ΜΗΤΡΟΠΟΛΙΤΗΣ ΠΡΩΗΝ ΠΑΤΡΩΝ ΚΥΡΟΣ ΝΙΚΟΔΗΜΟΣ Η ΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑ ΣΤΟΝ ΑΓΩΝΑ ΚΑΙ ΤΗΝ ΑΓΩΝΙΑ ΤΟΥ ΕΘΝΟΥΣ

Dear viewers, good morning and happy holidays. Today is October 28th, and all of Hellenism celebrates and rejoices for the wondrous and glorious deeds wrought by the hand of our Lord. Indeed, what the Lord has done for our nation is wondrous and glorious, because neither the predictions of the General Staff of the Army nor the predictions of the other staffs of the Allied forces could foresee what Hellenism achieved in the Albanian epic, in the battle of Greece during 1940-1941.

Our program today, however, is dedicated to the struggle of the Church, to the stance of the Church towards the suffering Hellenism during the war of 1940 and the Occupation. In our program today, we have the honor and the joy to host our Most Reverend Metropolitan, Mr. Nikodimos, who at that time served as Archdeacon to Archbishop Chrysanthos, and who can tell us firsthand and testify about the stance of our Church in the struggle of 1940 and during the Occupation. Most Reverend, we thank you for coming to our program. We welcome you, we ask for your blessing for the progress of this program, and not only for this program but for all of Hellenism.

We mentioned in our introduction that you served as Archdeacon to Archbishop Chrysanthos, and that you can testify firsthand about the stance of our great Archbishop. Can you tell us, then, something about the stance the Archbishop took on the day of the war, or shortly before?

My memories are vivid and indelible. October 28th, 1940, a Monday morning, we were summoned by the sound of sirens, about which we had no prior knowledge and did not know what was happening. After a short while, newspaper supplements began to circulate, and from them, we learned about the war: that Italy, with an audacious demand, wanted passage through Greek territory with conquest in mind, and that it had already received the heroic "No" from Prime Minister Ioannis Metaxas, who, worthy of the nation's historical data and those critical moments, took a brave and heroic stance, as was expected from Greece towards the invaders.

As was natural, I hurried to the Archdiocese, where my duties were. I was then, as you said, Archdeacon to the Archbishop of Athens and All Greece, Damaskinos Chrysanthos. Initially, he was occupied with official matters, and I was in the meeting room of the Archdiocese's Metropolitan Council, when a messenger from the Archbishop arrived with the order to leave the council and accompany him. Which I did, and I accompanied him to the residence of Prime Minister Ioannis Metaxas in Kifisia. There, I remained in the antechamber, but the two representatives of the nation and the Church collaborated. I did not hear what was said, but I know, because I was face to face at that moment, that immediately afterwards, the Greek declarations followed, with the first being from King George II, followed by a proclamation from Prime Minister Ioannis Metaxas, then a proclamation from the Commander-in-Chief Papagos, and amidst this trio of proclamations, the proclamation of the leader of the Greek Orthodox Church of Greece, Archbishop Chrysanthos, took its rightful place. All the proclamations had national fervor, a fighting spirit, but all four of these national figures also invoked God's protection and the hope for victory, which God's protection and shelter would bring.

This was the first moment, the first reactions, the first moves. Each of these responsible figures acted within their sphere of competence. From the side of the Archdiocese, the first measures were taken immediately. Priests, especially spiritual fathers, were notified to come to the Archdiocese to receive instructions from the Archbishop to go to the front lines, each to a designated position determined by the General Staff of the Army. They also received specific instructions regarding the issues they would face in their work and the appropriate handling they should follow. With the Archbishop's blessing and with great emotion, even tears, they left his office to go wherever duty to the homeland and the Church's command called them.

The next day, the Archbishop began to deal with what he called the necessary provision for the mobilized soldiers. He appointed the then Archimandrite Ieronymos Kotsonis, who, as is known, later became Archbishop of Athens, as the head of this effort. He had organizational talent, systematically addressed the problems, and before any other concern, it was deemed necessary to staff this service with individuals who could contribute. This certainly involved a sense of duty and a multifaceted mobilization of people, because reality quickly showed that it would not only be a matter of sustenance for those behind the lines and addressing material needs, but other problems would also arise, as they did, requiring the cooperation of scientists, especially doctors and lawyers, but also people of other specialties, because the inherent issues were multifaceted. A broad gathering of those invited took place.

Most Reverend, there was willingness, and based on what you are telling us, I will explain immediately. The first thought turned to a source for personnel, which the Church considered a mother. The Church considered that in the first phase, it should turn to those cultivated Christians, who were deeply rooted and who, in any case, had a relationship with organized bodies that had systematic work and developed contact with people who surrounded their work and cooperated with them. Thus, the broad circle that was created had a readiness to respond, it had a spiritual infrastructure, which is why success was guaranteed. And reality showed that the willingness of these people was broad, and their contribution was tireless and unceasing. In general, everything was methodical, even to the organization of correspondence to the front, correspondence from soldiers to those behind the lines, and the transmission of the prevailing atmosphere in the fighting part of the nation to those behind the lines. If necessary, I will also mention a name: the head of this communication provision was the university professor, Mr. Konstantinos Mouratidis, who systematically organized the effort. And the letters arrived in such numbers that it was impossible to answer them all, and the answers were selective. But it was conveyed that there was interest and attention in the correspondence from both sides. And what was even more remarkable, which amazed society, and especially those who, on behalf of the Church and the state, could assess the atmosphere that was being created, was the respect.

So, if you allow me, at this point, what you have said so far is very important. It reveals a gigantic effort of coordination between the flock of the Church, its personnel, clergy and laity, as you said, and religious organizations, as well as other scientists and students. And with all the effort that all of Hellenism made, because it was a gigantic effort, this war, whose true dimensions we still cannot grasp, how a small nation, a nation almost unarmed, not very prepared, found itself and dared and made the decision to oppose an empire like Italy was at that time, a military power, and its allies, Germany and Japan, the Axis alliance.

At this moment, as in all periods of Greek history, the Greek Church, the pastoral Church, the catechized, the Church of the Mysteries, found itself close to the Greek, who, in a mystical sense, constitutes the living Church, the body of Christ. That is, it was an atmosphere of prayer. If you allow me, I will also share my personal testimony. I was younger, just a child of 10 years old, when the war was declared. I will share a personal testimony from my village. There were two priests there. One of them was my father, may he rest in peace. They were not highly educated people; they had finished primary school, a preparatory seminary, but it seems they had orders, or acted spontaneously. Every afternoon, I remember, in the evening, they held supplications. When the war was declared, I remember the entire village, those who remained – we children, the wives of the mobilized, their mothers, their sisters, the elderly – filling the church. And I do not remember a more vivid, warmer prayer than that which was offered on that occasion. This was a great boost, a great reinforcement. Even women were knitting socks, knitting sweaters, and so on, which they would send to the soldiers. That is, the Church, in this instance, was found to be in sync with the soul of the nation. It was as the Gospel says, like the hen that gathers her chicks under her wings.

I confirm what you said, because I lived it, I knew it firsthand. And if I were to summarize the prevailing sentiments and dispositions of everyone in two points, I would say that, on the one hand, there was an immeasurable sense of religiousness, meaning such religious manifestations, neither before nor after, have occurred. The name of the Virgin Mary was on everyone's lips, and the soldiers in their letters from the front did not fail to assure us that they felt a sense of security because the protection of the Virgin Mary preceded their movements. In a way, they saw it and proceeded safely and full of hope. So much so that it created an atmosphere and a conviction in the people that the Virgin Mary protects both the soldiers and the nation, that many times we received messages at the Archdiocese that in such-and-such a place, they saw the Virgin Mary, that in such-and-such a church, the Virgin Mary appeared. And if you have heard it many times, they told us that in the windows of many buildings, the image of the Virgin Mary was imprinted, and people rushed to see the spectacle. Of course, there might have been a dose of exaggeration in this information, because it grew from mouth to mouth. However, I myself received orders twice from the Archbishop to go to two churches where so many people had gathered that the police had to close the church and keep the crowd outside to manage the congestion. The crowd's gathering was due to the news that the Virgin Mary had appeared in the temple. I remember that on both occasions, I had to speak to the crowds. I remember the specific names of the temples: the Church of the Dormition of the Theotokos in Ano Liosia, and the second was in the Church of Agia Markella in Botanikos, where I was sent. Others went elsewhere. On both occasions, supplications were made. I, however, was a deacon, and my intervention had to be on a different level. The parish priest would perform, and did perform, the supplications. I only had the word to deliver the message from the Church. In the first instance, it was proclaimed: "The Virgin Mary is with us, the Virgin Mary protects us, the front has the sense of her presence, and it is transmitted to us." Now, whether we are worthy to see her face to face, let this not create a demand or expectation for us, but let the certainty that the Virgin Mary is with us prevail. Let us take this spirit with us from this gathering. In the other gathering, I read as the Gospel passage for the supplication the Gospel of Thomas Sunday, to conclude with "Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed," and to place the people's demand and expectation to see the Virgin Mary in this light.

Yes, Most Reverend, you said that both before and after the war, this religious sentiment, this surge, was not apparent in the people. I understood it somewhat that way, that before the war began, this religious sentiment, this surge of religious feeling, was something hidden in their hearts.

Yes, precisely. That is what I wanted to emphasize. While it might not have been expressed externally before, after, or even now, this faith is primal, it is primal. In fact, that is what I wanted to emphasize, Most Reverend, and you can tell us from your experience, what contributed to this surge, this spontaneity? Mr. Paliogiannis mentioned earlier, and we have all heard it, that our churches were filled. What was it that made the people... I said it was this secret that existed. It was an intense prayerful disposition, which was certainly fueled by the fact that there were dangers, both at the front and behind the lines, because we had bombings. In times of danger, there is certainly an intense prayerful disposition. But along with the cross-cutting messages that the Virgin Mary is manifesting and that the soldiers have a vivid sense of this, it further wove this sentiment.

The second point, which is a continuation and extension of the first, is that there was a patriotic fervor, something analogous to what was happening in terms of religious and ecclesiastical matters. And a slogan circulated very intensely: "Let not the blood shed be in vain, but let the seed be utilized." That is, through the blood, Greece has passed. And indeed, this was a desire and an object of prayer: that from bitterness, sweetness would emerge, and that we would have fruits of national benefit from the events, so that victory would not simply be a military development of events, but would be tied to spiritual, material, and national benefits. So, these two aspects – the ecclesiastical and religious perspective, and the national side, on the other hand – these two...

Most Reverend, forgive me, Mr. Ayiannis, I will make a comment here. David, in one of his psalms, says, "God is my strength, and He is our helper." It is this faith that truly helped everyone, both those behind the lines and at the front, in this matter. But, Most Reverend, perhaps we can say here why the Church, after a decade, moved the feast of the Protection of the Virgin Mary to the 28th? Because it was on October 1st, if I'm not mistaken.

Let me start with that psalm you mentioned, to underline it twice. The first underlining is that the Archbishop used precisely these verses, along with others, of course, to compose a special prayer to be read in the liturgies. I still remember that he read it even before the crucified Christ on Good Friday, and it contained precisely this starting point. And the second is that an oratorio was created, which contained the developments of the events in a sequence of leaps, but conceptually, so that it would be a continuation in the right line. And within this oratorio, this verse took a central position. Perhaps you have heard the oratorio, because it has been performed many times since. In fact, on this day, the 28th of October, in relation to the establishment of the feast of the Holy Protection on October 28th, there were thoughts and decisions. Thoughts of Archbishop Spyridon later, and decisions of the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece. And the thought had this causal link: just as the national holiday of March 25th takes on a special color and religious message from the combination with the feast of the Annunciation, because otherwise it might not have such an evident surge and religious breath, so too, we would create a similar link for October 28th, again with a Theotokos feast, the feast of the Holy Protection, and there would be a liturgy, there would be a service, the remembrance of the Protection of the Virgin Mary for those fighting and then those behind the lines. And in this way, the corresponding manifestation of these events, which are celebrated on October 28th, would be maintained. If we also consider that in some period, it seemed that this brilliance of the initial establishment of the feast was beginning to fade, then one element that strengthened it was that it is now also a Theotokos feast. It was added to the Theotokos feasts.

I believe, Most Reverend, that the Church, in this instance, did nothing more than confirm the actual event. We said earlier that the soldiers saw the Virgin Mary in visions, the people had the conviction that it was the protection of the Virgin Mary that would protect both the fighters and those behind the lines. After all, the tradition of the Greeks, of Hellenism, is long, and Hellenism has roots going back to the Byzantine era. The "Defender General" to whom the salvation of the empire and the Church is entrusted is the Theotokos.

However, I believe that the torpedoing of the Hellas, which occurred on the day of the feast celebrated in Tinos for the Dormition of the Theotokos, also played a role in this entire process, in this entire outcome. And it was considered a direct insult to the soul of every Greek Orthodox Christian. Hellenism did not accept this insult and found itself, I believe, at this point, or rather, on the occasion of this event, found itself prepared on October 28th. As we read, as we see in documentaries, and as those of us who are a bit older remember, the Greeks were not psychologically unprepared. They knew what to answer the aggressor and had a deep conviction that the Virgin Mary, whose memory the aggressor insulted on a supreme feast like the Dormition of the Theotokos, would bring down their pride, humble them, and make them...

If we do not prolong the discussion on these details, I would add that this specific event of the feast of the Holy Protection was carried out by the theological professor of the university, the late Grigorios Papamichael. It should be noted that the feast of the Holy Protection was initially celebrated in Russia. He had studied in Russia, and with those data, he presented in a text he published the incident from which the feast of the Holy Protection originated, where there is real talk about the Protection of the Virgin Mary, manifested by her covering with the mophorion, that is, the head covering, over the protected persons. And in this way, it was deemed and identified as the most appropriate...

Yes, in my parish of Agios Georgios Karisou, with my co-priest, I looked in the synaxarion of the day, beyond the other celebrated persons, for a large family, Terentius and Neonilla, whose youngest child was their daughter Niki. And in that parish, a special celebration was held, of course, in parallel with the feast of the Holy Protection, but also of Saint Evniki, as a message and a symbol that heralds victory, the coming of victory with the blessing of God and His saints. After all, Most Reverend, we read again from David: "The Lord is God, and He has shown Himself to us. Bind the feast with garlands." So, it is not outside the framework of our Holy Church.

Perhaps we should now move on a little. The Occupation unfortunately came. We were not allowed, if you allow me to express myself, Most Reverend, to throw the enemy into the sea. The Germans arrived, Athens was occupied, and an event occurred with the late Archbishop Chrysanthos, who, it seems, was visited by the military commander. I would not want to say more, Most Reverend, I would like you to narrate it, because it seems you were present.

I received him. In fact, the Archbishop came to the Archdiocese in the morning. It was Sunday, April 27th, 1941. He told me that he would not officiate because he had to be ready at any moment, as something might arise. I asked for permission to officiate. He told me to go to the church, but not to officiate, to be ready if he needed to call me. I went to the Church of Chryssospiliotissa. They kindly offered me the pulpit. I did not officiate, but I preached. It was Thomas Sunday, April 27th. In the Gospel passage, Christ's "Peace be with you" is mentioned three times. And based on this, I delivered my sermon to prepare people not to panic from the impending events. While I was speaking, the cantor of the Archdiocese, through the Beautiful Gate, signaled me to come down from the pulpit. How did I finish? Fortunately, I was not inexperienced. You are a skilled handler. I appropriately moved to the conclusion and ended the sermon. I came down, and left for the Archbishop. I found him standing at the window, crying. Why was he crying? What did he see from the window that caused him to shed tears? He saw the flag of the Holy Cross on the Acropolis. This wounded his national sentiments and experiences, and he was a fighter. And because he was a man, he cried. That is how I found him.

In the meantime, several successive messages arrived from the state to the Archbishop. These three messages were: First, that a committee was formed to surrender the city, and they were also calling the Archbishop. And the Archbishop replied that the Greek hierarchs do not surrender cities to enemies, but their duty is to ensure their liberation. He did not go. Then came a second message: that a doxology would be performed in the Metropolitan Cathedral, and the Archbishop was invited. Of course, he spontaneously replied that a doxology has no place on the enslavement of our homeland. The hour for doxology will be another. Neither to the first invitation did he respond. The third message stated that the military commander requested to visit him, and he said, "I will await him." So, he gave me the order to await him at the entrance of the Archdiocese. And the Archbishop remained in his upstairs office. I went down and stayed there by the door. He arrived. Instead of a greeting, I made this gesture, and he passed. He went to the Archbishop. They spoke in German, so there was ease in communication. He began with pleasantries: "Athens is a beautiful city, a beautiful climate, and so on." And the Archbishop's reply was: "I hope you will respect it." And based on this spirit, the Archbishop said a few things, the spirit of which was: "I advise you and I implore you not to offend the honor of the Greek people." Of course, he did not tell them that this could have other consequences, but it was understood. The military commander stayed for a short while. They discussed a few other practical matters. He made some promises. Now, what they were, is another matter, and he withdrew.

The Archbishop remained there and summoned the Protosyncellus, Father Gervasios Mastas Paraskevopoulos, and the Assistant Bishop Panteleimon of Talantio, later of Thessaloniki. Of course, the Archdeacon was present. And it was necessary for us not to leave the Archdiocese, not only for the entire day but also for the night. And the Archbishop stayed within the Archdiocese for only one night, for any eventuality. The Archdeacon stayed for a week, nights within the Archdiocese, as a liaison, because he wanted to present himself.

Later, there was another demand: to swear in the Logothetopoulos government. The Archbishop replied, "I cannot swear in a government imposed by the enemy. We know that governments are appointed by the King or the people. Here, neither the King appointed the government, nor did the people elect it. It is a government imposed by the enemy. I do not swear it in." It is true that many friends and devoted people tried to persuade him, saying, "Make an exception, this government will be formed, it will be formed," because they wanted him not to fall out of favor, as they considered him very useful. He replied, "I have chosen these phrases I am telling you, knowing the consequences." He did not accept. And so it happened, because the government came, and my co-priest, Father Nikolaos Papadopoulos, as the priest of the parish where the Parliament is located, swore it in. Ah, yes, yes. And he swore it in without asking for permission, either because he considered it self-evident that as the parish priest, he should go when called to swear in the government, or to avoid complicating matters with a refusal from the Archdiocese, to facilitate things. He went, but the Archbishop did not pursue the matter to punish him for going arbitrarily. Let's say he forgave him, so that there would be no...

Most Reverend, so Archbishop Chrysanthos was a brave personality. He has a history. He was also Metropolitan of Trebizond and had contributed greatly to the salvation of Hellenism in that region. A truly national figure. And let's also say that with his stance, by refusing to swear in the occupation government, with his proud stance towards the German military commander, we must say that he gave the impetus for the resistance. Of course, there was the government that left with the King for Crete, and then to the Middle East. But among those who remained in Greece, the Archbishop was the one at that first moment who gave the signal for the resistance of the Greek people against the Germans and the occupiers in general.

And I, the Archbishop, soon fell from the throne, because he was influenced by the German factors, the imposed governors. His deposition and a major synod convened of those who had not voted for Chrysanthos during his election as Archbishop, and they removed him as "ascendant to the throne," as they said, by a decision not purely ecclesiastical, but with the cooperation of the state under the Metaxas dictatorship. He withdrew to his home. In fact, on the first day of his withdrawal, he had an accident, broke his leg, and went to the hospital. And those who did not understand it as reality began to say that he went to the hospital as a pretext to appear respectable in his removal. But we who knew him saw the broken leg and the cast and everything. In any case, he withdrew to his home. Archbishop Damaskinos took over, who was his co-candidate and whose election had later been annulled, and he was confined to the Monastery of Faneromeni. Throughout the dictatorship, he took over the service of provision for the mobilized. And the name changed, while it was called the Service of Provision for the Mobilized, it became the Organization of Christian Solidarity. And of course, with other staff, not always voluntary. In any case, he performed his service, both under the new structure and under the new circumstances. And the Archbishop, from his position, took active protective measures for the people, both in the area of welfare and in other areas of danger threatened to the Greeks by the occupiers. He also maintained the stance that the head of the Church should maintain.

And I was ordained a priest by Damaskinos, who, with many words of praise, characterized me as the Archdeacon of that time and promoted me to presbyter and archimandrite. Chrysanthos considered it necessary for himself to confine himself to his room for the four years of the Occupation. He did not go out, he did not leave his house. It was a protest, and he awaited the return of the government, in general, of the state, and the pacification of the country, either to give his resignation, as he did, considering himself Archbishop until then, but without taking any active steps, which the Archbishop on the throne, Damaskinos, was doing. And he used to say, "Now, who bears the responsibility?"

Another phrase reveals the nobility of his soul: "Someone else bears it." When the time of freedom came, he gave his resignation to the King, Constantine, Paul... Paul, yes, you are right, George. George. Yes. I don't know what else we could add.

Most Reverend, so Archbishop Damaskinos, with what you told us, showed himself to be a worthy successor to Chrysanthos. He was a personality. We cannot say that he did not... yes, and this work, which was indeed different... it puts me in a difficult position to compare the two. But in any case, I cannot say that he did not help much in the resistance of the Greek people. Yes, yes. It is a fact. Much has been published, and I have in mind a book that is not by a historian, nor a theologian, nor belonging to religious organizations. It is by the acclaimed and well-known writer Elias Venezis. Yes. He has published a book, and it is published by Estia Publications, with the title "Archbishop Damaskinos," and in parentheses, "The Years of Slavery." There, Elias Venezis presents documents, official papers, representations that the Archbishop made at the beginning of the Occupation to the authorities, to the Germans and the Italians, where, as you said very characteristically, he either intervened insistently, forcefully, to save people from impending famine, especially young children and pregnant mothers, with the soup kitchens that EOΧΑ organized, or to release oil that the metropolitans were sending from below Mytilene, and which the Germans did not allow to pass, or they confiscated it for the occupation troops. As well as personal representations to save hostages from the clutches of the enemy who were to be executed, sometimes successfully, sometimes unsuccessfully. Also, démarches and representations when the Bulgarian army began its advance in Eastern Thrace and Western Macedonia, where they had expelled the archbishops and priests, forcing the Greeks there to attend churches where Bulgarian priests officiated or to commemorate the Exarch of Bulgaria. And in general, an atmosphere had prevailed there that harmed our national rights. At this time of danger, at the time of Occupation, the Archbishop, it seems from this book, was always present. He truly did enormous work, and I regret that it is not highlighted, that this work is not highlighted, when the Occupation is discussed, when the famine is addressed, when our vindication, our national rights, especially in Thrace and Macedonia, and so on, are discussed. I believe that, as you also said, he was a good successor to Chrysanthos, and both stood worthy of the nation and the circumstances.

In one instance, when there was a list for the execution and death of certain individuals who had been arrested, the Archbishop wanted to react, and his plea was not heeded. They began to bargain, perhaps to remove some from the list, and so on, or what else should be done so that the decision would be executed but the other side would also be satisfied. He put himself first on the list, which influenced the situation, and something happened. Sometimes his interventions were successful, sometimes not, because the oppressor, the enemy, was cruel, especially in the area of reprisals. Yes, the Germans were cruel.

However, Most Reverend, we must say that beyond the Archbishop, many priests throughout Greece organized soup kitchens and cared for the flock, the people of God, and the Church was beside the people. And not only the Archbishop, but wherever we could, we have cases of many priests in various parts of Greece who fought for this cause, and many of them were executed. We have a number: 329 of our clergy were executed during the four years. This means that for them to be executed, something must have happened, and the enemy killed them. Yes.

Do you have anything to add, Most Reverend, to conclude? Fifty years have passed since the end of the Occupation. Today we are in peace, but after wars and turmoil, our hope is again in the Lord of Glory, in the Defender General, the Virgin Mary. And the feast of the Holy Protection, which we celebrate today, inspires us to ask for her protection, and may the Lord of Hosts always be with us, for besides Him, we have no other helper in distress. And with these words of the Most Reverend, we conclude our program, which refers to the struggle, the agony of the nation, and the contribution and support of the Church. The testimony of our Most Reverend Metropolitan, Mr. Nikodimos, is invaluable. It is firsthand, and I believe it has great value and must be preserved, and must be preserved even in the consciousness of younger Greeks, that in all circumstances, both peaceful and especially difficult ones, Hellenism has somewhere to lean, and that is the Church, with its organizational, administrative, liturgical, and mystical structure. The Church, which, as we said during the program, repeating Christ's words, functions like the hen that gathers and protects her chicks. We wish, or rather, we wish everyone a happy holiday today, and we express our warm thanks to the Most Reverend for responding to our request and for his effort in making this program. May God bless the nation.