Bartholomew Says Union is Inevitable

Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople with the brethren of Athos at the service at the Notre Dame de Saint-Remy Abbey in Rochefort.

Some of our astute commentators brought this to our attention earlier this morning.  If true, it’s a game-changer.   As Bartholomew stated in 2014, this was and is his ultimate goal and Monomakhos has been reporting the signs for the last 3 years.  We may be witnessing the beginning of the end of the Church as we know it.      

Monomakhos

Head of Phanar in Athos persuades monks to unite with Catholics

The Patriarch of Constantinople believes that only historical differences rather than dogmas separate Orthodoxy and Catholicism, hence their unity is inevitable.

Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople stated that there are only historical rather than dogmatic controversies between Orthodox Christians and Catholics. He said this during his last visit to the Holy Mount Athos.

In particular, according to the UOJ sources, during a visit to the Greek monastery Pantokrator, Patriarch Bartholomew, in the presence of the brethren and guests of the monastery, claimed that the unity of the Orthodox Church with Roman Catholics was inevitable.

In his opinion, the division that now exists between the Orthodox and Catholics has historical roots but is not in the field of dogma.

Patriarch Bartholomew is convinced that Catholics are “exactly the same Christians as we are”. He also emphasized that Pope Francis’s gift of holy relics of St. Peter the Apostle is a testimony of good graces of the Catholic Church in relation to the Orthodox Church.

The UOJ sources said that during the speech of Patriarch Bartholomew, Archimandrite Gabriel, Abbot of Pantokrator monastery, Archimandrite Alexy, Abbot of Xenophontos monastery, Archimandrite Ephraim, Abbot of Vatopedi monastery, brothers of several monasteries and guests were present. Most of the brethren of monasteries after such words of the head of Phanar were perplexed, but none of those present protested to Patriarch Bartholomew. In addition, some monks, after the words of the head of Phanar that unity with the Catholics is inevitable, cried.

According to the eyewitnesses, numerous patriarchal guards did not allow anyone from the brethren to record the speech of Patriarch Bartholomew.

Earlier, the UOJ wrote that in Belgium, Patriarch Bartholomew and Abbot of Xenophontos prayed jointly with Catholics.

https://spzh.news/en/news/66683-glava-fanara-na-afone-ubezhdal-bratiju-v-neobkhodimosti-jedinenija-s-katolikami

Comments

  1. Officially, he is now a heresiarch. Dear Orthodox Christians, run from this man…run far!

    He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

    PS…I am wondering about the monks who wept. Were they tears of joy or sorrow?

    • Peter A. Papoutsis says

      I agree. However Moscow is also in the ecumanist basket. Only ROCOR was good on this point but after the 2007 unification with Moscow my heart was broken and united with a greatly ecumanist (i.e. heretical) patriarchate. Its not just Constantinople its Moscow as well. Moscow agreed to all the same ecumanist documents that Constantinople did. Met with Toman Pontiff and shared prayers with him.
      So while i agree with you the ecumanist heresy doesn’t stop with  Constantinople but includes Moscow as well. Always did. Sorry to break it to you. Once Constantinople gets its wings clipped,  as it should, Moscow will start to reveal its true ecumenism colors. Then ROCOR will have to make a decision of whether it believes the Russian omogenia is more important than Orthodox or whether Orthodoxy is more important than the Russian omogenia. Remember Moscow ONLY called out the EP’s heresy AFTER the EP invaded its canonical and jurisdictional territory NOT before. Only ROCOR did that NOT Moscow.
      Also the OCA and many parts of Antioch are also infected by the heresy of ecumenism. Dark days are ahead of all of us. We should pray that all true Orthodox Christians stay united in the face of the pan-heresy of ecumenism no matter where is comes from or who is pushing it: Greek, Russian, Arab, Serb, etc.
      Lord have mercy!
      Peter 

    • Absolutely, no surprise here. I’ve been referring to him as the Heresiarch of Constantinople for years!

    • Panos Pantofles says
  2. “Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople stated that there are only historical rather than dogmatic controversies between Orthodox Christians and Catholics.”
    If this statement is correctly reported either Saints Photios the Great and Markos Eugenikos are heretics – or Bartholomew is.

  3. Alitheia1875 says

    Which is closer to Rome, Moscow or Constantinople? Because Kiril and Bartholomew seem to be in a footrace to get there. My money is on Bartholomew. So those two will be in schism but in communion with Rome. Ah, how far we have come!!!

    • Alitheia you are correct. But I think the Phanarites are closer as they have been conducting beta tests to see how well the laity will take it. Bart in his closed door meeting on Athos told them it was going to happen and not a peep out of the new Athonites.  Greek laity kissing the hand of Latin clergy,  Official pronouncements in GOA churches that Latins are not heretics and have the same baptism (this even occured in my nephews baptism where my priest told the RC guests that what they witnessed doesnt matter, that being orthodox or RC doesnt matter just that we are Christian is all that matters).  

    • Alitheia1875 “Which is closer to Rome, Moscow or Constantinople? Because Kiril and Bartholomew seem to be in a footrace to get there.”
       
      Russian bishops want to friendly and polite, what is OK. Either way, they know that the faithful will not allow any union. Like they boycotted the Living Church in 1920s

  4. The Orthodox Primates must call a Council now.

    • Brendan “The Orthodox Primates must call a Council now.”
       
      I am not sure if this is right time. There is no Orthodox Emperor, instead of him there are powerful forces that might hijack the council. Perhaps sticking to the prayer and quiet resistance is the best way.

      • There is never a ‘right time’.
        There is only the time we have,
        time which passes swiftly.

        • It seems that Archbishop Anastasios agrees with you, Brendan.  And take note of the one upon whom he places the onus for doing so.
          https://orthochristian.com/125886.html
           
          “The fundamental principle of Conciliarity, which has always underlain the advancement of the Orthodox Church, is the only key to finding a way out of the existing crisis.”
           
          “The initiative for the healing treatment of the new reality undoubtedly is accorded to the Ecumenical Patriarchate. But all the Autocephalous Churches, all Orthodox without exception, bear the responsibility to contribute to reconciliation…”
           
          Even advocates of the CP, the godly ones anyway, are seeing the light.
           

          • I think what Archbishop Anastasios is gently suggesting
            is that this healing treatment can be done with or without the EP.

            • Indeed.  Archbishop Anastasios speaks the truth in a gentle, yet direct, way that neither buys into the narrative of his Patriarch nor approves of his apparent ‘strategy’ (while at the same time not condoning the MP’s).  Though he clearly respects the office of the  patriarch, he refuses to flatter as a sycophant.
               
              “The ecclesiastical events of the past year have created a new reality, with the obvious involvement of geopolitical interests and expediencies.”
               
              “The granting of Autocephaly to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine has not brought the desired Orthodox unity and peace, as happened with all previous cases of granting Autocephaly.”
               
              “…while the mobilization of irresponsible persons to deride those who express different opinions, while at the same time flattering those whom they support, debases inter-Orthodox dialogue at a critical moment for Orthodoxy. ”
               
              “They [solutions] will not, of course, be achieved through exchanges of insulting and threatening texts, neither by extra- ecclesiastical interventions nor can they be imposed unilaterally or come automatically with the passing of time.”
               
              “The fundamental principle of Conciliarity, which has always underlain the advancement of the Orthodox Church, is the only key to finding a way out of the existing crisis. ”
               

            • Michael Bauman says

              Maybe it’s time for our bishops to not be so gentle

  5. PS: No wonder Ieronymous wants to resign.

    • George Michalopulos says

      Brendan, the dots are starting to come into focus now, aren’t they?

    • Maximus thank u for yr thoughts re OCA and yes a bigger problem is revealed in Orthodox church and that is we have an unresolved problem of how the Church is governed that the fall of world empires  under which church hid as it were, have brought to surface and all are lacking. All have acted over the years to suit themselves and given a totally spiritually bankrupt view of the Church. The Phanar actual re- writing of history and making it up as went along re it’s rights in Ukraine are a scandal. We Orthodox for  far too long have lived in fantasy land.  And two wrongs do not make a right. But the Phanar,  the traditional centre of world Orthodoxy if you like, has not acted to try to sort it out. Yes it spouts such words but in reality it is simply persuing an aim to take all the bits of the Orthodox world in diaspora, etc under it so becoming a sort of, hence titles,  ‘world Patriarch ‘ and advancing this by openly delusional byzantine,  but clearly papist dogma. HERESY 

      Re OCA. Not perfect but they were difficult times and its bishops were all duly ordained and had been within the Russian church and  came from there .  The USA situation was chaotic but there was not already an Autocephalous  or autonomous Church on USA territory either. There was no question of self consecrated bishops or ordination stemming from a defrocked lay Men,  Denisenko,  recognised as such by entire Church  including by bart as Patrarch in mid 1990s. Is our ecclesiology all play acting? 

      In addition  the current happenings are openly at behest of secular politicians and above all with promotion of Phanar papal like claims that are reminiscent of 1054,  no exaggeration, and power play and the betrayal and ignoring of multi million  member legal autonomous  church of Ukraine. No matter it’s connection with Moscow, it is a Ukrainian national  church. 
      Yes in my opinion would have been better if church of Russia had offered it autocephalous status as i have mentioned else where. 
      The fact is that the situation has crystalised the divisions in Orthodox world beteeen modernist and others and of developing papal like Phanar claims.  Sadly the people of Ukraine are it’s victims.  All stand condemned but non more than the Phanar. 

      • Nikos: “we have an unresolved problem of how the Church is governed that the fall of world empires under which church hid as it were”
         
        We have the solution. Since we are entering post Christian times and Era of Constantine has ended, we may return to the situation of the first three centuries of Christianity. It was not neither a bad time nor a bad example!

        • Martin could not agree with you more. But the bishops mostly seem glued to worldly power.  I used to be a keen support of the concept of a Patriarch, but NOT NOW.   I wonder if time to stamp that on the head and have synods with a say five yearly changing head?. 

          • Nikos: “the bishops mostly seem glued to worldly power”
             
            And the most successful bishops in this undertaking were Popes of Rome. Faced with the weakened imperial power (by wars and distance), they carved for themselves a strong kingdom in middle of Italy and proclaimed that a Germanic tribal king is the Roman Emperor, to serve papal wishes. The was the coup of a millennium!

  6. Antiochene Son says

    If this is true, Bart has committed material heresy, contradicting Church teaching. Yet if he truly believes there is no difference, then his continuing in non-communion with Rome is the sin of schism.
     
    So, go on. Do it. Stop whispering in the shadows and shout it from the rooftops, if you are so proud.
     
    The patriarchs of Antioch and Jerusalem had better be ready to step up to the plate, and soon.

  7. Gail Sheppard says

    Further confirmation of the direction this is going.  Notice how they gave Bartholomew a large painting of a Catholic church.
    Roman Catholic Archbishop of Malta at Ecumenical Patriarchate
    Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew warmly welcomed the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Malta, Charles Jude Scicluna, who visited today, Tuesday, November 26, the seat of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, accompanied by Rev. Prof. Hector Scerri, who is the president of the Diocesan Ecumenical Commission.
    During their meeting, the Ecumenical Patriarch and the Roman Catholic Archbishop had the opportunity to discuss issues related to the inter-Christian dialogue with particular regard to the coexistence and cooperation between the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church in Malta.
    Archbishop Charles Jude Scicluna officially invited the Ecumenical Patriarch to visit his diocese and the time of the visit will be determined later.
    Parish Priest of the Metropolis of Italy and Malta, Archimandrite Nathaniel Felesakis, attended the meeting and accompanied Archbishop Scicluna during his visit to the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
    https://orthodoxtimes.com/roman-catholic-archbishop-of-malta-at-ecumenical-patriarchate/

  8. anonimus per Scorilo says

    Come on, this is typical Soviet-style intox, especially the thing about the guards preventing the monks from recording.
    The reactions these Moscow news sources induce into people who take Moscow’s side start to resemble more and more the “Trump derangement syndrom” which the pro-democrat media induces in anti-Trumpers.
    Also, much like in TDS, not one day flies by without another “discovery” of something outrageous Black Bart did, followed by loud condemnations.
    And the “break communion with the schismatic !” slogan common among people with BBDS resembles very much the “impeach the traitor !” shout of the TDS people. 

    • Gail Sheppard says

      Frankly, it’s a mystery to me how people who accuse Trump supporters of being “deranged” can support a candidate who sees “Russian assets” everywhere. Perhaps it was those same Russian assets who photoshopped the pictures of Bartholomew seated in the bishop’s throne at the Monastère de Chevetogne posted on Facebook. And maybe those damn Ruskies also photoshopped a picture of Bartholomew smiling ear to ear when he received a very large painting of what appears to be some kind of hybrid church of the future.

      https://www.facebook.com/chevetogne/photos/a.969991906695119/969996856694624/?type=3&theater

      https://orthodoxtimes.com/roman-catholic-archbishop-of-malta-at-ecumenical-patriarchate/

    • Peter A. Papoutsis says

      I agree. Basically the propaganda war between Constantinople and Moscow comes down to ” my freak is better than your freak.” The problem is they are BOTH freaks. 
      Peter

      • Peter I am Greek like you, not Russian,
        but it seems to me that Bartholomew is more Papist than Kirill is.
        Maybe the explanation is that he has been brainwashed from the age of 26 or so, when he went to a Jesuit school in Italy to learn Canon Law (useful for today).
        Then think about the performance of the two Churches inside their countries. 
        Put your hand on your heart, and think honestly which of the two (B or K) is closer to God.

        • Peter A. Papoutsis says

          Who that’s a choice none of us should make. Plus i try hard everyday to place my hand on Christ’s heart and to make mine more like His. Alas i utterly fail but every day i do always try and seek His forgiveness for my frailty. 
          Peter

    • Good to point up the parallelism between trump and Bart, as I have earlier but you misdiagnose the reaction. A healthy mind bridles at the abuses of power and sheer criminality of these tyrants and forms rational arguments to further a legal case against their continuation. For example the Constitution being upheld by the act of Congress impeaching a felonious Executive. Would that the Orthodox Church show as much mettle to take Bart to task in the ecclesiastic equivalent of Impeachment!  

  9. Bartholomew and Francis can go jump in the river along with their idols! 

  10. George,
     
    I wouldn’t be as dramatic about it – it’s not the “end of the Church as we know it.”  The vine of the Church will be pruned for clarity, yes, but the church as we know it isn’t ending. 
    For at least the past 100 years, the Greek churches have been looking longingly at Western Christianity.  That’s an undeniable fact.  These events are simply the logical result. Besides, anyone with half a brain who’s been paying attention has known that union with Rome has been Istanbul’s desired end state for years. 

    What I’m curious about are the nationalist Greeks and Greek-Americans who are self-described “Russia-haters” yet who still fancy themselves as Orthodox:  Will they try to spin this in some bizarre “clever” fashion to somehow say that they are remaining Orthodox despite all of these machinations, or will they just say, “yeah I’m Orthodox, and we’re uniting with the Roman Catholics, so maybe I’ll be Roman Catholic, so what?  Who cares?”
     
    Or will they pull that nonsensical (yet unfortunately common) Uniate head-twister and claim that they’re “Orthodox in Union with Rome?”  

    As if anyone needs any more signs, to be truly in a sacramental relationship with Christ these days, one must absolutely look to the Church of Russia for guidance and be in communion with her.  And I ain’t got no Russian blood. But I refuse to be stupid and ignorant about these gravely serious matters.  Case closed.  

    At this American Thanksgiving season, I am thankful that everything continues to be put out on the table, in the open.  Glory to Jesus Christ!

    • Gail Sheppard says

      I get your point, Anon 2, but the Church “as we knew it” a little over a year ago didn’t include a bunch of non-ordained, schematics with a new faux Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine. Now, the Ecumenical Patriarchate may very well merge with Rome. I understand the need for the “pruning” but if he does this, many of our brethren will be caught in the middle. They don’t understand what’s going on and, as you say, harbor negative feelings toward Russia. We’ve seen it on this blog when we started talking about this 3 years ago. They don’t like change when it comes to their own little world. They just want to go to Church on Sunday. In some cases, it could be years before they catch on. Saying the Church as we know it will still exist is like saying a family still exists after a big giant wave comes and washes away their littlest children.

      • Hi Gail,
         
        I agree. Though to continue your family analogy, everyone has known for years that Grandpa Bartholomew is deluded and off-whack. Yet they didn’t want to discuss it in public and chose to pretend that he’s fine.  Some even choose to blame “Russia” for his behavior (if anyone else sees this as Clintonesque, well, they should).
         
        Now, Grandpa’s wacky delusions are out in the open and impossible to hide. Worse yet, he’s in a huge leadership position!
        He’s still the same deluded Grandpa he’s been for decades. Difference is that now people are forced to deal with it.  
         
        What I’m saying is that Istanbul is still the same today as it’s been for a while now.
         
        What’s different now is that people no longer can conveniently ignore the reality and can’t plausibly still pretend that everything is fine.  
         
        Yes, some are going to be forced to live in reality, whether they want to or not.  Life can be tough.  But with Christ and sacramental life in His Church, we who labor and are heavy-laden find rest. 

        • Gail Sheppard says

          Sadly, all true.

        • Peter A. Papoutsis says

          Your buying into Moscow’s propaganda third rome bs. Be careful. Moscow is just as ecumanist as Constantinople. They just are hiding it better…for the moment. So while you are correct about the EP’s heresy do not miss or forget Moscow’s.
          Peter

          • Peter, 
            assuming you are right,
            what do you propose we should do?

          • Don’t think so. 
            Be careful that you’re not dragging Pat. Kyrill into this mess in order to soften the blow of Pat. Bartholomew’s no-longer-able-to-hide heresy.  
            The MP, on the whole, has shown no similar “westward longing” that C’ple has been demonstrating over the past decades. Indeed, particularly since the reunification with ROCOR, the MP views western Christianity askance and bizarre, as it should. 
            There is the temptation to try to drag the Church of Russia into C’ple’s current mess, in order to make some who have an attachment to C’ple feel less pain. But I think the reality paints a different story. 
            The West wants nothing to do with Russia, and generally Russia views her course over history as quite distinct from western culture and western Christianity. 

            • Sorry, for all of you grammar pedants, I think I used “askance” as an adjective, when it really is an adverb. 

              Should have said “the MP looks askance at western Christianity and views it as bizarre.”  Much better. 

              A blessed American Thanksgiving to all. 

            • George C Michalopulos says

              And that’s a sad thing, i.e. the West not wanting Russia.  Russia is not the enemy, unfortunately a newly paganized West very much is.

    • George Michalopulos says

      Anon2, you raise several interesting points.  If I may answer one of the latter ones, I’ll put it this way:  The GOA is pretty much in freefall, from a financial standpoint in a debt-spiral.  One of the reasons for this is that –as in the CoG–people are simply apathetic.  In other words, people are voting with their feet. 

      For these people, it’s “no big whoop” and they’ll say “OK, so we’re in union with Rome”.   It’s no big deal.

      However, for those who are committed to Orthodoxy, even if this means that they’re prog/libs (e.g. the Fordhamites, etc.) then this might something which they want but like the dog which constantly chases the car, doesn’t know what to do when he catches it.  Perhaps a type of existential crisis.

      For the other Greek-American laymen who are committed Orthodox but who have bought the neoliberal nonsense of “muh Russia, BAD”, the level of fever would be uncomfortable indeed.
      For those Greek-Americans who aren’t necessarily Russophobes, I don’t think that they will have a problem at all looking to Moscow or establishing OC Greek missions.

      As for your first point, I agree:  the Church will survive, perhaps even thrive under the right circumstances.  Unfortunately, it won’t be a cakewalk.  The possibility of martyrdom or at the very least becoming a pariah as far as your extended family is concerned, is very real.
      What I’m trying to say is that we shouldn’t be so nonchalant about it.  Yes, the Church will survive but schism never truly heals, does it?  After all, look at the Western Church and the tens of thousands of ecclesial bodies that grew out of it.  Look at the Ukraine, those six Rusyn bishops which signed off on the original unia unleashed a torrent of bloodshed on that unfortunate land that frankly, is not going to be healed anytime soon (if ever).

      What Bartholomew has done is create a Ukrainian situation writ large.  And why?  To heal the Schism?  How so?  By creating more schisms?  Or is he doing this at the behest of the EU/US, which is becoming increasingly a force for evil in the world?  One which for some reason, cannot make peace with a resurgent, Christian Russia?
       

      • I’m sure the State Department sees this as Samuel Huntingdon’s “Clash of Civilisations” made flesh. As for Bartholomew, whatever he wanted at the start, he is now riding the tiger. He dare not dismount.
         

        • Brendon  yes Fukiyama put us in the islam box for dealing with 

          • Huntingdon put us in the ‘Orthodox’ box – from which the State Department is trying to  save (?) or evict us.

            • Sorry. HUNTINGDON,  NOT THE OTHER GUY. 

            • George Mavigas says

               Clash of Civilizations.  Samuel P. HuntingtonForeign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 3 (Summer, 1993),  esp. p. 30
              Samuel Phillips Huntington (April 18, 1927 – December 24, 2008)    was director of Harvard’s Center for International Affairs. During the presidency of Jimmy Carter, Huntington was the White House Coordinator of Security Planning for the National Security Council.  On January 8, 1979,  told Senate: 35-65% of the USA but 80-90% of the Soviets would survive a massive nuclear exchange (p.31).
              Descendant of: Samuel Huntington (Scotland, Connecticut 1731–1796), Founding Father and Signer of the Declaration of Independence, President of and Delegate to the Continental Congress from Connecticut 1776–1784,  Governor of Connecticut 1786–1796. 

              • “On January 8, 1979, told Senate: 35-65% of the USA but 80-90% of the Soviets would survive a massive nuclear exchange “.
                Maybe he prevented a war by saying so…

        • George Michalopulos says

          Brendan, that is a very perceptive insight.
          Of course, he could dismount:  all he needs to do is act Orthodox.

    • My bet is on the uniate head-twister explanation.

    • Anon yes it’s come out into open now and yes we greeks have been looking westward, look no further than the organs, dog collars etc, even at the outward level. But mentally have lost Orthodoxy a long time ago. Looking back I beginning to understand the old calander movement, even if i think they went over board but to be fair they always said it went deeper. 

      • Niko-
        I’m the same although I never thought they went overboard except for the Matthewite bishop. This becomes apparent when you read the initial documents the actual historical details. This includes the return of entire diocese back to the old calendar in 1935 but stopped violently in their tracks by the State, and the dehumanization of the greek populace as Ottomon sympathizers by the pro british Greek media including incitement of violence against anyone who says otherwise..  I’ll go one step further and say the initial attempts of the old calendarists to get other local churches behind them scored dividends in the 60’s. At the time the Slavic churches were under the Bolsheviks and the ancient patriarchates were all under the thumbs of freemason pro-British patriarchs. Finally the ROCOR ordained a bishop as part of their synod in 1959 to care for old calendarists in America and then completely recognized them by 1969. After the death of the freemason Pat. Benedict of Jerusalem came Dorotheos. He completely recognized the SiR and even delivered a homily at their monastery at Fili, even Ireneii followed this quietly but then he was removed.

        • Peter A. Papoutsis says

          Agreed. Cant add or contradict that.
          Peter

        • If I may dare to add or contradict… it was Diodoros, not Dorotheos.

          • Thank you for your correction Farher. I’m also off on the bishop. If I remember correctly the man (Petross) who became archbishop of the old calendarists in America was under ROCOR when he found St. Markellas in Astoria and under him were other old calendar churches including St.Nicholas at the WTC. He was ordained a bishop by ROCOR in 1962 (not to he confused with the man ordained by rocor for the Florinites of Greece). When ROCOR officially recognized the old calendarists in 1969 Bishop Petros joined the old calendarists officially as archbishop of Astoria. Basically ROCOR was in communion with either one or more old calendar synods from 1969-2006 and unofficially cared for old calendarist parishes in America from 1955-1969.

            • St. Nicholas was old calendar but nonetheless part of the GoA if I am not mistaken.

              • Blimbax- St. Nicholas was initially old calendar and independant from the GOA. From 1923 through the 60’s there were actually many Greek churches in America still on the old calendar and even still divided between venezelists and royalists. Archbishop Petros gathered together a few of these in the 50s thru 60’s St. Nicholas being one of these parishes. St. Nicholas passed into the GOARCH and was one of the last old calendar Greek churches in the GOA. I believe they changed over in 1981. 

            • Gus,

              Archimandrite Petros of Astoria and a few Greek parishes were actually under the Metropolia (OCA) as of 1956. He left the Metropolia in 1960 when they refused to consecrate him and the Greek Old Calendar Archimandrite Akakios Pappas to the episcopate.   He then joined the MP for about six months. Apparently, they shopped around for consecrations! He was independent in 1962 when he was finally consecrated secretly by ROCOR’s Abp. Leonty of Chile and Bp. Seraphim of Caracas. The two ROCOR hierarchs consecrated him in secrecy outside of their dioceses, against the will of their Metropolitan and unbeknownst to the other bishops of the ROCOR Synod, consequently, Bp. Petros went years without a certificate of consecration. 

              He spent six years in isolation not accepted by ROCOR since he was consecrated illegitimately and not accepted by the Greek Old Calendarists because he couldn’t supply a consecration certificate. In 1968 he was given a formal certificate by Met. Philaret, and that’s when he joined the Florinite Greek Old Calendarists. By 1974 he was booted out of the Florinites because he refused to sign the encyclical that declared New Calendarists as graceless schismatics.
              He was actually never a member of ROCOR, as a hierarch or otherwise. For details check out “Metropolitan Petros of Astoria: A Microcosm of the Old Calendar Movement in America” by Anastasios Hudson.

              ROCOR was NOT in communion with Greek schismatics “from 1969 to 2006”. That’s actually Old Calendarist propaganda because they seek to lay exclusive claim to ROCOR, as they consider it to be a True Orthodox Synod that apostatized into “ecumenist New Calendar World Orthodoxy”. One can read ROCOR sources and Fr. Seraphim Rose’s letters to see all the chaos that erupted in ROCOR due to communion with Matthewites, Florinites and Holy Transfiguration Monastery. ROCOR actually repented of their involvement with them relatively quickly. In a ROCOR resolution dated May 11, 1980 it was declared: 

              “RESOLVED. Lovingly honoring the podvig of our brethren who have suffered considerably in Greece for their defense of the True Orthodox Faith, the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia is deeply saddened that division reigns among them… The Russian bishops have no authority to investigate local problems in Greece in detail, much less mutual accusations. And so the Synod of Bishops, as early as 1976, resolved to remain aloof from any decisions and interference in the internal affairs of the Church in Greece… Even less are the Russian bishops able to investigate the regularity of the many ordinations of bishops now performed.”

              Therefore, ROCOR was only in communion with warring factions of Old Calendarists from 1969-1976. And then from 1994-2007 with the Synod in Resistance (SiR), Bulgarian and Romanian Old Calendarists. However, this union was condemned by the larger Old Calendarist-True Orthodox sects since the SiR synod was deemed to be heretical and schismatic. 

              Once upon a time I resolved to join the True Orthodox and I can’t help but notice that many people idealize Old Calendarists in their comments on this blog. The phronema of these groups is demonstrated in the official encyclicals of the largest Greek Old Calendarist Synod:

              1935: “On account of this, we counsel all who follow the Orthodox festal calendar to have no spiritual communion with the Schismatic Church and its schismatic ministers, from whom the Grace of the All-Holy Spirit has departed…”

              1950: “Therefore no New Calendarist must be received into the bosom of our Most Holy Church or be served without a prior confession by which he condemns the innovation of the New Calendarists and proclaims their Church Schismatic.”

              1974: “…the New Calendar in the Greek Church, which became Schismatic from its acceptance thereof in 1924 until the present… as a consequence, its Mysteries are deprived of sanctifying Grace.”

              1988: “…whatever Calendar they follow: either Patristic or the Papal one, have set themselves outside the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ… In the same way we blame any sort of para-religious offsprings such as having developed in great Russia Sergianism, which subordinated the Christ’s Church to godless Communism and created new ceasaropapism according to the western model.”

              2002: “According to the Confessions of Faith by the leaders of our sacred struggle of the Orthodox in Greece made in the years 1950 and 1974, the Mysteries that are performed by the New Calendarists, having actually been performed by schismato-heretics, lack sanctifying Grace.”

              These quotes are from the Florinites; the Matthewites are even stricter. For those who think the “the Greeks are now in schism”:

              ROCOR was in communion with groups who anathematized us, various groups deemed to be schismatic by each other and by all the local Churches throughout the world. Did ROCOR ever become schismatic by association? I don’t think so. Perhaps we can say that the process of becoming schismatic is validated by the judgment of a lawful synod and subsequently accepted by the fullness of the Church. And perhaps we can extend grace to contemporary churches bogged down with the Ukrainiacs. This manner of thinking allows myriads of our good brethren to remain in the Church and not be cast out due to the actions of a few nefarious (or errant) hierarchs in far off places.

            • Mary Pentayos says

              You need to learn how the gnisiacs found their purity. Their founder discovered on arrival that his ordination was flawed and built a flock by baptizing pregnant Irish girls to appease relatives back in Grecledom. Most Greeks made a fuss about language because Metaxas persecuted them if they didn’t speak their very limited Greek, like Kalmouko’s Nashua Albanians, so they were clueless she was xenoi. The gnisiac nephew was ready to join GOA when Karlutsos crawled into Lulurgas instead. Karlutsos now loves putting Lulurgas buttboys on parish councils because he can blackmail them out of their livelihood by showing them impeachable witnesses.

              • You have lost me here, Mary.
                What are gnisiacs?

                • Brendan, I think I can decode partially what Mary is saying. The Gnisiacs are the old calendarists of St Markella Cathedral in Astoria NY (from gnissios greek for genuine).  The founder was Archbishop Petros who established the parish in the 1950’s. His nephew succeeded him as bishop but at one point his uncle did not want him to be his successor. So nephew entered into talks with the GOARCH to take him in as a bishop. The exact circumstances of what happened is unknown ( to me) and no deal was ever made at the end. It’s possible he used it as leverage to become bishop at St. Markella. 
                  The pregnant irish girls is probably a reference to the fact Astoria was an irish neighborhood before it became greek. To this day a handful of irish pubs still exist hearkening back to those days. Anyhow she is saying he built a successful parish by baptizing all the irish girls that started dating/marrying/ getting pregnant by the Greek boys as the Greeks started moving in. Dont know who Lulurgas is. 

                  • Thank you Gus. Now I understand.
                    But, I’m not sure I want to know who Lulurgas is…

                    • Same here. I understood up to the part that the parents and grandparents of the 1st and 2nd generation greeks wanted them to marry greek, and the archdiocese obliged by not baptizing their non-married offspring of the irish girls,  leaving an opening for St. Markella in the irish turning greek neighborhood of Astoria to take them in. But who this Lulurgas is better not to know, lol.  I opine theres elements of truth in what Mary is saying in her own strange way with a bit of sensationalism and hyperbole mixed in

                    • Chris Venasis says

                      Lulurgas was the Turkul acolyte sent by Papandreou to undermine Iacovus with Irene Gristlebland. Astoria was always more Irish than Greek and still is. Greeks are just louder.

                  • Jamie Lavedo says

                     Paulus was classmates with Savas Stafruples in Athenes where they plotted reunion.

        • Gus yes.    If you know the life of St Nicholas Planas it’s very moving and sad.  You see the seeds  of the destruction   of  Orthodox spirituality for the accomodation with the world. 
          Ι  know Fyli too.  Many yrs ago as a student I help dig the foundatuons  for the Original church.  Τhey have an english bishop, bishop Ambrose. 

  11. Pope Francis has made the Catholic Church a shipwreck and her members confused, heartbroken and lost – yet the Greek Pat is rushing to jump aboard. What appalling madness.
     
    A question, as a newcomer to the Orthodox world, and Antiochian, anyone know where the Serbian Orthodox might stand on this? I have a family member looking into a Serbian parish in his neighborhood, with thoughts of converting from Catholicism, why I ask.

    • Gail Sheppard says

      Patriarch Irinej of Serbia generally stands strong when it comes to these things.

      • Gail,
        Actually, not many of the Holy Patriarchs can stand up under scrutiny. See below from the Serbian Patriarchate website:
        http://www.spc.rs/eng/celebration_hanukkah_jewish_community_belgrade
        “His Holiness Irinej, Serbian Patriarch visited last night the Belgrade synagogue Sukat Shalom and on that occasion he lit one of eight candles in a traditional ceremony regarding Hanukkah – the Jewish holiday of freedom and lights. Besides His Holiness… Mufti of Serbia Haji Efendi Jusufspahic, His Excellency Apostolic Nuncio Mr. Orlando Antonini… President of Jewish youth of Serbia Mr. Danijel Bogunovic and Honorary President of the Association of the Jewish Communities of Serbia Mr. Aca Singer.”
        And since many nowadays seek to interpret the Holy Canons regarding non-Orthodox and heretics in accordance with akrivia:
        Apostolic Canons 64: If any clergyman or layman shall enter into a synagogue of Jews or heretics to pray, let the former be deposed and let the latter be excommunicated.
        Lord have mercy… we all have sinned and fallen short. We need to pray more for all of our Holy Churches.

        • Gail Sheppard says

          It’s all very disappointing.

        • Maximus,
          It is the sign of the times……..
          The only thing these people are afraid of
          is the truth and transparency.
          As an example:
          When that event took place in Serbia,
          all of us there and here should start protesting by sending letters etc
          and not stop until that Patriarch agreed he did the wrong thing.

          In other words, it is about time that we the laity, the largest number of EQUAL souls inside the Church of Christ, remind the clergy to do what they promised to do on their ordination!
          Period. 

    • Theo,
       
      Yes, agree most definitely. The modern Roman Church is in complete disarray and is run by modernist active homosexual pederasts.  Not to mention the heresy of papism, who in their right mind would want to jump on to that train wreck?
       
      The Serbs are always firmly solid with the Russian Orthodox Church. Yes, the Serbs can be quite nationalistic, but when push comes to shove they are steadfast in their Orthodox faith. The recent Patriarch of Serbia Pavle was likely a true saint and probably will be canonized someday.  Remember also that Serbia is where the Russian Church regrouped and found safety in the wake of the communist revolution 100 years ago.  The Serbian Church is also where St John Maximovitch and others including Bishop Basil Rodzianko spent much of their formative years.  
      So the Serbian Church, I believe, is a safe place to be. 

      • George Michalopulos says

        I agree. God bless the Serbs!

        • Yes last yr we went  to Belgrade and Nis and loved the worship and devotion in church.  They can for understandable reasons be a touch nationalistic but are solid.  
          There is a beautiful Serbian Cathedral in Birmingham, UK,  copy of 14c Cathedral at Pec. On the rowntree estate. Rowntree was a quaker ( good people) with a love of Serbia and helped them much in wwi. Serbian Orthodox chanting is very melodic.  I did attend a Serbian wedding in Bradford in yorkshire where every one was drunk, but why not!! ? 

      • Peter A. Papoutsis says

        I agree. The Serbian Church is safe and solid as are the ROCOR churches, despite their union with Moscow, and the vast majority of the Antiochians. The OCA, outside of the Diocese of the South, not that solid. The GOAA is solid as well but only those parishes that aligned with Fr. Ephraim’s monasteries and their teachings despite being in union with Constantinople. There are obviously others like the Romanians, Albanians and Ukrainians, but that’s pretty much it that make up the One True Orthodox Church. 
        The Old Calendarist, while i greay admire them and their stand against ecumenism, are a mixed bag of schismatics and rabble that imho are outside of the One True Orthodox Church. 
        Peter 

        • Peter, you write as though you have some specific gripe against all the bishops of the OCA except maybe Abp. Alexander yet only one of his dioceses seems to rate in your estimation. How do you explain your opinions?

          • Claes,
             
            Peter can speak for himself, but I suspect he is referring to matters such as this…
             
            http://www.monomakhos.com/now-dont-that-just-beat-everything-you-ever-heard/#comment-147909
             
            …and the comments that follow.   If so (and as an OCA member myself), I share his concerns.

            • Well Brian, Peter himself still has not clarified his vague allegations and those complaints adumbrated by Fr. Weber about The Wheel and Fordham are immaterial as far as the OCA goes, since any involvement of OCA personnel, lay or clergy with them is peripheral.

              I attended SVOTS for the requisite 3 years, living there as seminarians must, driving past Fordham on the way to Arthur Avenue for fresh sorpresata and cappuccino served on round marble-topped tables on the sidewalk. We students were mildly curious about the school and heard they had a department of Byzantine Studies. But we never once heard Fr. Tom Hopko, Professor Paul Meyendorff or Student Dean Fr. Paul Lazor speak of the school. We inferred it was a GOARCHy thing to be avoided, boring at best and Phanariot at worst.  
              The aspersions toward the OCA  coming from a ROCOR Chaplain are no surprise and amount to shibboleth, much like the low estimates of OCA anything which are held by GOARCH clergy.
              A typical recent conversation I had with a longtime clergy friend leading a Greek Parish in the metropolis of Denver went like this: 
              Me: Father, did you hear Abp. Elpidophoros is spreading lies to the effect that Metr. Tikhon agreed to hand over the OCA’s Tomos and become a Diocese of GOARCH?
              Fr. Z: I understand the OCA is bankrupt and needs outside support. Why don’t you go under Antioch already?
              Me: Father, the financial crisis hit a full decade ago and the OCA dealt with it manfully and transparently; you can read the annual Treasurer’s reports on the web since they are public. I would say the current fiduciary problems GOARCH faves are magnitudes larger and the lack of transparency culturally endemic to Greek church life.
              But please tell me what the OCA would have to gain by giving up its unhindered autocephaly to become a satrapy of GOARCH or AOCNA, who are a fraction of the size of the OCA and headed by foreigners.
              Fr. Z: Yes, the Greeks are incredibly stupid… Look, it was great chatting with you but I have to go. 
               
              Confirmation Bias should be something people here know a lot about, but it’s much easier to spot it in one’s interlocutors than in one’s own speech. Greeks remember their impression of a corrupt Swaiko-run OCA since it bolsters their fat-&-sassy superiority; everyone knows ROCOR’s mission is to preserve the icon of pre-1917/18 Sobor Russian Orthodoxy so the academic pursuits of some OCA clergy are their frequent target, by which ROCOR can gauge its own putative fidelity.
              So I refute the charges against the OCA as immaterial rumor. The Local Autocephalous Church has got its own endemic problems no doubt, but tendentious (maybe invidious?) hearsay will not bring it down.  

              • George Michalopulos says

                Claes, you give us much to chew on. In truth, I cannot disparage your arguments and assertions, except for this: from the outside (ROCOR) looking in (Syosset), it does give many pause about the long term fidelity of Syosset to authentic tradition. I say this as a member of the OCA (DOS) and yes, as a partisan of Met Jonah. But I must tell you, I learned a lot during those years that made me question Syosset’s administrative style (if I may say so).

                I, for one, got the distinct impression that the OCA was still gliding on the fumes of the Meyendorff/Schmemman/SVOTS intellectual supremacy, which I believe was outstanding on its own merits and not just in comparison to HC/HC. By the time of Jonah however, those days were long gone and Schmemman’s own biases against the “celibate” monastics who were held in reserve for future vacancies in OCA’s Holy Synod still infected the mindset of Syosset. They would immediately go into “Executive Session” in order to keep matters secret.

                Anyway, to avoid this, Syosset went in the other direction, to “best practices”, etc. They went out of their way to augment their russophobia and anti-monasticism as well, needlessly in my opinion. Too much “Americanist”, not realizing that Americanism itself is a dead letter nowadays. To the extent that Americanism exists, it does so by taking liberty to its absurdist ends –that is to say, hyper-individualism, especially feminism, abortionism, faggotry, and an overall aversion to common sense and tradition.

                Anyway, I am done rambling for now. A beautiful day outside and sunlight calls.

                • Peter A. Papoutsis says

                  I agree greatly. For me, a lifelong anti-ecumanist and supporter of ROCOR I echo George’s sentiments. If you noticed i did NOT include the Diocese of the South. Most of the rest of the OCA is just as stagnant and running on the fumes of its past as George explained. Much like the GOAA that imho is not only a shell of its former self but in many ways hopelessly lost, especially with ecumenism and its love affair with Rome. ROCOR is still my standard as i realized the ecumanist heresy in my youth and properly denounced and destroyed by them.

                  While i still disagree with their union with Moscow, because Moscow is still ecumanist and compromise, the ONLY good that has come fron the Russian Church is ROCOR, and by extension the DOS.

                  I greatly apologize to those i have offended but if you need to see heresy in many parts of the Church not just among the Greeks. That’s all I’m saying.

                  Peter

              • Claes,
                 
                The fact that some moral degenerates in the OCA are allowed by some hierarchs to spread their poison unchecked is unfortunately not hearsay or rumor, as has been documented repeatedly on this very blog for many years.    But please don’t think that I have any desire to “bring down” the OCA.   Quite the contrary.  I am in the OCA.
                 
                 

                • Brian let’s be honest:
                  If 1 out of the 12 disciples was Judas the traitor,
                  why can’t we have 1 bad bishop in 12?
                  The serious problem is if the overall decisions of the Hierarchy are bad. I think OCA is Ok!

                  • To speak of OCA persons as ‘moral degenerates’ recalls the rhetoric of extremist politicians of the last century. Without specific reference I consider it general slander and posturing.  
                    The moderator has a couple points about the bloom being off the rose of American cultural ascendency, especially in the era of true degenerates like trump, McConnell and Kavanaugh. Who wants to follow our lead to utter political corruption? (Actually they are, sadly enough. Look at Brazil, Georgia…) 
                    Nevertheless, the role the OCA has, or could have among Local Orthodox Churches as inheritor of the advances in church governance of the Moscow Sobor of 1917-18, augmented by application of American nonprofit business principles  (lately applied post-Swaiko) is crucial to the current state of the Orthodox Conversation which has been ongoing for two millennia.
                    The OCA has a unique pastoral voice and national situation that should not be undervalued by foreign-led churches, nor by its own clergy, so often the case. I applaud Metr. Tikhon and before him Metr. Jonah for their positive assertion of  our Autocephaly that cuts through the fog of phanariotism and the mystification typical of the ex-CSB and others seeking legitimation from foreign heads. The OCA is Orthodoxy without bullshit, if you will pardon my French. 

                    • Claes,
                       
                      I honestly think you misunderstand.  I agree with you in most respects; I really do!
                       
                      Nevertheless, one has to wonder how long you’ve been paying attention to this blog (and countless others that expose this garbage).  I am most definitely NOT trying to  “bring down” the OCA as a whole.  On the contrary, I would like to see it defended against these…yes…moral degenerates.  They are thankfully relatively few in number – as are, I believe, the bishops who shelter them.  But they are there, and they are allowed to speak in the name of the Church without censure (except in a very general sense) or in the case of clergy, they are not removed from office.
                       
                      Take a look for yourself, if you have a strong stomach.  And these are only a very few of the examples that make headlines here on this blog alone.  This is not “general slander and posturing.”
                       
                      http://www.monomakhos.com/?s=Arida
                       
                      Moreover, if you scroll down to my comment that followed FR. Alexander Webster’s, you will find these words of mine.
                       
                      “The otherwise true (but very generalized) statements issued by the holy synod of the OCA ring hollow to the faithful when little or no corrective discipline is exercised at the level of specific persons who are allowed free reign to spread their poison with what cannot possibly be construed as anything other than the blessing of their local heirarch, be it misguided or purposeful.
                       
                      “Take this as an accusation against some of the bishops if you must, but it is the truth.  And I love the OCA.
                       “Having said this, I have never understood this or any of the current the attacks of the evil one on the Church as a jurisdictional problem per se.  None of the above-mentioned diseases (or those of the CP or the Church of Greece or the GOA or the AOANA, the Serbs or whatever issues any jurisdiction may have) is a jurisdictional issue at its core.  Judgement is beginning with the house of God, and no jurisdiction will escape. 
                       “What we are seeing virtually everywhere we look is not, in my opinion, anything new as such.  Rather it is the revelation of what actually is and has been for quite some time – only now it is being exposed by the Light for what it is.  We are being faced with a very clear choice. Have we been/are we now/will we be disciples of Christ – or of a cheap substitute that falsely bears His name and directly contradicts everything He and His Apostles have taught from the beginning?”
                       
                      Like you, Claes, I don’t want this poison allowed to be passed off as ‘Orthodox’– not in the GOA, not in the CP, not in the OCA – not in any jurisdiction that calls itself Orthodox. 
                       
                      Hopefully this clarifies.

            • Peter A. Papoutsis says

              Yes. This is the case. I’m surprised most disagree. This is very well known and Fr. Webster is correct.
              Peter 

      • anonimus per Scorilo says

        Yeah, very safe, unless Kačavenda is your bishop

    • George Michalopulos says

      Theo, to add on to your shipwreck analogy, this would be the first time in history in which rats are swimming to the sinking ship rather than away from it!

    • Thank you, everyone, for that very helpful information, I’ll hand it on. I don’t think my relative would be too pleased if he became Orthodox only to find himself back with the Rome he was looking for refuge from. Kind of a bad joke!

      • Same. Exactly the same story for me

      • Maximus, thank you for the information. The thing with the Florinites is they have been all over the place trying to appease the hardliners. They also have softer stances and Archbishop Petros was reinstated by them being that he was a moderate. They are also more moderate than one may think on the ground. Everyone knows they commune new calendarists, and such and since then they have merged with the SiR. For me I follow the Royal Path as Fr. Seraphim Rose wrote about: http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/royal.aspx

    • Michael Bauman says

      Theo, I too am an Antiochian. I have some friends who came into the Church under Serbia, monastics. They are lovers of God

  12. Patriarch Bartholomew is convinced that Catholics are “exactly the same Christians as we are”
     
    Let that sink in.

  13. AnonSaysWhat says

    https://yt3.ggpht.com/Wu6oLdBqvhXlexg5VRlfu06nhq-Wkcb2OkFkzGdd1l4bQpH0LhH8vH7GO1-08qe8Q5ll7QDlim4x=s720-nd

    “Ukrainian nationalist Phanariote schismatic “bishop” Epiphany prayed vested with the Roman-Catholics both Latins and Uniates in Brussels’s Roman-catholic Cathedral to mark Holodomor tragedy.”

  14. Brethren,

    You guys should read more contemporary Orthodox history. Especially in the 20th century. Local churches can repent. Once upon a time, the Serbian Patriarch was the President of the WCC. St. Justin Popovich fiercely denounced the ecumenism of the Serbian Church. Even Pat. Irenej of Serbia can be seen lighting menorahs in synagogues and he recently told Non-Chalcedonians that historical mistakes and not dogmas divides us and them. God judges, but I respectfully disagree such actions and statements. As far as the MP, in 1970 ROCOR condemned the MP for allowing intercommunion with RCCs:

    “The decision of the Moscow Patriarchate to give access to Roman Catholics to all the sacraments of the Orthodox Church… both violates the sacred canons and is contrary to the dogmatic teaching of Orthodoxy. By entering into communion with the heterodox, the Moscow Patriarchate alienates itself from unity with the Holy Fathers and Teachers of the Church. By this action it does not sanctify the heretics to whom it gives sacraments, but itself becomes a partaker of their heresy.” Archbishop Averky commented: “Now, even if some entertained some sort of doubts about how we should regard the contemporary Moscow Patriarchate, and whether we can consider it Orthodox after its intimate union with the enemies of God, the persecutors of the Faith and Christ’s Church, these doubts must now be completely dismissed: by the very fact that it has entered into liturgical communion with the Papists, it has fallen away from Orthodoxy and can no longer be considered Orthodox.”

    And yet now, a few decades later, the MP is the bastion of pure Orthodoxy. Pat. Bartholomew is merely continuing the program of his predecessors:

    Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras, 1967

    Why do we not automatically return to Mysteriological (Sacramental) communion? Because it is necessary for us to prepare our peoples for it, both theologically and psychologically. During the nine hundred years that have elapsed since 1054, we, the two worlds of East and West, have come to think that we belong to different Churches and different religions. And, as a result, the purpose of dialogues becomes quite evident. It is to prepare our peoples psychologically to understand that there is one Church and one religion, that we all believe in the same God—the Savior Christ. You and we respect all religions and we esteem the place and the time in which we live” (from a homily given by the Patriarch in the chapel of Lambeth Palace, London, November 13, 1967, cited in “Patriarch Athenagoras of Constantinople [1886-1972]: His Statements, Messages, and Activities,” Orthodox Tradition, Vol. XVIII, No. 1 [2001], p. 10).

    But we’ve all known this. Did Moscow (or anyone) denounce the EP for commemorating Pope Benedict at the Phanar or for praying with Pope Francis at the Holy Sepulcher? No one with authority much cared about the EPs heresy until… Ukraine. Don’t let geopolitics dictate your ecclesiology. We all need to pray for repentance.

    • Macimus-
      No one with authority cares now about ecumenism as they all partake in it. The MP had ROCOR to call them out. Heck they called out the EP as well. Of course during those years they were considered a pariah. 
      All the Churches get fussy when their territory is violated. Antioch has severed communion with Jerusalem over a church composed of tourists and foreign workers in Qatar. The EP went nuclear when Archbishop Christodoulos of Athens appointed bishops for the new lands, etc. Ukraine is a big deal as it’s the first time vagante sects were exchanged for the one holy catholic and apostolic church.  Apostolic Succession has been rendered a hoax, as the grace-filled Autonomous Orthodox church of Ukraine was dropped for a smaller compromised group of vagantes without holy orders by the wave of a magic wand.

      • Gus Langis,
        Thank you for the response. FYI, ROCOR actually did occasionally engage in questionable forms ecumenism (i.e. joint prayers) prior to the late 1960s. It doesn’t take too much digging to discover. ROCOR came into its own re: anti-ecumenism under the presidency of Met. Philaret of New York.

        I definitely agree about territory. The Saints fought on behalf of truth and  dogmas, we fight on behalf of dioceses, jurisdictions and titles.

        Do you really believe that the “Ukrainiacs” are unique? Even though many Slavic churches have historically accepted Catholic (i.e. heretical) priests in their orders and have made various declarations that their “sacraments are equally valid” over the centuries? Pat Bartholomew accepted Ukrainian bishops without apostolic succession a few years back; not even the MP protested too much because they lived in the U.S and the parties agreed not to aid the schismatics in the Ukraine. But there were no arguments about the EP being in schism because of “communion with graceless schismatics”. FYI, the OCU are schismatic in my opinion.

        This will likely offend some, although it is not my intent to do so, but if one studies the documents of the 1970s, one will realize that there are some parallels between the OCU and the OCA. The bishops of the OCA were actually officially anathematized by the MP on more than one occasion. ROCOR considered them to be schismatic. Next thing you know… autocephaly was granted unilaterally in 1970 without any formal repentance on the OCAs part.

        Arguments during that time are as follows:

        ‘decisions regarding autocephaly belong to “a Synod representing more generally the entirety of the local Autocephalous Orthodox Churches, and especially to an Ecumenical Synod” because a new autocephaly changes the canonical order of the whole Church.
        ‘It is against canonical and traditional order for a diocese regarded as having been in schism (as the Metropolia had officially been by Moscow from 1933 to 1970) to be suddenly granted autocephaly.’
        ‘Autocephaly must require the full agreement of the people and leadership of the territory in question, but the OCA’s autocephaly only represented the agreement of a minority of Orthodox America.’
        ‘Russian Orthodoxy remains disunified on American soil, remaining under three jurisdictions; the OCA’s autocephaly failed to produce unity even for the Russians.’
        ‘Moscow’s unilateral move was an affront to the community of the Church. “For this reason we are at a loss to explain the haste shown by the Russian Orthodox Church in announcing as autocephalous a relatively small section of the Russian Orthodox Diaspora in America, and conferring upon this Church a title disproportionate with reality, after having only recently recognized her jurisdiction.’
        ‘The name “The Orthodox Church in America” is a misnomer, as the body only comprises a minority of Orthodox faithful in America and is not representative of Orthodox America, but mainly represents a certain subsection of Slavic Orthodoxy in America (particularly ex-Uniate, Russianized Carpatho-Russians).’

        Sound familiar?? I do think that the bishops of the Metropolia/OCA had a lot more legitimacy than the “Patriarch” Filaret and his band of hand-picked sycophants.

        ROCOR came to be considered a pariah because they were ordaining schismatic bishops within the boundaries of other local Churches, and their association with said schismatic sects in Greece, Bulgaria, Romania and Russia.
        http://www.easternchristiansupply.biz/holytrinityoxnard/bin/Home/Entries/2008/2/25_Historical_Moments_in_the_Relations_Between_the_Russian_Orthodox_Church_Abroad_and_the_Holy_Synod_in_Resistance.html
         

        • Maximus,
          I always considered the OCA autocephaly problematic. The Metropolia was a creation of  a couple renegade amero-russo bishops in 1947. From 1947- 69 they were simply gathering uniates and other independant churches They were correct in seeking reconciliation from their mother church but still cringeworthy that all of a sudden the Soviet dominated Church which previously they hated now became their besties. I have to take issue with the link that ROCOR became a pariah due to ordaining schismatics etc abit of propaganda. They became a pariah because Met. Philaret wrote his sorrowful epistles against the new calendar Greeks. Rocor also constantly criticized the MP and the Orthodox participation in the WCC. In 1969-70 the Greeks did an about face and replaced the ROCOR with the OCA (same as in ukraine,) while ROCOR replaced the GOA with the old calendarists. This can be seen in old GOARCH annuals where the ROCOR was dropped from their list of churches they were in communion with in 1969 but present in 1968. (I’m going by memory so i maybe off by a year) 
          As far as non-ordination of schismatics and vagantes, this has weakened the entire legitimacy of the church. For example, currently some FB friends of mine from Australia are in a heated debate over “the kinotita” of South Adelaide. For those that dont know the Greek Orthodox communities of South Adelaide Australia are not under any canonical church. The clergy they use fell into some scandal and there was hope they would join the GOARCH. The Greeks of the GOARCH cannot even make a case that apostolic succession is even neccesary! The Kinotita community owns their assets and will not turn over anything to the Archdiocese and view the clergy more as private contractors. The Orthodox under the Phanar simply cannot make a case for them to become canonical. As one greek member of the Kinotita responded: ..” so if your Greek Orthodox but dont send your money to a bishop your a bad Orthodox, but if your Orthodox that sends your money to bishops in Greece your a good Orthodox”. They have no firm response precisely because apostolic succession has been rendered asunder and watered down, accepting anyone and accepting the sacraments of everyone.   

      • Guy as always u spot on. This setting up straw Men of perfect patriarchates is misleading.   None perfect but the EP has led the race for the crown so to speak.  For worldly reasons to retain and gain power it had lost with 1453. 
        But in addition what the Phanar has done in Ukraine with the non – church is totally in new ball game and makes a totally pretense of the sacraments.   The actions of a protestant.  Under the guise of not being european centric,  paganism and secularism are being enthroned in the Church behind trendy,  soft words.  Now the Church has always baptised if u like all that good in a Culture.  After all the tradition of koliva and eating at grave side is direct from classical Greece.  But  it has a profound meaning and now a Christian one. This is something different.  I  believe rhe Church in Alaska has done similar and the Serbs with their family Slava.  e

    • Thank you Maximus! I agree with 99% of your post. Re your last paragraph: Yes some hierarchs, monks, priests and lay teachers have been saying and teaching at least at a parish and private level (seminars, retreats, youtube, blogs) what the now-contemporary Saints like St John of San Francisco, St. Sophrony and St. Paisius (as well as all the earlier Saints!) have been saying about ecumenism and spotting specific actions as ones to watch in the Church itself. My favorite saying from such a true priest is “Truth and love are innately bonded. If you separate them, you lose them both!” And of course the injunction to “speak the truth in love.” (In Christian psych we believe that both the truth and the Truth shall set you free.)

      Personally I pray in the fullness of time a truly Holy Council will be called to address the many long-accepted deviations and distortions of Orthodoxy which because unaddressed earlier now make it hard to call such a Holy Council in its true form. Praying our beloved Panagia will free her Son’s winebearers there to heed then “Do whatever He says.” However the All Holy Trinity may have an entirely different route of healing in mind. I do pray that the Protective Veil of Panagia will protect all souls at risk until that can be accomplished and pray that the souls of the schismatics and heretics will be healed unto repentance and meantime be removed from their teaching and sacramental positions in the Church until such repentance. And may each of us be called heed then “do whatever He says.”

  15. Let us be clear on this. Orthodoxy without Rome is in some sense provisional. Union with Rome is our hope – but only if Rome again becomes Orthodox; by which I mean the Pope must give up his delusions of world dominion and accept that for us he ‘…is as one of the Patriarchs, and that alone’, as St Mark of Ephesus so trenchantly expressed it. [He must also remove the Filioque from the Western Creed, resolve the Azymos controversy and ditch Papal Infallibility and other un-Orthodox dogmas of his system. There is a lot of pruning to be done before Rome becomes Orthodox. Oh. and Pachamama has to go too. Paganism is out.]
    Now, if the Pope of Rome be just ‘one of the Patriarchs – if he be Orthodox’, how can the Bishop of Constantinople be more than this and remain Orthodox?

    • Gail Sheppard says

      I don’t think the Pope has any intentions of giving up anything and if he did, I don’t know that the support is there. He is now saying, “unity in diversity; with much less absorption.”

      If only the RC could legitimately become Orthodox and leave their failings, i.e. the infallibility of the Pope, purgatory, indulgences, celibate priests, immaculate conception, the filioque, wafers, etc. behind. How happy I would be to have them, especially the more traditionally minded who don’t embrace Pope Francis’ antics.

      RCs are scandalized by what happened in the Amazon and despondent over their inability to do anything about it. Their pain is real and I think we should be reaching out to them in some legitimate way, i.e. not with Bartholomew at the helm. For Bartholomew, being in communion has more to do with control and furthering his own personal objectives like being “first without equal”, helping the environment, weakening his adversaries (Russia), and forging a path between eastern and western Europe that can be leveraged by special interest groups like our own government.

      Were it anybody but Bartholomew, the role of the EP could be used for good. Someone else in that role could be a true hero for rescuing the more traditionally minded Roman Catholics. But Bartholomew, as is the case with most of his endeavors, is talking to the wrong people about the wrong things.

      • Johann Sebastian says

        The only way I could see Rome becoming Orthodox (and bear with me on this) at least before the Ukrainian mess of the past year, would be for an Eastern-rite cardinal to be elected to the papacy.
        In that case, Unia would have backfired for Rome.
        Lex orandi, lex credendi.

        • Gail Sheppard says

          One could argue that the Unia IS backfiring on Rome because of the recent overtures of the OCU and Bartholomew. They’re trying to win them over (and take them over).

        • Johann Sebastian: You mean just like in the novel (and later movie) “The Shoes of the Fisherman” (by Morris L. West)? 😉

          • johann sebastian says

            Alex:

            In some ways, yes, but in that account, the Eastern Rite cardinal appeared to have adopted the contemporary Roman Rite upon assuming the Papacy and showed no sign of bringing Rome into alignment with Orthodoxy. In fact, references to Byzantine rite practices–let alone Orthodoxy itself disregarding ritual differences–are few and far between there, save for a few appearances of a three-bar cross and the epanokalimavkion.

      • I think genuine union with the monophysites is, not matter how remote, far more likely than genuine union with the Roman Catholics.  

      • Gail, I share your pain and would only add in the “etc” both the understanding of our Most Holy Theotokos as well as the notion that eastern Orthodox concept of the nous of the Holy Fathers and not the western intellect is supreme in Orthodoxy.  Roman Catholics accept and assume that  Catholicism is “progressive” in its understanding of Christ’s teaching and using the intellect have simply manufactured heresies from that false notion — such as the Assumption, radically different from our Dormition.  Orthodoxy has only clarified when challenged by heresy what Christ has revealed to the Holy among us, never changing the import of what that revelation is. Vastly different mindset (soulset), approach and results.

      • Gail: He is now saying, “unity in diversity; with much less absorption.”
        That is the problem, Gail. He is effectively saying “One Church, many faiths” – which is nonsense.

        • Gail Sheppard says

          Indeed. It is total nonsense.

        • Bredan,
          He is effectively saying,
          “One Church, many faiths, me the boss
          – which makes sense (to him).

          • I believe he is willing to concede that Bartholomew (or Elpidophorus) can be his underboss…

            • More likely the two “lungs” breathing as one “according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience.”
               
              The modernist ‘ecumenical’ version of Heather has two Mommies.
               
              Saint Paul describes it well.  It is a spirit that those firmly attached to this world gladly breathe, having not the Spirit of the Living God.  Those who know Christ (yes, even Roman Catholics who truly know Him) will see it for what it is and mourn while the world rejoices in their Kumbaya moment of ‘unity’ so-called.
               
               
              God willing, this wicked spirit of false union just might be transformed into His means of true union among those who know Him in faith, love, and truth.

              • “transformed” is not the word.  Forgive me.  “Used” might be a better word, as in “…all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.”

            • Alitheia1875 says

              Look for Elpidoforos to be the EP in 5 years, maybe even less.

    • George C Michalopulos says

      Brendan, I very much agree with you.  However as to the azymes, we actually lost that battle and realized that it was a cultural artifact and not a theological stumbling block.

      • I’m not sure what you mean here, George. I asked the priest who baptised me, the late Fr John Maitland Moir (a saintly man): ‘Do we use risen bread because – Christ is risen, so is the bread?’
        ‘No’ he said. ‘We use risen bread because that is what they used at the Last Supper.’
        ‘How do we know that?’ I asked.
        ‘Read the four Evangelists and St Paul in Greek’ he replied. ‘Everytime the bread used in the Last Supper is mentioned, the Greek word given is artos; which is common or garden risen bread. Now St Matthew and St John were there. St Mark got his information from St Peter – who was also there. While St Paul was not in attendance, we know he spoke to St John and St Peter. St Luke knew St Paul, and very likely St Peter – and possibly some others of the twelve; like Philip? In any case, it is a solid testimony to the bread being artos, not azymos.’
        [I may not have remembered the exact words, but that is the exact import.]
        So, we use artos because we always have (as Rome also used to do) because they did. The bad theology only enters into it to ‘justify’ another Western. innovation.

      • Monk James Silver says

        I can’t agree with you here, George, but I’m left wondering where such an idea originated.
         
        In the Gospels, when it’s important to make it known that unleavened bread (Hebrew matsoh) is being discussed, the evangelists consistently use the Greek word azymos (‘yeastless‘) .  On the other hand, when describing an ordinary loaf of bread, the word artos appears.
         
        We notice that our Lord Jesus Christ, during the supper with His apostles on the night when He was betrayed, ‘took a loaf of bread’ (elabon arton), ‘blessed it, broke it, and gave it to His disciples and apostles’.
         
        From this we learn two things:  first, that the bread which He offered as His Body was a loaf of yeast-raised bread, showing clearly that, second, this was not a Passover seder or even an ordinary meal during Passover, from which artos would have been excluded.
         
        Since RC and western eucharistic practice generally use unleavened bread for Holy Communion because they think that this meal took place during Passover, they use matsoh for their eucharistic bread and not only that, they use little individual wafers which were never part of one single loaf.
         
        Since this practice defies the scriptures and the Tradition altogether, it will indeed be a point which the heterodox must concede were they to convert to Orthodoxy en masse. 

        • George Michalopulos says

          I stand corrected!

        • In the year of the Crucifixion, the Passover coincided with the Sabbath. Both began at sunset for ‘the evening and the morning were the first day’ [Gen 1:5]. The evening and the morning in that order. They did not have the clocks that we have. Midnight was not easy to tell. But sunset and sunrise were not that difficult. So they numbered the days from sunset to sunrise to sunset. Then the new day began.
          Now, if the Last Supper was the Passover meal, Jesus would have been crucified on the day of the Passover, which was also the Sabbath. Had a crucifixion occurred in a Jerusalem whose population was swollen by returning Jews for the Sabbath Passover, there would have been a riot. Riots cost money. The Emperor at the time was Tiberius – a notoriously tight-fisted skinflint (except when funding his ‘fun’ palace in Capri) who did not like unnecessary expenditure. The Procurator Pontius Pilate will have been acutely aware of this, having caused a riot when first appointed by attempting to place the Roman Eagles in the Temple. His coat was on a shaky nail already. There is no way he would have allowed the crucifixion on the Sabbath. Why do you think it was so important to have Jesus certified dead and in the tomb before the sun went down and the new day (Sabbath/Passover) began?
          The use of artos for the bread is testimony to this. Had the meal been a Passover meal, the only bread available anywhere in Jerusalem would have been unleavened azymos, with the possible exception of the Roman camp. However on the Passover, the holiest day in Jewish life, they would be highly unlikely to use Gentile Roman leavened bread for the ritual meal – would they?
          So, St John has to be correct. The Last Supper was not the Passover seder

        • Antiochene Son says

          I once heard a theory that the RC use of unleavened wafers comes from practical issues of making and storing eucharistic bread in the northern European climes. It was much easier in missionary situations to bake small, hard wafers that would keep for a long time than to be constantly baking loaves of bread.
           
          I don’t know if that’s true, but it makes sense. Allusions to the unleavened Passover bread and such were later projections to try to bolster the practice in the face of scrutiny.
           
          I think there are reasonable explanations for many RC practices (such as the compulsory celibate priesthood: after the fall of Rome, the monasteries became the center of Church life, and the priests, being celibate monks, came to be the norm, and eventually the rule), but that doesn’t mean they are right. Many are examples of oikonomia becoming law through entrenchment.
           
          I always chuckle at traddy RCs who become incensed over suggestions of having a married priesthood—when they are in communion with Uniates and Anglican ordinariates who have married priests. Keep it as a Roman rite discipline if you must, but let’s not pretend your weird Latin practices all have legitimate theological significance.

          • Pere LaChaise says

            Monk Mark, as I have read the imposition of celibacy for Roman Catholic parish priests was not a result of monastic influence but of Patarene mob bullying of Italian clergy during the ascendency of Hilderbrand who later became Pope Gregory. It was a power move by the renovationist in a time of general chaos when it became opportune use a mob to drive out regular clergy and replace them with his own creatures.  

          • Monk James Silver says

            Antiochene Son (November 27, 2019 at 11:08 pm) says ;
             

            I once heard a theory that the RC use of unleavened wafers comes from practical issues of making and storing eucharistic bread in the northern European climes. It was much easier in missionary situations to bake small, hard wafers that would keep for a long time than to be constantly baking loaves of bread.  SNIP

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
             
            That this explanation of the RC use of unleavened eucharistic bread is false is easily demonstrated by the experience of the Orthodox in northern and eastern Europe, especially in Russia, where leavened bread has been used liturgically since at least the tenth century.
             
            There are other issues at work here, all of them errors and none of them theologically defensible.

        • Very wel said Monk James Silver.

    • Brendan,
      Not sure what you mean by Orthodoxy being “provisional” without Rome?  Truly Rome left Orthodoxy, which is tragic for them.  Orthodoxy stands alone as embodying Christ’s Revelation in full and we mourn for those who deviated from  the Body of Christ to any degree and to whatever distance.  And pray for their return which would then re-unite them to the full Revelation and healing process.  We are not a “human institution” or “religion”, per the Holy Fathers.  We always want all patients (laity, clergy, hierarchs, whomever) to come to the only and best spiritual hospital equipped by, empowered by and headed by Christ the Physician Himself with the Holy Fathers and canonical priests as His staff physicians.  

      • Nicole, I agree with you completely.
        I used the phrase ‘in some sense’ to suggest that there is still a place for them in the Church and in our hearts. Obviously I wasn’t clear enough, for which I apologise.

    • RC seminaries and pulpits are filled with pedophiles and homosexuals. The perversion is profound and therefore, unlikely to change in our lifetimes. We must fight attempts to force us into union with them.

  16. GoArmyBeatNavy says

    We don’t have 300 years for this to happen. The Religion of Peace across the Atlantic and the godless, Middle Kingdom Red Dragon across the Pacific will EAT OUR YOUNG and spit out the bones. Either unify and fight or die slow separate deaths (as the GO world is experiencing now). The demographics for both threats, jihad, and the Chinese 100 year Marathon Plan (see Michael Pillsbury’s book of same name) , assure a non-stop assault on America , it’s values, and its ability to protect Christianity. Don’t count on.the Russkies. By 2050, they will be 30-40% Muslim in their country and its former Republics (higher there). Wake up and smell the geo-political realpolitik and stop obsessing about who’s commemorating whom in the Liturgy. Happy Thanksgiving to all.

    • GoArmyBeatNavy,
       
      If seminary education serves me right, the Church chose living beneath the Islamic yoke rather than the Papal yoke, understanding the Faith wouldn’t be compromised under Muslims, but would be through the Papists. 
       
      This said, it’s a matter of fact Muslims are proxy warriors funded, trained and directed by globalists. We know as much given revelations in Syria, Chechnya, Libya, and elsewhere. This doesn’t mean Islam isn’t a threat – it is among many – but Muslims are generally used as mercenaries like the gender warriors here in America. What profits the body if we lose our soul?
       
      And I humbly beg to differ, it is absolutely NEEDFUL establishing and maintaining lines around who stands within the Church and who doesn’t stand within the Church. A doctor looks at the body, recognizes foreign elements – elements posing as healthy cells – and must treat the cancer, or the rest of the Body, its members, its functions and environment pollutes and dies. This sobering work of guarding and protecting the Lamb is given to every priest, literally, at ordination. 
       
       

      • Alitheia1875 says

        Indeed, the residents of Lemnos, and island in the northern Aegean, during the time of the Ottoman years, were put under the Venetians because the Ottomans wanted tribute but didn’t want to do the work so they gave it to the Venetians. But the Orthodox on the island objected to the Sultan because the Venetians were actively trying to convert the Orthodox to Roman Catholicism, while the Ottomans didn’t try to convert the Orthodox to Islam. The Lemnians put it this way in their appeal to the Sultan: “We prefer the turban to the triple crown”.

    • Johann Sebastian says

      At least their societies haven’t abandoned the traditional natural order. The adherents of western pseudochristianity and secular humanism are infinitely more of a threat to us than pagans and Muslims.

    • Goarmy-
      And what exactly will this unity accomplish? What kind of fight are you talking about?  You’ve already pinpointed the problem which is low birth rates of Orthodox nations. You want to kill ourselves quicker through a new set of crusades with the plan to lower their populations on par with ours? If these other groups overtake us, it’s on us not on them.  You need to stop drinking the MIC koolaid. 
      Secondly why would you even think China is a threat? Because your government and military told you so?  What are american values? The anti-family homosexual agenda? And how do you know the Chinese will never convert to Orthodoxy? 
      This is one problem with ecumenism, that its irrational. Belief that if a bunch of European centered christianities fused together will create a new noble empire,  europeans will immediately become devout again, buddhists and hindus will convert enmasse and fairy dust will rain down on us is pure fantasy.  
       

    • Johann Sebastian says

      https://youtu.be/xojlpj0P0xg
      https://youtu.be/80SqrnHPm_4
      This guy is quite popular in the Sunni world–and anathematized by the Saudis.
       

    • AnonSaysWhat says

      @GoArmyBeatNavy – Don’t be silly. The American State Dept. does not and will not protect Christianity. Who bombed Serbia and her Churches with depleted uranium to ensure sicknesses for years to come? If it was just for controlling certain foreign interests, why do that? 
       
      Elder Joseph of Vatopedi monastery, when he was alive, stated a prophecy that the dark forces of this world will do anything to end Orthodox Christian unity and end Orthodoxy itself. We see these works being done today. Schism is on the menu. He stated when their efforts fail, and they will, they will instigate the next world war. The Elder states the Vatican is also working hard to end Orthodoxy. And we have our Patriarch working towards these efforts. These are not just prophecies anymore… they are current events.
       
      https://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2009/07/prophecies-of-elder-joseph-of-vatopaidi.html
       
       
       

      • Exactly.  I was never a prophesy man and it was Christ, Himself who said only God knows the date so  to speak, but we are living these things in real time now.  

  17. Gus, I don’t know all the dates, but I can safely say that ROCOR may have been in communion with the Matthewites briefly in the mid-1970’s.Before then, any con-celebrations and consecrations of bishops was not done with knowledge and/or approval of the ROCOR synod of bishops. It’s safe to say that many ROCOR bishops were sympathetic to Archbishop Petros of Astoria. In the 1970’s, under the influence of Abbot Panteilemon of Brookline, ROCOR was in communion with the Matthewites but they were opposed to Archbishop Petros. The Matthewites broke with ROCOR shortly after ROCOR corrected their ordinations. And it wasn’t until the Glorification of Archbishop John Maximovitch, that ROCOR came in communion with Aetna/Fili Old Calendarists. That union ended with the Reconciliation with Moscow.
    Wouldn’t it be a refreshing change that instead of pursuing ecumenical talks with Roman Catholics and Protestants, that we commence dialogue with these good Christans that left the Church over issues that meant a lot to them. Those who know these people see them as good people-not far in their practices from the rest of us. I’m speaking of the Old Calendarists in Greece, Romania and Bulgaria. Also, the Russian Orthodox who couldn’t accept the reconciliation with Moscow. And of course, the Old Believers of Russia.
     

    • I agree with you except on one point. Just some background on old calendarism in America. Archbishop Petros was a priest under ROCOR (was also in the Metropolia before then for about a year) since the 1950’s. He was a bishop under the ROCOR synod, the irregular ordinations came about with the ordination of Akakios for Greece. It was only when ROCOR recognized the Florinites in 1969, that Petros officially became the Archbishop of Greek old calendarist florinites. In the mid-70’s ROCOR was in communion with both the Matthewites and Florinites.
      The one point is I do not view these as outside the Church. I follow the royal path such as Elder Philotheos Zervakos, Fr. Seraphim Rose, Photios Kontoglu etc Archbishop Averky etc. That these are two opposing camps of the same Church.

    • “Wouldn’t it be a refreshing change that instead of pursuing ecumenical talks with Roman Catholics and Protestants, that we commence dialogue with these good Christans that left the Church over issues that meant a lot to them. Those who know these people see them as good people-not far in their practices from the rest of us. I’m speaking of the Old Calendarists in Greece, Romania and Bulgaria. Also, the Russian Orthodox who couldn’t accept the reconciliation with Moscow. And of course, the Old Believers of Russia.”
      Amen!!!

      • Mikhail, a good thought.
        However, just imagine:
        We reconcile with all these group today,
        and …tomorrow all of us en groupe we are led to Rome by Bartholomew.
        Would it perhaps be better if we first sort out:
        Who wants to go to Rome let him go,
        and the rest of us reconcile with the above groups?
        Just a thought…

        • I agree Ioannis. Whoever chooses Rome, let them go quickly, so that the remaining Orthodox may continue in peace.

      • Just a point with regard to the statement “Also, the Russian Orthodox who couldn’t accept the reconciliation with Moscow.” Historical Tichonite ROCOR never had any “conciliation” with Moscow “MP” in the first place. That was a Soviet construct from its inception having no connection or correlation with the historical Russian Orthodox Church of Patriarch Tichon. When Met. Sergius Stragorodsky had assumed powers under the auspices of the Soviet authorities back in the 1920’s and then made his infamous “Declaration” in 1927 declaring his loyalties to the Soviet regime he had usurped rank of office and then once he had assumed usurped rank of office he then further usurped the powers of that office as well. He was never legit even though at the time he was a canonical bishop, albeit a “renovationist” who was brought back into clerical rank through repentance. “Moscow Patriarchate” was never either the name or the designation of the pre-revolutionary ROC Patriarchate of St. Patriarch Tichon. St. Patriarch Tichon was the Patriarch of All Russia. So just a point of clarification there that the historical ROCOR and the MP were never in any kind of communion, when the “unia” of 2007 took place that was a “first.” As far as Bart showing his colors everyone already knows maybe that’s all for the better, end the charade, want to be Catholic be a Catholic and lets quit beating around the bush. Papal primacy, immaculate conception, filioque, infallibility etc. just call it all “historical differences” and sweep it under the rug. “Technical details” getting in the way of “brotherly love” they will say. 

  18. https://orthochristian.com/125966.html
     
    It appears that Black Bart may have rescinded on his promise to canonize Elder Joseph the Hesychast and others. He announced five last month, but only two got added to the calendar…

  19. As the Phanar sucks up to Papa Pachamama,
    see what Papa’s best boy is up to…
    https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/dead-silence-from-church-hierarchy-on-fr-james-martins-depiction-of-jesus-as-a-gay-man

    • Gail Sheppard says

      One day soon, the Catholics are going to be joining us on this blog and we’ll have a whole new entity to rail about, i.e. the Catholic Church. The traditionalists among them are horrified by this sort of stuff. – It’s not enough to be more compassionate and inclusive with some of these people. Some would have us change the Gospel to fit the way they would like the Church to be.

  20. From the EP’s new man in England:
     
    “We, as the leaders, need to visit each other in the “sacred space” of the other. Perhaps, we need to form a new religious holiday and bring all faiths together and make it an annual celebration – a global celebration for humanity and truth.”
     
    http://www.thyateira.org.uk/archbishop-nikitas-at-an-interfaith-programme-symposium-in-austria/
     
    Yikes!

    • “His Master’s Voice”!
      Yikes squared!

    • Quote: ‘Religious leaders need to stand together, make public statements together, and mush more.’
      ‘Mush.’ That sums it up perfectly.

    • George C Michalopulos says

      Basil, I could say much here but I’d rather not. 
      Instead, let his words speak for themselves:  “Hate speech” and “hate crimes” are the coming tools of oppression.   Make no mistake about it.  The LBGTQ+ people are honing their swords in order to use them –I think quite effectively, I might add.
      You will know which side many hierarchs of the Ecumenical Patriarchate are on in due time.
      ‘Nuff said.

    • He’s worried about hate speech? Politics? Not truth or the salvation of souls? He sounds more like a UN social worker than an Orthodox Archbishop.

      The organization that sponsored the conference is KAICIID, which I had to do some digging to find out is the initiative of King Abdullah of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Not exactly a bastion of religious freedom and human rights.

    • Pere LaChaise says

      When a Council of Primates is called, Abp. Nikitas must be called to the floor to explain his innovative idea. If he does not recant, this should result in his deposition. For a new head of a Diocese to so boldly infer that our current cycle of theological liturgical feasts needs augmentation to fit a feast of ecumenism shows this man has no root in Holy Tradition and is opposed to the consensus of the Fathers of the Church.
      Anathema!

    • Antiochene Son says

      Not only is that theologically unsound, it is also just plain gay.

  21. The only reasons for the EP taking the course that it has are:

    Bribes
    Blackmail
    Union with Rome

    And I think all 3 are probably at work. The EP has not increased its stature in the Church. His actions only make sense if he plans on taking what he can with him on his way out the door.

    • I think, Fr John, that pride has a part to play as well, pride that refuses to be upstaged by ‘upstart’ Russians in a Church in which he sees ‘Hellenismos’ as synonymous with Orthodoxy – and himself as ‘Primus sine Paribus’ therein.
      He seems to have problems with the notion that the Church may be a place: ‘Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all. [Col 3:11]

      • This is where the little old OCA has a major role to play. As a postethnic church full of people from nowhere in particular, just living in the USA and trying to be Orthodox despite all, we have no dog in the fight of ´Ελλενισμός/Ρωμιοσύνη vs. Русски мир.  We just appoint excellently educated priests to sacrificially serve small parishes and appoint serious, qualified and dedicated native Bishops to oversee them for nominal pay. There is no room for ambitious careerists unless they want to be worked to death literally at SVOTS. And they won’t get paid much doing it. 
        Sure, all the foreign-headed churches deride the OCA as the ‘poor church’ that doesn’t flatter their well-heeled clientele who must  to be seen by neighbors as belonging to ‘a major denomination’ that showcases congregants’ material success in diaspora. 
        I don’t think proud Russophiles and hellenophiles, or even Arabs or Serbs will ever join our churches in substantial numbers. We will have to get on without them and grow from our poor American soil. But history already shows that ethnic churches always die in a few generations if not sooner.  Orthodoxy does not ultimately  admit of idolatry and phyletism; the consistent appeal to legitimation through blessings from foreign overlords and privileging of European homeland culture will ultimately cost these jurisdictions everything, if it is not sacrificed for the sake of Christ’s Gospel. How many churches must void themselves of young families and newcomers marginalized by clergy and elder congregants insisting that Liturgy continue as a tribute to memories of Bucharest, Sofia, Fener, St. Petersburg? These churches are already dying the demographic death. 
        We have no dog in the fight of the Olde Worlde Orthodoxies. Personally, I am on the side of the Tradition and Canons which Moscow happens to stand on at present. But if the shoe was on the other foot, I’d have to side with ‘Stamboul (except in this universe they’ve been consistently wrong since my grandfather mustered out of the Army in ‘18). 
        There won’t be any earthly reward or gratuitous payoff for holding to the middle, humbly inclusive path in the OCA or whatever jurisdiction’s churches we attend. But if we find significant exclusivist cultural pride and feelings of superiority you can bet the devil — and Matt Heimbach — is welcome there. 

        • Gail Sheppard says

          Spoke to yet another OCA bishop who assured me that apart from what we already have, the only autocephaly they would be interested in is true autocephaly (not what the schismatics have) that’s all-inclusive.    

          • Michael Bauman says

            I am confident that if we just kick the Greeks out of the room here in the US so that adults can make proper decisions and then invite them in with restrictions proper to 5 year olds in adult company, it would not take long to make significant advancement. Or is it the adult children making decisions for the welfare of their unfortunately demented parent? Take your pick

            • Antiochene Son says

              If it hadn’t been for the Greeks, the Church in the US would have had administrative unity long ago. We can all agree to set aside some of our local color for the greater good, but not to be ruled over by the Pope in Istanbul.

              • Peter A. Papoutsis says

                No i disagree. Its not just the Greeks my friend. 
                Peter

                • George Michalopulos says

                  AS, I must agree with Peter here.  Although what you say was true for decades, it was Arb Iakovos of blessed memory who tried by hook and crook to create a truly united American Church.  He did this first with SCOBA in the early 60s. 

                  He also went to bat for the Metropolia when EP Athenogoras went ballistic after Moscow granted them autocephaly.  And then it was him and Met Philip Saliba who spearheaded the Ligonier movement.  

                  So it’s complicated.  As for the average GOA layman today (who only has some Greek ancestry), I would say that I will not be surprised if it is they who will be standing up to the EP/GOA nexus sooner rather than later.

            • Tim R. Mortiss says

              When you say Greeks, Michael, do you mean those who are Greek by ancestry, or do you mean total Anglos like me who belong to a GOA parish, or our priest, who is one who is as Greek as a high-caste Hindu family member can possibly be? Or both?
              Let us know when we can be invited back into the room…

            • Michael,
              It seems things are incredibly simple:
              If you remove the Greek majority then Fanarion (= little lamp) has no excuse at all to ask for any money! 
              That is why GOA is not evangelizing but rather greek-keeping.

        • Michael Bauman says

          Claes, indeed. When I was writing this: http://www.monomakhos.com/22258-2/ I came to the astounding (to me) and uncomfortable conclusion that the OCA is the jurisdiction best positioned to lead here in the United States. Unfortunately, the closest OCA parish to me is, I believe, is in Kansas City about 3.5 hours away (legally). George’s is next closest. Then Theotokos Unexpected Joy parish in Ash Grove, MO. Even if there were one in Oklahoma City, that is still way outside my weekly travel radius.

          I have worshipped in several OCA parishes over the years and have many friends in the OCA including some priests. At least in this part of the country–what you say is true. But, like all the other Orthodox, they need to get over the coastal/big city mentality. Especially, get the central headquarters the **** out of New York.

        • Claes I’m greek, that is passport, and language and Birth and greek mother and half greek father BUT WELL SAID. Every word. There are as today wonderful parishes in OCA living this in reality. The rest will die. I have experience wonderful worship in english in USA that is one with Churches in Moscow or elsewhere.

  22. Why beat around the bush, Father?  Tell us what you really think (LOL!).
     
    One does get a distinct sense that while we are occupied with arguing for truth and righteousness according to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, others who cloak their covetousness in religious authority sneer at us in disdain, essentially saying, “You weak miserable fools!  That’s not how the world works.”
     
    “And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.  And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.”

  23. Michael Bauman says

    It is interesting how quickly people forget. The normative approach to the Roman Catholic Church (since it has never been abrogated) is the 1848 Encyclical of the Eastern Patriarchs to Pope Pius the IX. It is also intriguing that the text is up on the Fordham site. https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/1848orthodoxencyclical.asp Has anything in the RCC actually gotten better since 1848?

    Union with Rome under any pretense is unacceptable. Bartholomew’s movement in that direction is a betrayal of thousands of saints and martyrs and ordinary believers who have stood in the heat of the day and suffered the slightest calumny for our refusal to recognize the Pope as head of the Church, etc, etc., etc, and all of the miasmic innovations that have vomited forth from the Curia’s mouth. Anaxios, Anaxios, Anaxios.

    My, what a world wide drop in testosterone have our bishops experienced since then. A.D. 1848 was a watershed year in terms of the mind of the world as I have noted before. This encyclical was and remains a resounding shot across the bow of the worldly mind and its antipathy to the Orthodox Church.

    I know not what course the Orthodox bishops will take. I pray and hope that they will stand their ground relying on the grace and mercy of our Lord and not go running after worldly approval as has Bart, the Betrayer, but for me an my house, we will serve the Lord.

    • Anyone read the headline that the new Greek Orthodox bishop of Argentina is named Joseph Bosch?
      cant find anything on him
      maybe he is RC?
      introduced distantly in a far land
      but evidence of a quiet union
      hoping I’m dead wrong

      • Alitheia1875A says

        He was born in Argentina. Received his theological education in Thessalonika, Balamand and Rome (Catholic University of Thomas Aquinas) and received doctorates from Thessalonika and Rome conceerning St John of Damascus, St. Gregory Palamas and Thomas Aquinas. (Brief synopsis of part of the article from the Greek found through Google on the EP website)
        He has also been involved in ecumenical circles, the WCC, etc.
        Draw your own conclusions.

  24. Michael Bauman says

    I post this link to the what remains the normative statement of the Orthodox Church regarding the Rome Catholic schismatics: https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/1848orthodoxencyclical.asp

    I find many things intriguing concerning this document:
    1. It was published in 1848 which was a watershed year in which the great vomitus mass of nihilistic philosophies began to be unleashed in the west
    2. The second paragraph declares:

    § 2. Hence have arisen manifold and monstrous heresies, which the Catholic Church, even from her infancy, taking unto her the whole armor of God, and assuming the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God (Eph. vi. 13-17,) has been compelled to combat. She has triumphed over all unto this day, and she will triumph for ever, being manifested as mightier and more illustrious after each struggle..

    3. It is up to Bart the Betrayer to tell us what has gotten better in the RCC since that time, item by item–and how in his weakness and concupiscence he has given up the struggle.

    4. The testosterone level of our bishops has had a marked decline since then.

    5. The site where this document can be found is intriguing in itself and I wonder how long it will remain there.

    I know not what course our bishops will take, I hope and pray that at least one remain true. For me an my house, we will serve the Lord.

    The whole thing is disgusting and I am being kind

  25. The 1848 and the 1895 encyclical should be plastered all over the churches. How far the WCC and Latin Ecumenists have succeeded in changing us. 

  26. I don’t move around in high places, but I think I have some feel—after decades of pastoring them—for the sentiments of ordinary Orthodox parishioners in this country.
    Among them, I believe, there is zero interest for union with the Pope or with anybody else. I have never seen a trace of it;
    Indeed, given the antics of the current Pope, I think there may now be a genuine hostility to the idea.

    • Michael Bauman says

      Fr. Pat, that is good to know but it is beyond obvious that Bart and his crew do not care about this country or the people here.  There are enough former RCs to make any such “union” a no go here I am sure but I have found that even our best bishops can be quite naive when it comes to non-Orthodox beliefs and practice.  Without the experience elsewhere it can be easy to think too charitably about the heresy elsewhere.  If Bart the Betrayer had and actual flock, it might be different.  
       

  27. Jonas Refipas says

    Bart is facing fait accompli, with four fifths of his flock already RC by marriage even in Greece where they marry their Polish and Filipina maids and RC marriages yield substantially more offspring. Even USA elderly depend increasingly on RC home care aides to bring them to church and we see these Jamaican, Dominican and Filipina nurses doing their cross the latin way.