If war leads to the glorification of God’s anointed ones, then even violence on the battlefield is rehabilitated as God’s design. And this is already worthy of praise. And Corippus tells about a solemn liturgy in honor of the victory, where all its perpetrators are worthy of communion from the common (single) chalice.
Interestingly, many Byzantine canons of that time are known, and in none of them is Basil the Great’s canon concerning the three-year penance mentioned. Only Saint John III Scholasticus (died 577 AD), Patriarch of Constantinople, one of the brightest canonists of his time, in the preface to his famous Nomocanon, says that he is the first to add all the canonical letters of Basil the Great to the collection of church rules. Previous collections, of course, contained Basil’s letters, but the 13th rule about the three-year penance was deliberately omitted. Only from 580 AD, with the Syntagma canonum, does the 128th letter of Basil the Great appear in canonical collections. However, the compilers of subsequent collections invariably noted that the rules of Basil the Great were not recognized as having the same authority as the rules of the councils, and were cited only as a source of church law. This is a very important nuance. Basil’s rules were cited, but not given the force of normative church act.
However, despite such obvious lobbying (by emperors and rulers through their appointees to the steward (bishop) positions in the church – priests-puppets of secular power), church consciousness remained not unanimous on the issue of military service.
In the fifth century, St. Paulinus of Nola (353-431 AD) writes to a friend who served in the army: “Whoever fights with a sword in hand is a servant of death” (et qui militat gladio mortis est minister). And he also reminds him that one cannot serve two masters, Christ and Caesar, even “if Caesar now wishes to be a servant of Christ, in order to rule justly over many nations”. The humane and compassionate nature of Paulinus could not reconcile with the fact of violence, even necessary, even for a righteous cause.
The disciple of John Chrysostom, St. Isidore of Pelusium (died around 435 AD), who preached much among soldiers and addressed them with exhortations in his letters, believing that “those who avenge moderately should not be reproached as those who act unjustly, because they do a lawful deed…”, was still far from triumphant euphoria: “Though the killing of enemies in wars appears to be a lawful deed and monuments are erected to the victors, commemorating their merits; yet, remembering the close kinship among all people, it is not innocent either; therefore Moses commanded that he who killed a man in war should resort to purification and sprinkling.”
From this brief scholastic historical excursion, we see that the Church’s position on this issue evolved (better to say, degenerated, secularized) over a long time: from lifelong excommunication in the third century to partial excommunication in the fourth century; from recognizing the necessity of a Christian army to defend the faith to celebrating victory with a divine liturgy in the presence of hierarchs and the entire Christian-loving army. And up to the catastrophe, when the patriarchs of the Orthodox churches bless the “Christian-loving army” to defend the national, material interests of states-empires: the patriarch of the ROC blesses to kill Orthodox Ukrainians, and the patriarch of the UOC KP blesses to kill Orthodox Russians. But fortunately, in the church alongside progressive “missionary-militarists”, who tried to bring military service to some positive Christian denominator, there is a camp of Christian pacifists who preach the Kingdom of God, which does not need to be defended with the sword and fire (tanks, machine guns, and other blood-shedding weapons), not “Christian” empires and national churches, which need to be defended from other “Christian” empires and other national churches (the faithful of one national church encroach on the autocephaly of another national church in the interests of the empire-state, in which it (the church) is one of the ministries-puppets of the emperor-president and the powerful of this age).
In the church lexicon, there is a word – economy (oikonomia), which indicates the freedom of the church in relation to the letter of the canon-rule, to normative-behavioral instructions (for example, in imposing penance, sanctions (for the purpose of healing from the disease of ignorance of one’s sin) – that is, the dosage of “medicines”, each according to his spiritual-psychological-physical state and abilities – for the same sin, the measure of treatment for each is individual: for some, healing sanctions for a year, for another, a month is enough for healing (coming out of the illusion), and yet another – a week, although they all committed the same sin (according to the books (catalog) of canons and rules). Economy is also called such an action when it is necessary to choose between lesser and greater evil (such a kind of compromise with evil; not capitulation, but a creative wise action (which considers time, place, expediency, usefulness, etc.), the goal of which is ultimately to overcome (although now it seems to capitulate to evil, to destroy it with cunning at a favorable time) the division between God and creation). For example, the Lord Jesus Christ repeatedly went to the Passover feast in Jerusalem, but drove the traders out of the temple (which the criminals turned into a den of thieves) only in the last Passover, although He saw evil in the previous times!!! What, could He agree with evil, or approve it?! No! It was just not the time!!! The only thing that has no economy in the church is heresy; there can be no compromise with heresy: it must be exposed immediately! The sins of a sinner (who knows that his life is sinful) can be covered and even not noticed for a certain time (of course, creatively working on his salvation), but the heretic must be immediately, right then exposed, and if he does not repent, – excommunicated from the community. For example, in Byzantium, various sins of emperors were tolerated, but heresy – never! But over time, economy in the church often began to turn into economy (money-making), and the truth was forgotten! Therefore, we see the sober church’s necessary economy, for example, of Basil the Great regarding war, killing in war: he tries to tell the Truth, but missionary considers the wishes of the secular machine called the Roman Empire, which at that time was powerfully gaining momentum in subjugating (in the direction of “privatizing”) the church and using it for its own interests (examples: the entire history of the Church from Emperor Constantine the Great to our days – “Emperor” Vladimir Putin). Therefore, the saints oppose evil as they can and as long as they can. And in subsequent centuries, economy began to dominate in the church, which almost completely secularized and serves not its faithful (Church, Kingdom of God, interests), but the interests of the empire-nation and its own economic enrichment. Christians (spirit-bearers) at all times testified to the truth, stood above the causes and “truths” of wars, and always saw not “right and wrong, innocent and guilty”, but first of all a terrible catastrophe and fratricide. Therefore, the voice of the saints in history, which is all soaked in blood, has one single motive: repentance!