The Truth Will Set You Free But First It Will Piss You Off

Evidence of Uncle Sam’s greedy little hands has been all over this from the beginning.  And this, coming from an Okie from Muskogee (or close enough), who loves the good ‘ole U. S. of A. 

I’m tired of seeing people like Pompeo, Brownback, and Pyatt using Bartholomew as their poster child for international religious freedom.  One day soon, they’re going to realize they bet on the wrong horse and then the truth is going to piss them off, right about the time it sets us free.   

This just came across my desk.  If true, it’s not surprising.                   


Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew publicly admitted that the so-called ‘independent’ Orthodox Church of Ukraine had been created as a tool of the geopolitical standoff in eastern Europe.

Commenting on the Ukraine question to Кomanian mediahe claimed that “for many years” religious and political “leaders of Ukraine” have been seeking to create an independent church, which was is “associated with democracy in the West than with a repressive regime in the East.”

Bartholomew added that he believes that the “mission” of the Ecumenical Patriarchate is to encourage and enable the creation of such a church. By this comment, the leader of the Constantinople Patriarchate officially confirmed that the creation of the ‘independent’ Ukrainian church was a solely political move and had little common with spiritual redemption and the Orthodox Church itself. The goal was to create such an entity that will help to push the Ukrainian society into the ‘right direction’: The direction in which it will become a tool of forces supporting the new of neo-liberal World Order and the Cold War 2.0.



  1. Gus Langis says

    NATO Orthodoxy. The Phanarites promoting Orthodox Imperialism. The CoG should be ashamed of themselves. No thanks, I don’t want to belong.

  2. Please, everyone, if you have links to photographs of U.S. State Department officials (ambassadors, consuls, emissaries, etc.) meeting with Bartholomew, Archbishop Irenaios, or any other hierarchs, please post the links. Here are several:

    U.S. Ambassodor G. Pyatt with Bartholomew

    U.S. Ambassodor G. Pyatt with Archb. Elpidophorous.

    U.S. Ambassador for “religious freedom” Sam Brownback meets with Petro Poroshenko.

    Pyatt and Brownback with Irinaios.

    U.S. Ambassador for “religious freedom” Sam Brownback meets with Greek Arch. Irinaios.

    U.S. Ambassador for “religious freedom” Sam Brownback meets with Arch. Elpidophorous.

    U.S. Ambassador for “religious freedom” Sam Brownback meets with Romanian Patriarch.

    U.S. Consul General Gregory W. Pfleger, Jr. meets in Thessaloniki with Metropolitan Ioannis (Tassias) of Langadas. Pfleger is the U.S. official who reportedly went to Mt Athos two days before Bartholomew’s visit.

    I think it would help to document the connections between the State Department and certain ecclesiastical figures.

  3. Antiochene Son says

    Yep, his mission in service to globohomo and that delicious green paper is to sow chaos, schism, mistrust, and factionalism. Everything the Gospel stands against.

    God will not be mocked, your All Holiness. Have you no fear?

    • Bartholomew appears more and more as Judas than one might prefer to admit.  

      • Matthew Panchisin says

        Bartholomew continues to endorse the sect he created in Ukraine as they seize and steal Churches from the canonical Orthodox Church in Ukraine. Somehow he is somewhat succeeding in gathering support from other bishops, which is incomprehensible. Has anybody heard him sincerely say anything against those thefts or the assaults on the Clergy and laity? I can only recall one Pontius Pilate type of remark several months ago. It is a very serious matter that out of basic moral standards necessitate ongoing statements from him against such behavior as he shepherds his flocks, some say he just doesn’t care.
        I saw this in the news today, “The Ecumenical Patriarchate informed by letter all of the archdioceses, metropolises, and monasteries under its ecclesiastical jurisdiction that it will subject them to financial audits.” apparently he is busy with many other matters.
        LonelyDn, I know what you are saying, one doesn’t even want to think that way however thieves have a tradition in which they throw away that which is precious.

  4. We are witnessing the rise of Phanarodoxy!

  5. George Michalopulos says

    I don’t mean to interrupt this threat with something political but here goes;   the illustrious Ilhan Omar:  yesterday the House of Representatives voted to recognize the Armenian Holocaust.  She decided to vote “present”.
    This shows some stunning hypocrisy on behalf of Omar.

  6. Ilhan Omar is alleged to have a strong connection to Cenk Uygur and the Young Turks.

    • AH she did not vote to support the genocide Bill. Sorry I misread.  Of course this is totally hypocrisy.  Disgusting.  

  7. Gail Sheppard says

    The fallout from this particular decision has been immense. I am particularly saddened by the violence and looting Bartholomew unleashed. You would think this would weigh heavily on his heart. If it has, he hasn’t mentioned it.

    When I was young, I was so filled with love for the things of God my aunt gave me a simple silver cross to wear around my neck. This cross was more important to me than anything I owned. I was confirmed in that cross and remember thinking I wanted to be married in it. When I approached my teenage years I wore it on a leather strap around my neck. I never took it off, except for one day when my friends and I were downtown with our fathers practicing a star formation waltz for our upcoming cotillion. I was afraid it would fall off my neck so I put it in my purse for safekeeping. After our rehearsal, the girls and I went back to the entryway to retrieve our things. All of our stuff had been stolen! Gone was my purse with my precious cross. The only way I could bear the loss was imagining it around another girl’s neck, whose life might be a little brighter for having my cross. I prayed it would protect her as I felt it had protected me.

    A year ago, I moved 1000 miles away to my new home in OK and every one of my icons was stolen. An original print of the Shroud of Turin by Barrie Schwartz is missing as well, as are relics from the Tsar’s family that were recovered when they found the last two graves with the bodies of Alexei and Maria. I had packed these precious things with the gold jewelry of my mother’s and grandmother’s. It later occurred to me that had I not packed them together, the gold would be gone but not the things that really mattered to me.

    When you’re an only child of an only child, you have a lot of things but not a lot of help. I remember hiring day workers from a Home Depot parking lot at one point to help me pack up the 3 generations of stuff I had to move.

    As reported by Orthodox Christianity, the most recent little village parish that was pillaged in the Chernigov Province is minus some precious icons. Among them an ancient, locally-venerated Iveron Icon of the Mother of God, as well as an icon of Sts. Job and Amphilochius of Pochaev with particles of their relics and a Vladimir Icon of the Mother of God. I imagine they are weeping over the loss. The thought of it kept me up last night.

    I wonder if the recipient of the Athenagoras Human Rights Awards lost any sleep over it. Somehow I doubt it.

  8. Latvia might be next in the cross-hairs:

  9. As we look on with horror and disgust at Pope Francis, Bartholomew aligns himself with this same fraternity of Satanists. The so-called Council of Crete and the Amazonian Synod hatched from the same rotten egg. The more we ‘sit’ on this issue, the more likely it may hatch.
    Perhaps some of us assume this monster will be still-born, but not throw the thing out of the nest? Honestly, is it likely – even possible given our circumstances – for Bartholomew to be deposed? Is this even the best option?
    Of course, we’re all very familiar with Church officials ‘compromised’ under communism. That snake shed its skin and we have globalism, and still, Church officials are ‘compromised’ but I don’t see as strong a reaction against globalism as we witnessed under communism. Any ideas why?  

    • Gus Langis says

      Globalism is applauded by the majority of the laity and marketed as progress.  Terms such as multiculturalism and diversity are celebrated by every aspect of western society while Communism was always lauded as evil. In the ecclesiastical domain there was always ROCOR reminding us of the evils of the Soviet Church, of a heresy called Sergianism and that they (ROCOR) alone represents the free part of the Russian Church.  Figures such as Lenin and Stalin were never recognized as heroic statesmen. Globalism on the other hand is thought of as victory of western culture over the world which the naive christian thinks is his heritage. In reality christianity may be used by the globalists as a tool of western imperialism as Dumenko’s sect attests to.

      Bartholomew needs to be deposed to show that no EP is above the Church nor is a patriarch a universal pope. This probably wont solve the problem as his successor will be worse but it still must be done. Truth be told the entire Constantinople synod needs to be deposed for everything from being bishops without flocks to their adherence to the Crete robber Council to violation of canons concerning relation with the heterodox to their adherence to neo-papism.

  10. Michael Bauman says

    LonelyDN, Globalism is the way of the world: compassion, no judgment, kumbaya; MONEY, POWER, SEX. The ultimate in Bread and Circuses

    Communism was part of the evil one’s plans to make us more amenable to the kinder, softer tyranny of globalism

    • Fr Seraphim Rose, of blessed memory, wrote: “One might take, as a symbol of our carefree, fun-loving, self-worshipping times, our American ‘Disneyland’; if so, we should not neglect to see behind it the more sinister symbol that shows where the ‘me generation’ is really heading: the Soviet Gulag.” He wrote this in 1982. 

      • Lonley dcn..   The late Fr Alexander Schememn wrote in his Diaries with a fore knowledge quite frightening of these trends and he was writing  in the 1970s and early 1980s. He of course died 13th of December 1983. 
        He especially wrote of the greater danger than communism of american secularism entering the Altar itself. How right he was. 
        Sadly in USA and maybe in world Orthodox we effectively have two churches.  One seen by the world as  ‘reactionary’  and ‘retarded’,  and the other as GOA as liberal and ‘ open for business ‘.  Only trouble is the people are forsaking it and it is not the Church. The Catholic church is effectively a organization for corrupt paedophile Men. Who can trust any of them?

  11. I have a question after reading today’s posting at
    I have never seen mention that M.Onuphry ever requested autocephaly which has been one of the strongest arguments in convincing me of EP overreach. However, I have quoted this sentence/paragraph from the above link hoping for some more info from folks on this blog who are more discerning than I am:
    “As the Archbishop of Athens and All Greece underlined, shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the declaration of independence of Ukraine, the latter requested that its local Church be granted the status of autocephaly, in accordance with the pattern of the other Autocephalous Churches. This original request was a genuine one. The fact that it was co-signed even by the current Metropolitan Onufriy is a strong indication that it was a comprehensive request, in the sense of reflecting the desire of the entire people and the hierarchy, so that they would achieve independence from subservience to the Russian hierarchy.”

    • Susan,

      Your question/concern deserves an answer. Since no one has responded to you, I will attempt to provide it. The players and timeline of events are complex. What follows is a very simplified version intended only to address the specifics of your question.

      My understanding is that autocephaly was indeed requested shortly after the Ukraine became an independent state around 1991, some 28 years ago. Although I have no knowledge of it, I take Met. Ignatius at his word that Met. Onufry’s signature was on that request. To my knowledge (someone please correct me if I am mistaken), this request was made to the Moscow Patriarchate. That request for autocephaly was denied, although a high degree of autonomy was, in fact, granted to them.

      Shortly thereafter, Metropolitan Philaret (who was then a Metropolitan in the Moscow Patriarchate) unexpectedly lost his bid to become the Patriarch of Moscow. He then declared himself “Patriarch of Kiev.” When he did so, no other Orthodox Church, including Constantinople, recognized him as such. All viewed him as a schismatic. Philaret was subsequently laicized and then excommunicated by the Moscow Patriarchate. Moscow duly informed Constantinople of these disciplinary actions against Philaret at the time; and Constantinople, in turn, acknowledged and fully recognized in writing not only Philarets’s defrocking and excommunication, but also acknowledged “the fullness of the Russian Orthodox Church’s exclusive competence on this issue.”

      The history and the text of these communications between the MP and the CP can be found here:

      Met. Onufry was, of course, not a participant in any schism. Nor did he participate in the recent quest for autocephaly which Bartholomew granted to these defrocked (and in some cases never ordained in the first place) schismatics. Met. Onufry honored the Moscow Patriarchate’s denial of the request for autocephaly, continued to submit himself to the MP, and has done so faithfully ever since that request of 28 or so years ago was made.

    • Susan,

      I would also call your attention to these words of the MP synod during the period of Philaret’s abstinence and disobedience – not only to the MP, but also to his own local synod in Kiev.

      June 11, 1992

      “There exists the false opinion that the ecclesiastical judgment over the former Metropolitan Philaret will influence the decision on the issue of granting full canonical independence to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. By the force of our archpastoral word we testify that such assertions are either a misconception or deliberate slander.

      “We will not in any way prevent the discussion of the issue of the full canonical independence of the Ukrainian Church. We will accept any judgment pronounced by the voice of the people of the Church on this given matter. But we want this voice to be heard freely and clearly, and that the faithful would not be subjected to any pressure connected with political or other earthly interests. Being responsible before God for the people of the Church entrusted to our humble hands by Him, we will do everything in our power for their spiritual freedom and so that they would live as the Gospel and teachings of the Orthodox Church instruct.

      “The former Metropolitan Philaret and other Church offenders use the topic of “autocephaly” exclusively for personal purposes, creating the false impression that they are “victims” for their allegedly autocephalic convictions. We testify to you that among the participants in our Bishops’ Council, who deposed Metropolitan Philaret and Bishop Jacob, were those hierarchs who openly support the idea of a speedy granting of autocephaly to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Philaret and Jacob are deprived of their office not for their convictions but for their transgressions against the Church, expressed in the conscious and egregious violation of the sacred canons.

      “As regards the granting of full canonical independence to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, we firmly believe that this issue should be resolved by lawful canonical means through the convening of a Local Council and the coordination of its decision with the will of all the fraternal Local Churches. If this does not happen, we will only reap more and more schisms, bringing destruction to Church life.”

      And then there is this (Google translation) …

      April 2, 1992

      “The Bishops’ Council of the Russian Orthodox Church had a judgment on the appeal of the episcopate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church regarding the granting of autocephaly to her.

      During the free and lengthy fraternal discussion, the speeches of the bishops of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church were attentively heard, which testified to the ambiguous attitude towards the autocephaly of the clergy and believers of Ukraine. While the idea of autocephaly is perceived positively in the western dioceses of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, in the rest it is rejected by the majority of the faithful people and clergy.
      The bishops who were serving in all the independent states that were part of the USSR and from abroad took an active part in the discussion. The unanimous opinion was expressed that the unity of our Holy Orthodox Church in the current difficult conditions of historical life is the key to maintaining the inner church world and an important factor in overcoming the emerging interethnic alienation and enmity. Unity and peace within the Church is also an indispensable condition for the success of her pastoral ministry, through which she brings the message of salvation to modern man.

      It carefully examined the situation in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church that developed after the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church granted it autonomy and independence in October 1990. The Council of Bishops is forced to state that the intra-church and inter-confessional situation in Ukraine has not undergone significant positive changes since then, but faces new painful divisions that could have the most dire consequences for the fate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
      Given all this, the Council of Bishops DECIDED:

      1. In order to have a genuine expression of the will of the fullness of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, to have a judgment on the granting of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church full canonical independence at the next Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church.
      2. Address the Epistle to all Orthodox of Ukraine.
      3. The Council of Bishops took note of the statement of Bishop Filaret, Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine, that in the name of church peace, he would petition the upcoming Bishops’ Council of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church to relieve him of the duties of the Primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

      The Council of Bishops was sympathetic to the position of His Grace Metropolitan Filaret, expressing gratitude to him for many years of archpastoral work at the Kiev department, blessed to carry episcopal service in another department of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.”

      To any and all who deem this statement of April 2, 1992 to be disingenuous, I can only reply that it was Philaret’s own actions that prevented progress toward Ukrainian autocephaly being granted by Moscow.

      This would be the same Philaret whose own clerical orders, as well as that of those unlawfully bestowed by his hand in flagrant disobedience of every Church authority (including Pat. Bartholomew), were inexplicably “restored” by the CP apart from even the most generous (and economic) interpretation of accepted canonical norms and without even a hint repentance on the part of Philaret or those leaders in his “patriarchate” whom he willfully and deliberately led into schism, – that same Philaret who even now rages even against the ‘autocephaly’ granted by the CP and continues to foment schism, as could have been easily predicted by any simpleton with even an ounce of spiritual sense.

      Thus, by ignoring his brethren in the MP, by ignoring the wisdom (not laws) contained in the canonical Tradition, and by ignoring his brethren in almost every other local Church, Bartholomew has only compounded an already serious and painful schism in fulfillment of the warning…

      “As regards the granting of full canonical independence to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, we firmly believe that this issue should be resolved by lawful canonical means through the convening of a Local Council and the coordination of its decision with the will of all the fraternal Local Churches. If this does not happen, we will only reap more and more schisms, bringing destruction to Church life.”

      But hey, it’s much easier for some to slander the MP and blame them for the schisms in the Ukraine…and now the entire world.

  12. Susan,
    As you may know the biggest problem is autocephaly was not granted to the Ukranian Orthodox Church at all. It was given to two sporadic sects that were combined into one. These sects were courted by the pro-western Kievan regime to serve as the state religion but they needed the wider Orthodox community’s support as these groups had no credibility, that where the EP came in.
    Today the eastern half of the country would not want autocephaly even if they did 28 years earlier. The western half has always been a hodgepodge of pro western sectarianism, the first time they schismed was to become uniate in 1596.

    • Solitary Priest says

      Your last sentence is false, Mr. Langis. Western Ukraine did not “schism” in 1596. What happened is that the Poles strongarmed almost the entire Orthodox episcopacy within the boundaries of their state into accepting a false union with the Papacy. The laity back then had no say; in fact one of the lies they were told was that the Pope had returned to Orthodoxy.

      • George Michalopulos says

        SP, thanks for setting the record straight. The (was it seven?) bishops in the western Ukraine who were under Polish dominion did indeed sign the unia without the knowledge of the laity (who were mostly illiterate anyway).

    • George Michalopulos says

      Gus, I just now read your excellent analysis. SP priest corrected you but in the final analysis, I’m not sure that between your observation and SP’s correction there is much of a distinction. The end-result was this horrible chimera called the unia which is neither fish nor fowl and has resulted in centuries of unrelenting bloodshed.

      I think that’s what we need to keep our eye on and remember that the West has never done us any favors.

      • Solitary Priest says

        Ironically, George, the bishops of the two Western Ukrainian cities, Gideon Balaban of Lviv, and Michael Kopestiansky of Peremishel, withdrew their signatures and did not go through with the union. The Metropolitan of Kiev was among the majority who did. At one time, when the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth extended as far East as Smolensk(now in Russia, but near the Belarusian border), there was a Uniate bishop in that city.
              When Poland was partitioned between Russia, Prussia, and Austria, by the end of the 18th century, all of Belarus and most of Ukraine became Russian. Most of the Uniates there returned to Orthodoxy. The region known as Western Ukraine today became part of Catholic Austria, hence the Uniate church survived there.

        • George Michalopulos says

          Thank you Fr for fleshing out the history more clearly. It’s fascinating if you ask me.

        • I have some personal experience of Ukraine uniatism having in London good friends. They in fact wish to be Orthodox but are caught between an anti Russian and anti Polish nationalistic attitude. No love is lost between Poles and Ukrainians.  
          Worship wise they exhibit ( at the Ukrainian London Cathedral) a growing trend to ‘ Orthodox ‘ worship and bearded clergy, etc with Catholic theology.  Of course it’s sad but even saddened by fact their worship is more Orthodox then that of GOA. (acapella, etc) And at the individual level Ukrainian faithful show a piety totally missing in GOA. Plus they All singing the liturgy and prostrations etc. 

  13. cynthia curran says

    Mike Pompeo knows little about eastern orthodoxy. He attended the same high school I did in Orange County called Los Amigos, At the time he attended their were few orthodox greeks or others, Mainly whites were protestant and some were Catholic. About 20 percent of the student population was Latino So, I course he knew some Catholics.. Pompeo went back east for college and moved to Kansas where his mother originally came from and never went back to California. So, I doubt he knows much about Bath..

  14. Greatly Saddened says

    Below please find an article from today in The National Herald.
    Archbishop of Athens and All Greece Ieronymos Meets U.S. Ambassador Pyatt
    By ANA 
    November 22, 2019