Not a Good Sign

You gotta hand it to the Phanar. They’ve been dealt a bad hand ever since 1453 but they’ve always managed to find a way to not play it if at all possible. On the other hand, on those occasions in which they do play it, it tends to make matters worse for Constantinople.

According to the semi-official website of the Moscow Patriarchate (Pravoslavie.ru/english/101923.htm), His Holiness, Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople is stoking anti-Muscovite embers in Ukraine, widely dropping hints that he “will help [them] find…a united Church.”

The occasion for this announcement was on March 15, when Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman of Ukraine, paid a visit to the Phanar. Groysmen presented His Holiness with news that there is a groundswell among Ukrainians to solve the long-simmering schismatic situation that exists among Orthodox Christians there.

According to Pravoslavie.ru; “Ukrainian politicians and non-canonical schismatic “Orthodox” clergy have appealed to the Ecumenical Patriarchate many times to involve himself in the canonical territory of the Moscow Patriarchate and declare the Ukrainian Church autocephalous, which he has thus far declined to do.”

Bartholomew replied to Groysman, “[w]e can be optimistic about the future.” While sympathetic to the Ukrainian’s plea, note what word did not pass Bartholomew’s lips –i.e. autocephaly. When it comes to the Phanar, statements and more importantly unstatements, are key.

Clearly, His Holiness understands this. As well as the fact that going down this road could blow up in his face as the situation in Ukraine is anything but stable.

Worse, the reverberations that would redound upon the Phanar would not be pleasant. The Ukrainians for one thing would be livid if anything less than autocephaly was granted. For one thing, it would make them appear weak in the face of Putin’s Russia. It would in fact solidify the Muscovite narrative that Ukraine (or “Little Russia”) is an integral part of the Rusyn civilization and thus, the Russian Orthodox Church. This is how (for example), Constantinople views the Orthodox Church in America –as a semi-autonomous archdiocese of Moscow.

This is not what the Ukrainians want. If anything, those who remain loyal to Kiev, want nothing at all to do with Russia, now or forever. They are even willing to amputate their Eastern, Russophilic limb if that’s what it takes to create a more homogeneous nation. An autocephalous Church, one that was at least recognized by Constantinople and its dependencies would go a long way to solidifying their ethnogenic narrative. Although this would enrage Moscow, short of an actual invasion, there would be nothing they could do. In this sense, the Ukrainians would only have to worry about themselves and not give a rip about the international fallout.

Bartholomew however has no such luxury. The Phanar would have to consider what the Russian response would be. For one thing, Moscow would up its game in Damascus and if it becomes obvious that Constantinople continues to follow the globalist path –which ultimately leads to Rome–then Moscow can force the issue and Antioch would then become first among the Diptychs. All the other local Churches that the Phanar has antagonized over the years would give such a move serious consideration, as it would move them all up two spots in the pecking order.

Just because the Phanar is relatively weak doesn’t mean that they’re stupid. Surely there are some cooler heads there that understand that the globalist narrative which propped them up over the last several decades is in serious trouble. Thanks to the Brexit and the recent presidential election in the United States, the previous transnational way of doing things is no longer operative. President Erdogan of Turkey learned this lesson the hard way earlier last month when he tried to cajole President Trump into seeing things his way in Syria, rather than Putin’s. As we reported earlier, Erdogan’s pleas fell on deaf ears.

Quite simply, the Phanar’s stock as a State Department asset has dwindled significantly.

To be sure, the Ukrainian-autocephaly card is a high one. Unfortunately for the Phanar, when it’s the only card, it makes it hard to play. Moreover, Constantinople’s continued antagonism of more traditional elements throughout the rest of the Orthodox world has not made them many friends. According to some souces, the entirety of Mount Athos has stopped commemorating the Ecumenical Patriarch for some years now. Many of these people already look to Moscow for leadership.

As is known, one of the sticking points between Constantinople and Moscow (among others) is the power to grant autocephaly. Moscow believes that any Mother Church can grant autocephaly. Istanbul on the other hand believes that only an Ecumenical Council can do so, and absent of such a council, only the Ecumenical Patriarchate possesses that right. A third way, one which was more conciliar and would split the differences, was being adjudicated in Crete during last year’s “council” but nothing came of it.

That being said, the Phanar has been extremely stingy when it comes to granting autocephaly. Throughout its history, national Churches only arose when the natives seized the reins of power and declared their autocephaly on their own, often to the great chagrin of the Mother Church in Constantinople. The one time in recent memory when Constantinople did so (in Estonia), it only angered Moscow and the wounds between the two Churches have not healed. (It also granted Albania autocephaly but that country was never in the cross-hairs.) At any rate, the autocephaly of the tiny Estonian Church has proved to be somewhat of an embarrassment.

Because of this history, it is doubtful that the present Ecumenical Patriarch or his putative successor (Elpidophorous Lambrianides, whose papal pretensions are even more startling that Bartholomew’s) is going to be profligate with creating Local Churches unmoored from the Phanar. If anything, the Phanar has been laying the groundwork for rescinding the autocephaly of the Church of Greece and taking the entire Greek nation back into its sheep-fold. It’s not too implausible to believe that they would like to do so as well with Bulgaria, Serbia and the other Balkan Churches as well. (They were able to do so several centuries ago thanks to the Ottoman armies which conquered those states.)

Here’s to hoping that cooler heads prevail and the Phanar take into account the ruptures that would happen in Orthodoxy should they force the Ukrainian issue.

Comments

  1. Well Moscow and the EP ought work it out at their next meeting at the WCC.
    I mean getting granted “autocephaly” from Tolstoy or Lenin or Stalin isn’t gonna
    save no souls. Barking up the wrong tree, old expression, but may be useful.
    Then there is the “dog that does not bark” in Book of Isaiah and he’s not doing his job.

  2. 15 March – same day as the forced abdication of the Tsar-Martyr.

    • Estonian Slovak says:

      Wonder if that was intentional. Toto executed General Draza Mihailovic on July 17, 1946, exactly 28 years after the Soviets butchered the Tsar Martyr and his family. I’m sure he purposely chose that date.

  3. Joseph Lipper says:

    Is this what’s called Byzantine intrigue?

    • George Michalopulos says:

      Yes, but the Byzantines actually had an army and a state to support it while they went and did all their intrigues. Sigh.

  4. Monk James says:

    This is theoretical papacy, pure and simple, in an Orthodox disguise, and it is NOT the solution of Constantinople’s age-old problem of asserting primacy among the Orthodox churches at the same time as it is reduced to a population of just a few thousand Christians, a large proportion of them priests and bishops of fictive places.. We know that we’re in trouble wheneverthe chiefs outnumber the Indians.

    The Phanar is doing its best to stay afloat as it continues to sink in the quagmire of antichristian Turkey and of Islam altogether. Everyone understands this but few admit it out loud, especially Constantinople.

    It’s time and past time for Constantinople to admit that it has gone extinct just as old Rome did, if for only slightly different reasons, and pass the torch to Moscow.

  5. Gail Sheppard says:

    I am so confused by what the EP does and continues to do.

    He must not and should not insist he speaks for the Orthodox world, yet he does. He must not and should not interfere in another’s territory, yet he does. He must not and should do what he did in Crete, yet he did?

    How do we witness to the world when we allow this man, who says he speaks for us, do and say things that are in direct conflict with our practices and teachings? Don’t they use spiritual courts for this kind of thing?

  6. Gail,

    You seemed confused about Rasputin as well, but quick to defend him. Monk? Not a Monk? Some say a Martyr as well? Opinions like belly buttons every one has one. Oddly not so quick to defend Ecumenical Patriarch. If he does not speak for the Orthodox world, who does? Is our church without a Ecumenical Patriarch? Who made that decision? Perhaps we should be careful how WE disparage the living and the dead. With so much hate in the world and such harsh words spoken of EP, by so many, you may disparaging a future Martyr. God forbid! Remember Saint Nectarios was also vilified by many members of the Hierarchy. He was also ignored, and slandered, in their jealously, hatred of a brother Bishop. I will be patient with EP, and see what his long game might be. He alone cannot splinter Orthodoxy, it would take a team effort. We should all remember that.

    Again sorry if I offend, but I don’t believe Moscow should become third Rome. We all know Putin controls all of Russia. Which means The Russian Church is under Putin to some degree as well. Yes everything seems well now, but what if we have future EP in third Rome Moscow, who at some point does not see eye to eye with Putin’s adventures in world affairs. Not a good situation. For one I don’t want Putin influencing who our future EP’s would be, and what they should be allowed to say about world affairs. Two when a country has a leader such as Putin, Russia is just ripe for future revolts, who knows who the next leader of Russia will be. Perhaps not even a Christian. Look at the atheist Greek PM who would not even put his hand the bible at his swearing into office.

    The world can change overnight. Moscow or Istanbul, or even Jerusalem is not the answer, as they are too unstable. My opinion is the Holy Mountain, Mount Athos. Two changes would have to occur, one make Mount Athos, a City State, like The Vatican, and two a portion of Mount Athos would have to accept women, most likely where the EP headquarters would be.

    Thank you for your prayers, and always know I always pray for all my brothers and sisters of Monomakhos, regardless if we agree or disagree.

    • George Michalopulos says:

      Dino, very interesting observations. Much food for thought.

      However, my answer is that the Orthodox Churches do not need an “ecumenical” anybody. We don’t need a spokesman in other words. One of our strengths is that our theology is remarkably uniform. The term “ecumenical” was first used when Constantinople was the “ecumenical city”. In much the same way that Washington, DC is “the federal city”. There was nothing universal about it.

      Anyway, my 2c.

      I do like your idea of Mt Athos being the lodestar (so to speak) of Orthodoxy. I for one would like to see the entire Phanariote system wiped clean of auxiliary bishops and only monks from Mt Athos standing for election for the Constantinopolitan see.

      • Not a bad idea.

        The truth of Orthodoxy is guarded by the Holy Spirit in a Great and Holy Synod recognized by reception. Reception is the dog that doesn’t bark.

        If the Orthodox faithful reject an alleged council, then it is not a true Orthodox council. There can be no outside criterion for the location of the Church if the Holy Spirit dwells within it. And it does. All we need do is have faith in the pillar and ground of truth, the Orthodox Church.

      • Monk James says:

        Men who go to Athos are trying to avoid notice, so please let’s not cull the monks there for candidates for the episcopate, let alone the patriarchate of Constantinople.

        And as long as I have your attention, dear friends, I’d like us to avoid words like ‘see’ to describe a bishop’s responsibilities. Let’s file that with ‘chasuble’ and other words of heterodox provenance.

        Altogether, especially in English, we cravenly depend on Roman Catholic and Protestant vocabulary to describe our life in The Church when there are easily available and perfectly acceptable Orthodox terms for the same things.

        We’re outnumbered by the RCs, but they’re outbelieved in our Christian faith by us Orthodox .

        As my spiritual father used to say: ‘Why is it that every time the pope sneezes, the Orthodox catch a cold?

        Please, let’s learn and use our own words, even in English. These are ‘teachable moments’!’

        • The pope is a heretic, as is Bartholomew. The difference is that Bartholomew has been brought up on charges of heresy and the pope hasn’t.

      • Fr. Philip (Speranza) says:

        George,
        The Patriarch of Constantinople carries the title “Ecumenical Patriarch” only because that See was once the primatial See of the Oikoumene, “the household,” a.k.a. the Byzantine Empire, whose boundaries were considered to be the boundaries of the civilized world. The word “ecumenical” in the title never carried the same connotation the word took on only in the 20th Century. Interestingly, it is also only in the 20th Century, under Patriarch Meletios, that the current papal pretensions were embraced. That the See continues to use the title long after the Oikoumene has disappeared strikes me as simply sad, like the tabby cat claiming to be a lion on his great-great-great grandmother’s side.

        As for only Athonite monks being eligible for election to Constantinople, neat idea—but difficult. According to Turkish law, the person elected must be a Turkish citizen; and a Turkish citizenship can be tough to obtain, especially in the increasingly anti-Christian climate.

        • Actually, the patriarchs of Constantinople started applying the name “Ecumenical” to themselves out of arrogance. Even the Orthodox popes began to call them on it and it went into remission, then re-emerged.

          • George Michalopulos says:

            Technically true, but Fr Philip’s point was that when it was resurrected in the thirteenth century, it was during a time of political insecurity, to reassure the Christian oikoumene that “Rome” still stood. It had no universalist pretensions whatsoever.

            To the extent that it extended beyond the Byzantine polity (i.e. Kievan Rus’), it was understood that the it encompassed the proper boundaries of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. In Dmitri Ouspenski’s magisterial book (Byzantium and the Slavs) the concept of oikoumene was viewed as a “Byzantine commonwealth”.

        • George Michalopulos says:

          Agreed. Putin is no choirboy but at least he’s an Orthodox Christian “not-a-choirboy”. As a Greek, fingernails scratch across the chalkboard when I am forced to the realization that a Moslem has the right to select the EP. One who is almost always philo-Islamic and –let us be frank here–anti-evangelical.

          We should never have stood for that.

          • Except that if the EP moved to the Holy Mountain, the Turks can pound sand who our next EP would be George!

            Putin is not the poster boy we should want for Orthodoxy!

          • Michael Bauman says:

            George, that Moslems and Jews pick the Partiarchs Constantinople and Jerusalem is nothing new. Been going on since AD1435 as far as the EP is concerned.

            That existential fact should be taken into account in how how much we listen to what they say.

            In fact we should realize that all of the Patriarchs are politically constrained and comprimised. Even Russia. Discernment is necessary.

            • George Michalopulos says:

              Not a good thing though, eh? I can’t see anything ideal about it.

              Let’s look at this from the Russophobes’ perspective: they constantly denigrate the Romanov dynasty for letting the patriarchate fall into abeyance then having a layman sit at the head of the Holy Synod as “Ober-procurator“.

              As odious as that is (and it is certainly nowhere near the ideal), the fact remains that under these laymen (many of whom were German Protestants), the ROC grew and evangelized.

              That’s a conundrum I grant you but there it is.

              • Yes. It’s easy to get tied up in conundrums. Peter the Great refused to allow the election of a patriarch for the Church of Russia. It became governed by a Most Holy Synod. Peter lacked the authority to abolish anything having to do with the Church, but his action had an effect. There was a vacancy on the throne of the Patriarch of Moscow and all Rus’ for many years. Yet the Church survived there without any primate whatsoever. That, in contradistinction to the assertions of the Phanar that everything depends on the primate.

                Later, in 1917, the patriarchate was restored. This took place practically simultaneously with the Bolshevik Revolution. Very shortly thereafter, as the situation deteriorated, the Supreme Church Authority for the Church of Russia was transferred abroad, by Patriarch Tikhon. This was restored in 2007.

                The Church has the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. It needs no other primate than Christ. Earthly primacy is simply an administrative position. This is the lesson that the Roman Catholics failed.

                Hope that helps.

                • http://buchanan.org/blog/ryancare-route-winning-losing-126725

                  Pat nails it again. This is getting interesting.

                  • George Michalopulos says:

                    The longer I’ve been around, the more I see Pat’s prescience on so many issues.

                    My belief is that this is because Pat is the closest thing to a Christian Democrat we have in the US. We used to call these people paleocons but that’s only part of it. Because they were traditionalist Christians who had a Jeffersonian understanding of human frailty, they believed in history and things like Natural Law.

                    I realize this is an oversimplification but true conservatives have always believed as the ancient Greeks and Romans did regarding the nature of man and his polities. Ideologues and other utopians never did. As such, I’ve come to the realization that Trump is a conservative in the true sense of the word: one who sees the world as it is (i.e. in a Hobbesian way). Pat pointed this out but I saw it immediately when he tweeted out after the Ryancare debacle that Obamacare is now (still) the law of the land. And even according to the best estimates, it’s still going to collapse sooner rather than later.

                    Having said that, the delicious irony is that it was the ideologues of the Freedom Caucus who did us the favor of pulling the plug on Ryancare (which was as bad as Obamacare). They also exposed the fecklessness of Ryan –another ideologue–who has been so overrated that it’s now apparent for all to see. Hopefully, they’ll get rid of him.

      • George Michalopulos says:

        Dino, forgive the abruptness of my response to you. I should have let Gail answer for herself.

        My concern (and thus, my haste) was due to the fact that a new breed of intellectuals in the Ecumenical Patriarchate are pushing a shocking, novel ecclesiological theory which explicitly states that the First See is sine parabus (i.e. “without equal”).

        This is nothing less than Eastern papalism, pure and simple and its main proponent right now is Metropolitan Elpidophorous Lambrianides, of the defunct See of Brusa. (I’ll write more about this soon.)

        Anyway, long story short, the “ecumenical” part of the Constantinopolitan See has now veered off into an ecclesiosological heresy, one which would lead to massive ruptures world-wide within Orthodoxy. Hence my great alarm.

        Please forgive my haste.

    • I’d rather have Putin (who is at least a baptized Orthodox Christian) influencing who the EP is than the Turkish government—which DOES have a veto over who assumes the throne.

      But along with George, I agree that the Holy Mountain, or Mount Sinai, or some arrangement of the most venerable monasteries should have a decisive role in all of this.

    • Putin doesn’t control the Church. Russia more or less works in symphonia. Thanks be to God.

      Ye of little faith. Were you not told that the prince of this world would deceive the whole world in the end times? We are seeing it transpire. Don’t be alarmed though. It had to come to pass. God works in mysterious ways.

      It might be tomorrow or a hundred years from now, but Christ is returning. I’d say, judging by what’s going on, sooner rather than later. In fact, I can say with some certainty based on events that the unloosing of Satan that was to transpire in the end times is what we are seeing. The “thousand years” was probably the Church Age, from the time of Christ to the Bolshevik Revolution. The Bolshevik Revolution was in 1917. Now it is 2017.

      Rest easy friends and neighbors.

      It is not a good sign for the Phanar that it has been charged with heresy. It obviously has lapsed. Fear not. God will work it all out. Perhaps even Patriarch Bartholomew can be restored to the faith. Who knows?

      It is an exciting time to be alive.

    • Gail Sheppard says:

      Dino, Rasputin claimed to be a monk, but by no stretch of the imagination do *I* believe he was a monk! I didn’t defend him! I repeated what was said about him at the time which explains why he was accepted into the Royal Family’s inner circle. There were Orthodox bishops and priests in the Church who referred to him as a monk, which might explain why Alexandra was so open to receiving his help. There is no evidence to suggest she knowingly brought a “demon” into home as was suggested. She *believed* Rasputin was who he purported to be. – I never heard anyone call him a martyr. Can you provide a link to that effect? – Rasputin was a charlatan who was not without some talent.

      With regard to the EP, I am questioning his *actions,* not his *person.* He is guilty of heresy. I don’t recall saying anything about him one day becoming a martyr. If that were to happen, it would not change my opinion about his activity. By the same token, his recent actions would not preclude him from being a martyr. These things are not mutually exclusive. Some thought Saint John Maximovich was crazy for not wearing shoes. I can’t speak to his state of mind. He may very well have been crazy but that does not mitigate the fact that he is also a bonafied Saint to whom I pray.

      You can be patient with the EP all you want, but the things he is doing threaten the Church. I’m not in the minority with reagrd to my thinking. The Church trumps everything, including the EP. He needs to be retired and I suspect something along these lines is being discussed as we speak. We, of course, all pray for his safety. After Crete, when his own airport was attacked did you call to check to see if he was alright? I did.

      Mount Athos will not change, the EP will not relocate there and the only woman allowed on Mount Athos is the woman to whom the island belongs.

      • Monk James says:

        Gail Sheppard (March 25, 2017 at 9:45 pm) says:

        ‘Dino, Rasputin claimed to be a monk….’ SNIP
        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        Is that for certain? This is the first time I’ve heard such a thing!

        • Gail Sheppard says:

          Father James, I should have used a more descriptive term. I don’t think he was perceived as a conventional monk, but as a staryets. As far as I can tell, he did nothing to dispel this understanding. Even the Royal Family’s Bishop investigated him and seemed to come to a favorable conclusion:

          “However, at that time, Rasputin had with Their Majesties a defender who was much more powerful, more influential and with more access than all others: Bishop Theophane, who, in 1908, had become Confessor to Their Majesties.

          “Could they not trust their spiritual guide, could they not have faith in the words of a man of such solid religious convictions, of such vast theological knowledge and whose unshakeable devotion to true Orthodoxy was universally known, in the clergy no less?”

          “Bishop Theophane was also sent, at the Empress’s wish, to Rasputin’s native village in order to gather information about him there. The Bishop spent some time in Rasputin’s home in Pokrovskoie, and discussed the subject of him with the Blessed Macarius, of Verkotouie and reported the most favorable information back to Their Majesties.”

          http://www.alexanderpalace.org/palace/rasputin-romanovs-meeting.html

      • Gail,
        With all respect now you are confusing me as well. You first said, “I think Rasputin was an Orthodox monk believe it or not!”(March 21, 2017 at 3:30am). Then you said,”I didn’t say he lived like a monk. I said he was a monk.”(March 21,2017 at 9:51pm). Then you said, “Maybe he just looks like a monk and liked hanging out with Orthodox clergy.”(March 24, 2017)And finally, “Dino, Rasputin claimed to be a monk, but by by no stretch of the imagination do *I* believe he was a monk!”(March 25, 2017 at 9:45pm) Oh well.

        I’m not a huge fan of EP, just respectful. He is the EP, and is under constant threat living in a country that is 99 percent Muslim. Again he alone cannot splinter Orthodoxy, let’s see what happens before jumping the gun. I did not check on him as you did. Kudos!

        If Mount Athos must only allow Our Mother The Theotokos, so be it. Still not a deal breaker, if Third Rome was The Holy Mountain. What a blessing that would be.

        Glad to here your veneration to Saint John Maximovich. He has blessed me in many trials, and I believe I received one miracle from his prayers as well. Though I suffer from horrible migraines I’m still very blessed indeed. I know there is a reason for the pain I suffer, I just have not figured it out yet. With our Lord and Savior, our Theotokos, and the saints all is possible. Be patient Gail.

        • Gail, Almost forgot! You also said you never heard anyone call Rasputin a Martyr, but, a simple search on Google will show many consider Rasputin a Martyr, and a saint!

          If fact: Controversially, since the early 1990’s, a faction within the Russian Orthodox Church connected with Metropolitan John of St. Petersburg has insisted that Rasputin was a saint, and lobbied for his formal canonization. If accepted, he would be referred to as “Martyr for God and Tsar Elder Grigory Novy.”(Orthodoxwiki.org)

          I’m sure Metropolitan John of St. Petersburg has a large following in his beliefs as well. Saints and Sinners, Gail, all depends who you ask!

          • Gail Sheppard says:

            Well, Dino, what can I say? You’ve gathered things I’ve said in multiple posts and it would be tedious for me to connect the dots. I think it was pretty clear that I was trying to defend the Empress against your accusations that she couldn’t possibly be a Passion-Bearer or Saint because she brought a demon into her home.

            My point was that Alexandra Feodorovna’s interest in this man was based solely on the interests of her son and that SHE believed, as did OTHERS, he was a staryets (an elder monk, usually one with spiritual authority).

            Although he was believed to be a monk, he didn’t live like one. He had been married, but it’s not clear (to me) if the family knew that at the time.

            For some strange reason, he *did* have success in controlling hemophilia. Other healings were attributed to him, as well as clairvoyance, all of which would have contributed to the general belief he was sent by God. In many pictures it shows he dressed like the clergy and wore a prominent cross. He was clearly Orthodox, which is the reason I provided the picture. If he wasn’t a staryets, there are certainly a lot of people who believed he was. If what you’re telling me about Metropolitan John of St. Petersburg is true, there apparently still are.

            I was going to say Russians believe in these things (staryets), but then so do I. I do not and cannot know the truth. In hindsight, he looks more like a charlatan, but I completely understand why he wouldn’t seem so at the time.

            It’s alarming to know that a member from the proposed “Martyr for God and Tsar Elder Grigory Novy” is purportedly housed in formaldehyde in a The Russian Museum of Erotica!

    • Peter A. Papoutsus says:

      Except for allowing women on Mt. Athos, I agree with your assessment. Finally, to stress it again, the concept of Moscow as the Third Rome is a non-starter and continues to remain bs. Thank you Dino. Take care and Kali Sarakosti.

      Peter

      • If there is a Rome at this point, Peter, it is Moscow. And we’re all Russians now, at least those of us who want to be on the winning side of the current theomachy between God and Satan. Moscow is the last powerful beacon of Orthodoxy:

        http://nebula.wsimg.com/obj/OTk3MzAwRUFGODBGNkU1NkQzRkI6OWI4MGI3MjNjN2E0NWI2ODdjNmVhMWRkMWUwZWQ2NzQ6Ojo6OjA=

        • Misha,

          As much as a part of me wishes this were true, the powerful beacons of Orthodoxy are weak in the eyes of the world, something Russia is not. And this is not to say that Russia is not a beacon of Orthodoxy. She is, and I hope she continues to be; but her ability to exercise power in a the geopolitical sense isn’t what makes her a beacon of Orthodoxy. Nor would the proclamation of her as the New Rome enhance her status in this regard.

          Having undergone a severe chastisement, something much of the rest of the world likely still has before it, she is a light and may well become the light of Orthodoxy. But God save us all from craving power in this world.

          • Peter A. Papoutsis says:

            Amen.

          • Brian,
            Perfect, could not have said it better myself. You have a gift with words. Russian Orthodoxy is beautiful, and a beacon, my only fear is the Russian Government, they still have a lot to prove in my book. Their history, especially in the last 100 years I pray, will remain just that. History!

        • Peter A. Papoutsis says:

          I’m Orthodox neither Greek or Russian.

      • Peter A. Papoutsus,

        Have you changed your name, is that a typo, or not the real Peter A. Papoutsis?
        Any how Kali Sarakosti to you as well!

        Dino

  7. Michael Bauman says:

    There is an official formal charge of heresy against Pat Bartholomew submitted to the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece.

    • Source?

    • Steady folks. We’re going to get through this. Let the process of canon law and Orthodox tradition work this thing out. The world’s not going to end because of this little mess.

      Papism has caused a lot of grief in this world. Efforts to seduce the Phanar into it have contributed to this. All we need do is stand firm in the faith and let God handle it.

    • Peter A. Papoutsus says:

      About time and IMHO way overdue. He should never pushed for the Cretan council. However I do have a question – did the EP push for Crete or Mr. Globalist? Did Pope Francis push for the RCC”s “Council on the family” or did Mr. Globalist?

      The eschatological telos of Globalism was clearly being set up with the full integration of Europe in the EU, the TPP and the TAP being accepted and ratified and the election (coronation?) Of Hillary Evil Incarnate Clinton being the final piece with full religious ecumenism and religious synchronization via Rome and Constandinople being achieved.

      BUT GOD stepped in and stopped the wicked dead in their tracks. The old Yiddish saying is true: “Man plans and God laughs.”

      Brexit happend, Donald J. Trump became president. European countries started revolting and are still revolting from the EU. Pope Francis and Patriarch Bartholomew are both being brought up on charges of heresy, and discussions are being had on how to officially remove and depose a heretical Pope in the RCC. Finally, to round things up and put a nice fine point on the end of Globalism Old man Rockafeller has died at the ripe old age of 101, called home by his father the Devil for failing to deliver our world into his Satanic Kingdom.

      We like to say that God is in control. Well if this does not prove it to you then nothing will. However, let the record officially reflect GOD IS AND ALWAYS SHALL BE IN CONTROL. ONE CANNOT GO AGAINST THE WILL.OF GOD.

      I hope Frank and Bart are paying attention.

      Peter

  8. Michael Bauman says:

    The See of Constantinople should be retired, not just the current Patriarch.

  9. Anon in the GOA says:

    Well here is something to consider the Chryssavgis Biography of Patriarch Bartholomew sure has flopped. It is rated #372 in the Orthodoxy section of Amazon. Icon Coloring books sell more copies. Also check the table of contents of the book to see who honors the EP. There is only one Orthodox person who contributes and that is George Stephanopoulos.

  10. Michael Woerl says:

    Finland, Estonia and Latvia are autonomous under the jurisdiction of the EP.
    The EP granted autocephaly to Poland in the early 1920s, reportedly for 7,000,000 Polish zlotys, paid by the Polish government. Romania was made a Patriarchate by Constantinople in 1925, in exchange for adopting the Papal Calendar.
    Georgia, autocephalous early on, had its autocephaly “confiscated” by Moscow in the early 19th century, after Russia incorporated Georgia to protect it from being overrun by Muslims. Georgia reclaimed its autocephaly in 1917. While the EP did not recognize Georgia’s loss of autocephaly to Russia, it also did not recognize the restoration of Georgian autocephaly until 1990! Go figure! Which, undoubtedly, earned a great big “Gee, thanks!” from Georgia. The Patriarchate of Constantinople has become increasingly irrelevant, increasingly incompetent, and increasingly captive of Papal/WCC bogus theology. Time has come to recognize the facts! The EP has jurisdiction over only a small percentage of the Orthodox Church. Needs to be relegated to the position of the small, insignificant, potentially harmful entity that it is.