίτης Παῦλος’ [‘Your All-Holiness Master, With this letter I respectfully submit that, having served for forty consecutive years as Metropolitan of Sweden and all Scandinavia, I cannot accept my recent transfer to the Holy Metropolis of Amaseia and I express the entreaty to continue my ecclesiastical life as Metropolitan formerly of Sweden and all Scandinavia. With deepest respect. Stockholm, 5 June 2014. + Metropolitan Pavlos’].

58 See ibid, 212–213.

59 See the list of the retired Hierarchs of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Ἐπετηρίς τοῦ Οἰκουμενικοῦ Πατριαρχείου ἔτους 2022 [Yearbook of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of the Year 2022], Metropolitan Athenagoras of Kydoniai (ed), assisted by the Grand Archimandrite Agathangelos, Archivist of the Patriarchate (Thessaloniki, 2021), 525: ‘ὁ πρ. Ἀμασείας κ. Παῦλος, ἐν Στοκχόλμῃ’ [‘Pavlos, formerly of Amaseia, in Stockholm’].

60 Menevissoglou, Metropolitan Pavlos, Ἡ ἱστορία τῆς Ἱερᾶς Μητροπόλεως Σουηδίας καὶ πάσης Σκανδιναβίας (1969–2014) [The History of the Holy Metropolis of Sweden and all Scandinavia (1969–2014)] (Thessaloniki, 2017)Google Scholar.

61 Menevissoglou, Pavlos, Ἡ Ἱερὰ Μητρόπολις Σουηδίας καὶ πάσης Σκανδιναβίας, 1969-1994 (Ἱστορικὰ Σημειώματα) [The Holy Metropolis of Sweden and all Scandinavia, 1969–1994 (Historical Notes)] (Athens, 1994)Google Scholar.

62 Menevissoglou, Μητροπολίτου Σουηδίας, passim.

63 See ibid, 9: ‘ἠκούσθη κατ᾽ ἐπανάληψιν, καὶ λέγεται ἔτι καὶ σήμερον ‘χωρὶς αἰδώ’, ὅτι ὁ Μητροπολίτης Παῦλος ἐπαύθη ἐκ τῶν ἐν ἐνεργείᾳ καθηκόντων αὐτοῦ ἐπειδὴ ‘δὲν ἔκαμνε τίποτε’’ [‘It has been repeatedly heard, and it is said even today ‘without shame,’ that Metropolitan Pavlos was dismissed from his active duties because ‘he didn't do anything’’].

64 Beside the Metropolitan Church of St George in Stockholm, the other two churches that were acquired in Sweden by the Metropolis during the tenure of Metropolitan Pavlos were the Holy Church of St Paul in Uppsala and the Holy Church of the Holy Trinity in Gothenburg. See Menevissoglou, Ἡ ἱστορία, 129–139 and 155–174, respectively.

65 The Holy Church of the Annunciation of the Mother of God in Oslo. See ibid., 141-154.

66 See ibid, 93–127.

67 The parishes of the Apostle Andrew in Malmö, of the Dormition of the Mother of God in Borås and of St Nicholas in Kalmar. See ibid, 175–184.

68 The parish of St George in Copenhagen. See ibid, 185–191.

69 With the establishment of ‘parishes’ (ἐνορίαι), through the new Charter of the Holy Metropolis of Sweden, in replacement of the pre-existing ‘communities’ (κοινότητες), an institution described as ‘uncanonical’ in the Opinion of Professor Gerasimos Konidaris, issued upon request by Metropolitan Pavlos in 1977. See ibid, 223–229.

70 See ibid, 242–243.

71 See ibid, 218–221.

72 Ibid, 218: ‘Ὁ Μητροπολίτης Παῦλος, πλὴν τῆς φροντίδος τὴν ὁποίαν ἐπέδειξε διὰ τὴν καταγραφὴν καὶ διάσωσιν τῆς ἱστορίας τῆς Ἱερᾶς Μητροπόλεως, παραλλήλως πρὸς τὰ ἀρχιερατικὰ αὐτοῦ καθήκοντα ἠσχολήθη καὶ μὲ συγγραφικὸν ἔργον’ [‘Metropolitan Pavlos, beside the care that he showed for the recording and preservation of the history of the Holy Metropolis, in parallel to his hierarchical duties, also dealt with literary work’].

73 See this catalogue in Menevissoglou, Ἡ ἱστορία, 295–300.

74 Menevissoglou, Ἱστορικὴ εἰσαγωγή, 11: ‘Τὸ σύγγραμμα τοῦτο ἐγράφη παραπλεύρως τῶν ἐπισκοπικῶν ἡμῶν καθηκόντων ἐν τῇ Ἱερᾷ Μητροπόλει Σουηδίας καὶ πάσης Σκανδιναβίας⋅ ἀπῄτησε κόπον πολὺν καὶ οὐκ ὀλίγον χρόνον ἀναπαύσεως. Εὐχόμεθα ὅπως ὁ Κύριος δεχθῇ (καὶ) τὴν προσφορὰν ταύτην ὡς ἐκκλησιαστικὴν διακονίαν’.