HOCNA HAS ALWAYS CONDEMNED CREATED-NAME-DEIFICATION
HOCNA has not changed its teaching on the veneration of God’s name or on the condemned heresy of created-name-deification or the condemned heresy of created-name-adoration. From the first statement (June 2012) to the most recent statement (November 2017), HOCNA has been consistent in condemning the heresy of name-worship. On June 6/19, 2012, Metropolitan Ephraim of Boston, published this statement: “if anybody (including Father Anthony Bulatovich) is guilty of … Deifying letters, sounds and random/accidental thoughts about God, … then he is certainly guilty of heresy. If he does not actually advocate such teachings [the four errors listed by Saint Tikhon], then it only seems fair to say that he is not guilty of heresy.” Please note that claiming that a created name consisting of letters and sounds is an uncreated energy of God would be a form of deifying letters and sounds, because all Orthodox accept Saint Gregory Palamas’s teaching that “every power or energy [of God] is God Himself.” To say a created name is “not God” is the same as saying a created name is “not God’s energy,” because God’s energies are God. Therefore, logically, Metropolitan Ephraim is clearly rejecting the heretical notion that a created name can be an uncreated energy. On November 7/20, 2017, Metropolitan Gregory of Boston, made the following statement in a public interview for an international audience: “Not only letters and sounds, but also human ideas and thoughts, that is, everything which created words consist of, are not God. To deify them is to fall into pantheism. We have always condemned this false teaching and will continue to condemn it, both in writing and verbally. This is what ‘Name-worshiping’ is. Of course this is a heresy, and we have never had anything to do with this teaching.… As regards the historical Athonite controversy concerning the Name of God, we as the local Church in North America (and not at all the local Russian Church), have no intention of meddling in this or resolving it, adhering in this to the position of the Most Holy Tikhon, Patriarch of Moscow,..., which at this time canonically represents the last word expressed by the Russian Church on this question, until its careful and unbiased future examination by a legitimate Council. All our current theological views proceed from theses set forth in this document [by Saint Tikhon in 1921].…. The prerogative of finally resolving the ‘Athonite affair,’ in our opinion, belongs to a future legitimate Council of the Russian Church, the successor of the All-Russian Council of 1917–18, which was to have taken up this matter, but was not able to because of the civil war and troubles which began in Russia. But to confess and adhere to the teaching of the Holy Fathers on this or on any other theological question—that is not only our business, but simply our duty! I will personally add, that if anyone intentionally or even due to ignorance and lack of education, during the events of the beginning of the last century on Athos, fell into the error of ‘Name-worshiping,’ that is, pantheism, then of course we condemn this.”
Concerning the phrase “uncreated name”: it was not originated by HOCNA, but is a paraphrase of Saint Clement of Rome’s words “archegonos tes pases ktiseos onoma” (literally, "origin-of-all-creation name" or “author-of-all-creation name”). In context, which I cannot discuss now, Saint Clement of Rome was referring to something completely different from human names for God. Let me just say now that Saint Clement of Rome was taught by the apostles and is a great Church Father and there is a correct, contextual interpretation of his words that is Orthodox. He was not a heretic. Surely, when HOCNA (1) clearly, precisely, and repeatedly condemns the heresy of created-name-adoration, and (2) quotes and defends saints like Saint Clement of Rome — HOCNA cannot be fairly condemned for heresy. Rather, HOCNA has condemned the heresy in question numerous times. Moreover, when condemning the heresy of name-worship, HOCNA has used the exact words of the Fathers, from Saint Clement of Rome (AD 96) to Saint Tikhon of Moscow (1921). It is not heretical to quote the Fathers. To repeat: In all its numerous statements on the name-of-God controversy, HOCNA has rejected as heresy the idea that a created name can be a divine energy, uncreated, deity, God, or God Himself. HOCNA has also always also rejected the condemned heresy that would permit divine-worship given to created names. In fact, HOCNA has been at the forefront of condemning these heresies with numerous statements quoting the exact words of the Fathers, consistently over the past five years.