Monday, June 28, 2010

St John Chrysostom on Romans 16:17-18.

"Now I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught, and avoid them. For such people do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own appetites; and by fair and flattering words they deceive the hearts of the simple-minded."
St. Paul says, "I appeal to you to take note," that is, to be exceedingly particular about, and to get acquainted with, and to search out thoroughly— whom, pray? Why, "those who create divisions and difficulties, contrary to the doctrine which you have been taught." For this is, if anything, what undermines the Church: being divided within itself. This is the devil's weapon, this turns all things upside-down. For so long as the body is joined into one, he has no power to get an entrance, but it is from division that the offense comes.
And what causes division? Opinions contrary to the teaching of the Apostles. And where do such opinions come from? From men's being slaves to the belly, and the other passions. "For such people," he says, "do not serve the Lord, but their own appetites" (literally, "belly").
And what are we to do to those who make mischief in this way? He does not say have a meeting and come to blows, but "avoid them." For if it was from ignorance or error that they did this, one ought to set them right. But if they sin willingly, run away from them. And he says this elsewhere as well. For he says, "Withdraw from every brother that walks disorderly" (2 Thess 3:6), and in speaking to Timothy about the coppersmith, he gives him similar advice, saying, "Beware of him" (2 Tim 4:15).

Sunday, June 27, 2010

Ecumenism

THIS IS  A REPOST FROM ANOTHER BLOG WORTH REPEATING. Let's play a game one of these posts doesn't belong can you guess which one? Clue: (Fr. G)
+JN1034 said...
Reunion with the Vatican is not in the near future, nor is any semblance of authentic visible union (as must be evidenced by sharing the Eucharist as the culminating witness of the Faith). The opposing trajectories of East and West have - at least for today - no points of convergence, maybe some public chatter, moments of generic dialogue, a birthday or two, certainly many feastdays and symbolic gift exchanges. Those thinking reunion is lurking close by should give thought to Einstein's claim that parallel lines converge only in the most distant galaxies lightyears away from today. You are correct that the administrative issues are heavy, and that histories have been written, and jurisdictional lifestyles set in stone. Regarding pan-Orthodox symbiosis, we know from our own family that though heads of jurisdictions may be filled with spiritual urgency, may have the best intentions, may have drafted the most detailed plans, and may have acquired logistical tools for such grand maneuvers, the laity - the grassroots piety movements - will have the most significant role to play whether we find oneness in Christ at the Holy Altar of His Church, or we remain as ever-splintering groups founded on anthropomorphic criteria.
3:47 PM

elgreca262 said...
We may rely on a few key points: Everything that is Christian was established pre schism at the Ecumencial Councils. There is nothing more to add no innovation necessary. Only in the flights of children is reunification in my life time doable. I encourage the Pope to continue to assert his influence to assit the Ecumenical Throne with its struggle against human rights violations.
We must treat one another as children of God as the fruits of the Apostles themselves pushing through the resistence to belief and practice set before us by the enemy.
The churches will move together as sisters in full communion when God deems it; until then the Eastern Orthodox Church (faithful) will keep the candles burning.
elgreca262.blogspot.com
8:46 PM

Fr. Gregory Jensen said...
Thank you Father for your post and your blog.
If I may, it seems to me that--theological differences between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches aside for a moment--the impediment to reconciliation between our two Churches seem largely internal to the Orthodox side of the question.
That is to say, we cannot move toward reconciliation between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches because though we (the Orthodox) share a common faith we are nevertheless divided in other ways.
Our own divisions for all that they are secondary (e.g., the lack of administrative unity not only in the US but also Western Europe, Australia and parts of Asia) are nevertheless an impediment to healing the schism. I do not say this lightly, but we need to face the facts of our situation.
Taking the narrowest interpretation of the Great Schism, that all the fault lies on the side of Rome and that they need to repent and return to us, how can they do this when we cannot even manage to agree on relative simple matters such as a unified and functional administrative structure for the US?
I agree, as I alluded to on my own blog, that the interpretation many are giving to the words of Catholic Archbishop of Moscow are overly optimistic--I suspect that what he was referring to was not a re-establishment of communion, but pastoral collaboration and cooperation in the face of the twin threats of Islamic radicalism an increasing secular culture. But even this cooperation will be difficult to put into effect if, sadly true to form, one or more of the Orthodox churches (or bishops) stamps it (or his) foot and has a temper tantrum.
It is sad for me to think that it is we, the Orthodox, who are the stumbling block in this matter.
Again, thanks for the post.
In Christ,
FrG
5:32 AM


+JN1034 said...
Those of us who witnessed the historic 1965 meetings between Athenagoras of Constantinople and Paul VI of Rome, during the joint lifting of the excommunications of 1054, were comforted to know that this one particular piece towards reunion was put behind us. Through the years Constantinople has made strides with "dialogues of love"; in many instances Moscow turned a cold cassock toward the Vatican (as well as the WCC). Perhaps what we are seeing is the imposition of necessity owing to new factors that we've never experienced before, e.g., the Internet, spontaneous news coverage, and information sharing, civil laws of the land encouraging us to conform to human rights equality and equity when often we'd choose no to. The international community is diligent to wave the universal flag of human rights laws and UN instruments, esp. of religious minorities and against the perpetrators of these violations and crimes against humanity - ungodly matters that all religious and spiritual traditions have amassed in their ancient closets and cultural mindsets. Though inter-Orthodox cohesion seems fragile on the local, national, and regional levels, our global unity is solid (as shown by the June 2009 Chambesy conference) and moving forward. Yes, many Orthodox tend to stamp their feet and beat their breasts, but, alas, we encourage our own people to do the same when our hierarchs and clergy shut doors to our own people rather than make provisions by economy to bring all people into the parishes under welcoming circumstances. If we can't seek the most humble and needful of our lost ones without casting aspersions and pointing canonical fingers at them, how can we seek anything greater?

9:52 AM

Saturday, June 26, 2010

What could be more necessary?

Some misguided, ambitious or just disloyal individuals groups and communities maintain the Ecumenical See is not necessary. What could be more necessary? The establishment of autocephalous churches or patriarchates are only pursued rightly, justly and with authority in love through obedience and respect; not by disparaging or dismissively marginalizing the martyric throne.  All else is counterfeit and worthless leading to mortification an amputation from the body. Any attempts to discredit canon 28 or imply a receding or diminishing of any kind by the Ecumenical Throne is simply demonic. All those who say they want to stay out of the "politics" of the church; who want to stay somehow "above the fray" are as useless as tits on a bull. They are not willing to take a stand and only obstruct the real issues confronting the churches which are of vital importance.

Thursday, June 24, 2010

Damianakis Brings Ecumenical Understanding

Damianakis has continued to discuss the relevancy and holy people of the ecumenical councils. Elias established that the councils are never to be relegated to the past or understood merely as historical artifacts. They are living sanctions of the church they reach out calling to us.

Orientale Lumen XIV North
June 7-10, 2010
Seton Hall University
South Orange, NJ

Orientale Lumen XIV East
June 21-24, 2010
Pope John Paul II Cultural Center
Washington, DC

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

Do You Want To Be Healed

YOU CAN'T HOLD TIGHT TO YOUR SIN, YOUR ADDICTION, YOUR ISSUE AND HAVE HOLINESS, SOBRIETY, WHOLENESS We cannot serve two masters the Lord and ourself. Do you wish to be healed?
JOHN 5:6-9 "And a certain man was there, which had an infirmity thirty and eight years. When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made whole? The impotent man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool: but while I am coming, another steppeth down ... See Morebefore me. Jesus saith unto him, Rise, take up thy bed, and walk. And immediately the man was made whole, and took up his bed, and walked"   
"τοῦτον ἰδὼν ὁ Ἰησοῦς κατακείμενον καὶ γνοὺς ὅτι πολὺν ἤδη χρόνον ἔχει, λέγει αὐτῷ· θέλεις ὑγιὴς γενέσθαι; ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ ὁ ἀσθενῶν· κύριε, ἄνθρωπον οὐκ ἔχω ἵνα ὅταν ταραχθῇ τοͅ ὕδωρ βάλῃ με εἰς τὴν κολυμβήθραν· ἐν ᾧ δὲ ἔρχομαι ἐγὼ, ἄλλος πρὸ ἐμοῦ καταβαίνει. λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς· ἔγειρε ἆρον τὸν κράβαττον σου καὶ περιπάτει. καὶ εὐθέως ἐγένετο ὑγιὴς ὁ ἄνθρωπος καὶ ἦρεν τὸν κράβαττον αὐτοῦ καὶ περιεπάτει."

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Greek Orphanage Still in Turkish Control

16/6/2010
TODAY’S ZAMAN ANKARA
The top European court of human rights has ordered the Turkish government to reregister a historic Orthodox orphanage to the İstanbul-based Fener Greek Orthodox Patriarchate and also told Ankara to pay 26,000 euros in total to the patriarchate for both non-pecuniary damages and costs and expenses.
In its ruling issued on Tuesday, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) referred to its earlier judgment in July 2008 in which it held that the Turkish authorities were not entitled to deprive the applicant of its property without providing for appropriate compensation.
“The church had not received any compensation and it had therefore had to bear an individual and excessive burden, entailing a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property). It further held that the question of the application of Article 41 (just satisfaction) was not ready for decision and reserved it. In today’s [Tuesday's] judgment, the Court held that Turkey had to reregister the property in question in the land register in the applicant’s name and to pay to the applicant 6,000 euros for non-pecuniary damage and 20,000 for costs and expenses,” the court said.
Turkey should reregister the orphanage on the Princes’ Islands off the coast of İstanbul to the patriarchate within three months, the court also said, according to news reports.
The orphanage, one of the largest wooden buildings in the world, was bought by the patriarchate in 1902 and its management was handed over to the Büyükada Greek Orphanage Foundation in 1903. The title deed of the orphanage has been under the control of the General Directorate for Foundations since 1997 and was registered as a property of the Büyükada Greek Orphanage Foundation by the directorate through a court order dated 2004. While the Turkish government argued that the property was sold at the time to the patriarchate by the Şehzade Sultan Mehmet Foundation for the building of an orphanage, and thus the property belonged to the Büyükada Greek Orphanage Foundation, the patriarchate insisted that the property had been registered as belonging to the patriarchate in Ottoman Empire archives and was also registered in the land office of the Turkish Republic in 1929 following the establishment of the republic in 1923.

Source:

Monday, June 14, 2010

Patriarchal Divine Liturgy on August 15th at Panagia Sumela in Pontos

Patriarchal Divine Liturgy on August 15th at Panagia Sumela in Pontos

FR. JOHN A. LIMBERAKIS Remembered

FR. JOHN A. LIMBERAKIS

Protopresvyteros of the Ecumenical Patriarchate

Pioneer Priest of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America for 60 Years

October 7, 1925 - June 10, 2010
Father John A. Limberakis, 84 a leading priest of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America for over 60 years died in Philadelphia, with his loving wife Elizabeth and his children and grandchildren at his bedside. Known as a builder of churches, he led four Greek Orthodox parishes (Fresno, California, Cranston, Rhode Island, Elkins Park, Pennsylvania and Valley Forge (Jeffersonville), Pennsylvania in building houses of worship. A senior priest in the Philadelphia area since 1970, he served in various leadership and ecclesiastical capacities for the Greek Orthodox Church.
Father John was born on October 7, 1925 in Boston, Massachusetts of immigrant parents, Anthony John and Evangeline Karadimitriou Limberakis, who left their homeland of Alatsata, a suburb of Smyrna, Asia Minor in 1922. The eldest of four children, he attended public schools in Somerville, Massachusetts and at age 16, graduating high school in his junior year, he enrolled in Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology when it was located in Pomfret, Connecticut. Upon graduation in 1948, he was appointed registrar of the Seminary, serving as executive secretary to the late dean, the Rt. Rev. Athenagoras Cavvadas, who was also bishop of New England. He pursued graduate studies, first in Fresno, California, then in Providence, Rhode Island and finally in Philadelphia. He received Bachelor of Arts (BA) and Bachelor of Divinity (BD) degrees from Holy Cross School of Theology and a Master of Arts (MA) degree from Temple University.Prior to his ordination into the holy priesthood on November 8, 1949, The Feastday of the Archangels, he married Elizabeth Constantine, a native of Los Angeles, California. They raised four children, two girls and two boys. Their firstborn, Evangelyn, died at age 11, and is buried in Providence, Rhode Island. Their eldest son, Cary, married to Alexis Demetris, is a dentist in Jenkintown, Pennsylvania with four children; Anthony, married to Maria Borden, is a radiologist in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania with three children and two grandchildren; and Catherine, married to James T. Tsatalis, is a school teacher by profession with three children, in Dayton, Ohio.
Father John's first pastoral charge was in Fresno, California, where he immediately initiated a church building program resulting with the relocation of the parish and the construction of a new Byzantine Church of St. George in the suburbs. In 1955 he was assigned to the Annunciation in Providence, Rhode Island where once more the parish relocated and erected a new church edifice in the suburb of Cranston. He came to Philadelphia in 1970 and was assigned to the Annunciation in Elkins Park, Pennsylvania where the following year construction began on its new Byzantine edifice. In 1990, he retired from the Annunciation and within a week was asked by the Archdiocese to once again, shepherd a parish in need of a house of worship, St. Sophia in Norristown, Pennsylvania. Always eager to serve the needs of the church, he accepted this challenge with alacrity and dedication. Upon his arrival at St. Sophia's a new building program was launched. The parish relocated to the gateway of historic Valley Forge in 1996, not far from the site where George Washington wintered his troops during the American Revolutionary War. In each parish Father John served, building programs were inaugurated, parishes were relocated and new edifices completed.
The church has honored Father John with the Byzantine ecclesiastical offikia of Economos, Sakelarios and Protopresvyteros of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. He was bestowed the high honor of Crossbearer of the Holy Sepulcher, a title presented by the Patriarchate of Jerusalem. He served in various capacities of elected office for the clergy locally and at the diocesan and archdiocesan levels. He was active in inter-faith and ecumenical affairs wherever he served, and had often been asked to represent his church at various high-level conclaves. During his active priesthood he worked unceasingly to minister to the needs of his flock. On The Feastday of the Archangels, November 8, 2009, Father John celebrated his 60th anniversary to the priesthood.
Father John led some 10 pilgrimages to the Holy Land, often ascending Mount Sinai and continuing on to the Spiritual Center of world Orthodoxy, the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople in Istanbul. In 2004 he witnessed the return of the Holy Relics of St. Gregory the Theologian and St. John Chrysostom to the Ecumenical Patriarchate from the Vatican where they had been held for 800 years since the Fourth Crusade of 1204. With his family and fellow pilgrims he visited some of the most significant monasteries throughout the Holy Land, Greece and Asia Minor.
Father John A. Limberakis was an exemplary pioneer priest in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America having shepherded four parishes into building houses of worship. A dynamic homilist and liturgist, a devoted husband of 60 years, a loving father, grandfather and great grandfather, he always supported and defended the Mother Church of Constantinople, the Ecumenical Patriarchate. His remarkable and pioneering ministry will long be remembered by the thousands of lives and souls who were comforted by his loving pastoral care.
(http://www.archons.org/)

Sunday, June 13, 2010

Our Most Sincere Condolences

Drs. Anthony and Maria Limberakis and Family,

Please accept our most sincere condolences from our family to yours.

+ Aιωνία η μνήμη.
+ Aιωνία η μνήμη.
+ Aιωνία η μνήμη.

Elias, Angela, Theophani, Stavronikitas & Euphemia

My family and His All-Holiness

The Secretary General for the Ecumenical Patriarchate was asked this ridiculous question "Why doesn't the Ecumenical Patriarch pastor his people"? Speaking for my family I can say emphatically 'He does"!!!!    His All-Holiness is known by all pious orthodox christians. My husband Elias,  teen-age daughter Theophani, teen-age  son Stavronikitas and our youngest daughter Euphemia all have a profound awareness and love for His All-Holiness who does pastor us as the Good Shepard. His name and activities are mentioned each and everyday without fail. We discuss his itinerary, press releases, media coverage, pilgrimages, visitations, audiences, encyclicals, books and public statements. We have several photos of His All-Holiness and Ecumenical flags throughout our home.
Our children include the history of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in their school assignments and we make every effort to speak truth to power. Even our 30 month old daughter stops to watch video clips upon hearing his very distinct voice. His All-Holiness has entered our hearts spiritually living in our home. His love plainly demonstrated by his continued presence and faithfulness to his sacred position. We back his every decision, remain loyalists and outspoken. I will continue to be a watchdog and critic of those wanna bees where I find them. Our Holy Father will never disappoint  as he will never abandon his See for ease or personal safety even though there are those who plan his assassination (God forbid). My children consider him to have a Rock Star status. His greatness is probably the only issue never contested.
We engage with our Patriarch the way we engage with our patron saints. The Ecumenical Patriarchate will not succumb to cowardice or political pressure. We, though unworthy ourselves, are the descendants of the faithful the martyrs, the oppressed who pressed onward passing on their faith, their language and their fearlessness to us. We are gladly obligated and blessed to be connected to this great legacy. We love and defend our Holy Father. He is loved and revered in our home, no less a member of my family then I.

Archimandrite Elpidophoros Lambriniadis, Chief Secretery of the Ecumenical Patriarchate

The Theological Faculty of St.Vladimir in New York: "Greek Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarchate and the church in the U.S. "
http://www.romfea.gr/

...I'm pleased to stand today on the premises of the Theological Faculty of St. Vladimir, a nursery of theological and pastoral letters calling, which has based the Russian spirituality and intellect, great pioneers of the spirit and the highest functionaries, such as fathers George Florovsky, Schmeman Alexander and John Meyendorff.

I express my sincere thanks to the worthy successors of those great theologians for their invitation to participate in high level academic symposium, and to have the opportunity to pass on all the blessings and paternal Patriarchal blessings of the Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, the Pontiff of the Holy Great Church of Christ in Constantinople.

(I regret that because of the last session of the Holy Synod Holy my late arrival, and allowed me to attend two very interesting presentations of the main Timothy Clark and George Lewis Parsenios).

The issue is now called upon to present before you is the "Greek Orthodoxy and the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Church in the USA. Starting from the content and historical development of "Greek Orthodox" will try to explore its relationship with the Ecumenical Patriarchate, and finally using these to interpret the attitude of the Church of Constantinople at the ecclesial situation in the U.S. and will present his vision for the future of American Orthodoxy.

The Church of Christ from the recommendation that the Lord Jesus Christ on earth and in particular the principle of its organization under the local bishops deeply affected, as was also natural, from the political, administrative and cultural context of the Roman Empire, known as an empire, by syncretism, multi-ethnicity and multiculturalism, but also by a single law, single chain of command, common language, common currency, etc. Since Christianity, after the period of persecution was recorded as a known and tolerated in the beginning and formal, then the religion of the empire, the identity of the Church affected and influenced the identity of the Roman citizen. I do not want here to elaborate on how the Divine Providence had thus prepared the political and cultural background of the expansion and consolidation of the Church of Christ, nor on how the multinational and multicultural identity of the empire easier to own the external building Christianity.

But I want to draw your attention to the meaning and content of Roman citizenship (or resident of the Roman Empire), especially since he began to have a characteristic identity of the Christian religion.

The Roman Christian tribal can belong to any nation, have any native language and yet be faithful falling undera Bishop of the city's temporary residence, as in secular terms was subject to the Roman governor governor of the region. Its status as a citizen of the kingdom of God was, mutatis mutandis, the same characteristics in his capacity as a citizen of the Roman Empire: regardless of race, language or origin.

Similar was the identity of the Roman Empire in the Church: the basis and criterion for the organization from scratch was the geographical criterion, a bishop for each city, which have been subject to all local residents, the other language without discrimination, within the apostolic teaching "essential èvl Jew nor Greek, slave nor essential èvl free, essential èvl male and female ˙ everyone you are a For he to ye in Christ Jesus." (Gal. 3, 28).

On the same principle, the churches are called today "The Church of Alexandria", "Antioch Church", "Jerusalem Church," Church Russia "and so on in that geographic designations. It antiparadosiako and irregular in church terms, it is called the Patriarchy as 'Russian', 'Serbian', 'Romanian', 'Bulgarian' or 'Georgian', and the Patriarchs: "Patriarch of the Russian", "Serb", "Romanian ', "the Bulgarians" or "Georgians" because the designations are introduced not only the dispersion but also to the local Orthodox Churches in Ethnic criterion and divide the flock of the bishop of the place based on national origin, leaving room for eispidisi in such other province and even parish practice. This applies at the local Church and the dispersion, because the sacred rules can not be selective and occasional power, but universal.

The experience and teaching of the Church is also reflected in the decisions of the Ecumenical Synods, which codified and recorded binding for all Christianity, not just the once delivered faith and doctrine, but the principles of administrative organization. The Ecumenical Councils, I draw your attention, not edogmatisan of non-being, or conditions imposed by church organization did not exist until then. So in matters of faith and on the administration codified the apostolic teaching, the experience of the Church and the patristic tradition. Nor is it necessary here to go to the presentation of proven wrong already adequately distinguish the sacred rules dogmatic, can not reviewed, and administrative, Steam tropopoiisin.

Returning to the analysis of the terms, recall that the Church within the Roman Empire, such as the 18th century, was named by Western historians as the Byzantine, Roman onomastike, when they started emfanizontai schismatics and heretics church structures, which have diakrinontai terms of terminology. This was entonotero and established at the Orthodox East after the Schism of the year 1054 and especially after the Ottoman victory over the Eastern Roman Empire.

The Sultan allopistos now confirmed and formally introduced the term "Roman nation» (Rum Milleti ₌ Roman nation) with respect to all Orthodox Christians of the empire occupied. For the Sultan, like the predecessor of the Emperor, there were nations discrimination, but discrimination and religious bonds. That is, after all, and people who are not naming exislamizonto Rome Muslims, but Turks. The exislamizomenos "tourkefe 'changed identity.

The Ottoman Empire, which adopted and respected the existing ecclesiastical terminology, which subdued the Roman Christians are not distinguished by language and ethnic background, but on the membership of the Church.

Thus, in the Anatolian languages (Greek, Turkish, Arabic), the Patriarchate (Orthodox, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem) marked as Rum Orthodox (ie Roman Orthodox) as opposed to the Rum Catholic (ie Roman Catholic) is the Armenian or the Syrian churches.
Problem arose when the rise of nationalism (19th century) in the Balkans, the term Rum metefrasthi a Greek to be the cause of rehabilitation and independence of peoples and Orthodox church perspective. Meanwhile, of course, was founded by the Greek state and any sense of Hellenism was treated with nationalistic terms, giving a totally different meaning in the original condition Rum.

In order not to dwell only briefly summarized as follows: The origin of the term "Greek Orthodoxy has now taken a content of national character, which distorts reality. The term "Greek Orthodoxy, the« Rum Orthodox »given in English as beneficially« Roman Orthodox ». As the term Roman Catholic is not translated as «italian catholic», so the term «Rum» the «Roman» Orthodox should not be translated as «Greek Orthodox», ie a way to give national content in a purely ecclesiastical terminology.

The original sense is preserved in the Roman Catholic Church which, unfortunately, have the unfortunate title of «Greek Catholic». These are certainly not Greek, but Uniates subordinate to the Pope, followed by the Byzantine (Eastern Roman see) rate.

It is also striking that all the Slavonic peoples in the pre-outbreak period of nationalism had no problem whatsoever called Rum Orthodox and be subject to the Ecumenical Patriarchate, is not to forget, never made an effort to Hellenization, since this was contrary to the principles and the very identity as universal. Not even a period of Christianization of the Slavic epecheirithi the hellenization them: on the contrary strengthened (essentially edimiourgithi) language with the preparation of special alphabet for them and support their cultural identity.

It is no coincidence that the Church of Russia in the 18th century until the October Revolution had difficulty called "Greek-Russian '2Or even your own church until 1971 was called «Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of America»3.

Since, then, I think, proved that the term «Greek Orthodox» with respect to the Patriarchate of the East is not an exact return on their real identity, we can better explain current developments both in the diaspora and in the Patriarchate itself.

Once established the independent Greek state, which in terms of terminology, corresponded with the Patriarchate of the East are gone through a period of crisis of identity.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate has granted the status Autocephalous Church of Greece, Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria, Georgia, Poland, Albania and the Czech Republic and Slovakia (19th - 20th cent.) After the Asia Minor catastrophe lost almost the entire flock within Turkey with the signing of Treaty of Lausanne and the exchange of populations between Greece and Turkey.

The Patriarchate of Antioch and Jerusalem passed through an identity crisis because their Greek threatened to identify with the fate of the Greek nation and the policy of the Greek Republic. Also, the Church of Russia, turned after the abolition of the Patriarchate of Peter the Great in a state institution panslavistiki reconciled with the direction of foreign policy of the Russian state during the 19th century, because it allowed the possibility of having full coverage of the State to promote and their own interests. Thus, by the establishment of the Royal Society Palaistineiou on May 28, 1882, by helping Russians pilgrims, became an institution of the Czarist interests in the Middle East, simultaneously promoting its own interests in this sensitive area.

The Patriarchate of Alexandria turned his attention to ieraspotoli to the peoples of Africa. Once developed and consolidated its mission organized in 2001 has requested formal letters from the Ecumenical Patriarchate's jurisdiction if parachorisin entire continent. Since then, added the title of Patriarch of Alexandria, the words "and all Africa" and until then "and any land in Egypt 'only.

Nationalism and knocked on the door of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, which Palestinians loyal edyskolefonto understand now why the Church was entitled «Rum Orthodox» (wrongly be translated as greek) while they were neglecting Arabic and Arab national consciousness. Wisely, however, pastoral activities and demonstrate sensitivity to the needs of the Palestinian flock, he managed to deal with each emerging nationalist outbreaks and crises.

I think it was necessary that border on being able to approach the current situation of the Orthodox Church in the U.S. and the position of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate is not national in its current sense. It follower of the traditional, traditional expression of Christianity, as he stood in the organizational background of a non-national, a global empire and, as recorded and codified in the decisions of the Ecumenical Synods.

The Ecumenical Councils recorded the original and apostolic Christian conscience on the organization of ecclesiastical life in purely geographic criteria, rather than linguistic or national origin. The jurisdiction of each church was described accurately in their decisions, while they were composed saints and bearing Fathers were aware that there were areas outside the boundaries of the Roman world and beyond the then known "universe", which called the technical term "barbarian". The pastoral responsibility for those areas reimbursed to the Ecumenical Patriarch.

The geographical jurisdiction of the churches and patriarchates built up later (after enn. Marital sessions) periegrafisan also precisely the patriarchal and synodal Volumes issued by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of securing and expressing the Pan-Orthodox consciousness and consensus.

It is well established that the Church of Russia has developed missionary work in Alaska as the 18th century, when the region was a russian territory, as indeed did the churches of the Empire era in apiokies them.

The standard question here is: the territorial expansion of a state is aftonoitos extending jurisdiction of the Church of this State in that area? H and the other question: The development of a mission outside the geographical area of jurisdiction is likewise claim jurisdiction?

Preaching the word of God and spreading the Gospel of Christ is certainly commendable, and the holiness and sacrificial offering of first missionaries are well respected and accepted.

The geographical, but the jurisdiction of the Church Russia is clearly circumscribed in Volume of Autocephaly received by the Ecumenical Patriarchate. The argument that this first evingelise a part of the Americas is not church, nor a regular basis, but is colonial mentality. We at this point to mention the examples of the Russian mission in China and Japan, countries where the Church of Russia considers the standard of ground! The proper response in such cases is the Patriarchate of Alexandria, which he has requested and received formal jurisdiction over the entire African continent, as you said.

The further presence of Orthodoxy in the U.S. in late 19th and during the 20th century the common features of all the Orthodox diaspora around the world: the Orthodox church were organized mainly based on ethnicity and the churches of origin.

Therefore it is not fair to say that by doing this ... "Diespasthi this section and was replaced by the arbitrary authority unheard of" multi-jurisdictional '"4.
The Patriarchy presvygeni esevasthisan the 28th rule of the Fourth Ecumenical Council and the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate on outside the geographical limits of the Orthodox Church sites. The only exception was, unfortunately, the Patriarchate of Antioch, who in the confusion caused in the late 19th century with good performance and the exact scope of "Greek Orthodox Patriarchate» «Rum Orthodox Patriarchate» misled by the rise of Arab nationalism and made ecclesiological different options to survive in an environment characterized by dangerously growing anti-western of the time (the geopolitical environment enn.).

The evolution of the presence of Russia in the U.S. Church deeply affected by the consequences of the October Revolution in the year 1917 and the introduction in Russia of the atheist regime. Communication with the needy Orthodox Church became increasingly difficult with each dependency it accused of collaboration with the atheist regime, treated with suspicion and a strong reluctance. Contributed to this later and the Cold War climate between the two superpowers, which made it conceivable to subject American citizens to Moscha5 church.

Already in 1924, as you know, it was decided to 'temporary autonomy' of the U.S. presence Rossias6 Church. Moscow has challenged the regularity tous7 while they mention the Patriarch of Moscow as a formal ecclesiastical authority tous8. We forget that the year 1946 was an attempt to join in the then Patriarch Alexius I, not karpoforise9. A similar attempt was made back in 1966 when Bishop Irenaeus was sent to all Orthodox Prokathimenous10.

Known developments that led to the return of the incorrect Autocephaly the metropolis, which only in 1970 renamed the Moscow Patriarchate on «Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of America» in OCA11.

Apart from the question whether it was normal yield "Autocephaly (which is not a coincidence that only recognized the Soviet sphere of Churches epirrois12) questions:

The pursuit of local drug metropolis of the Church of Moscow dictated solely by ideology and ecclesiological principles of locality of the Church was an inevitable choice and need to decline the possible suspicion that subject, and spiritually guided by a church state, which was considered the main threat to IPA13.

Today, after 40 years, verified the view of Fr John Meyendorff that: "The criticism caused the Autocephaly not due to the normal ecclesiological reasons, but fear that 'fyletistiki' ethnocentric or the structure of existing 'jurisdictions' will now face the serious challenge of a normal, healthy American Church, which was at the same time very open to maintaining all existing national customs and traditions of various groups of Orthodox immigrants?14

We appreciate the efforts of the OCA to establish the U.S. concept and reality of the local Church. This, as noted above, a vision and the Ecumenical Patriarchate. I wonder if you can claimlocality when there is a minority, when ignoring all other churches.

Reading the Instructions of the Hierarchy of OCA, by which was announced formally in the year 1970, making the 'autocephalous' status, stressed that it was a three-fold objective:

"The objective of the union of all Orthodox Christians of America at a church."

"The objective of free testimony of Christian faith throughout the world."

"The goal of spiritual growth in power by force, through the prayers of the holy Father Herman of Alaska.

Again I wonder if now, after 40 years, we can say we have found one of these three objectives. The first goal is clearly not achieved. As for the other two goals, just make in the double question:
a) needs to return autocephalous status to be achieved? You had the exact same and before making this scheme? and in that connection, b) the other Orthodox in the U.S. presence, which have not been autocephalous status, lagged behind in anything in these areas of the Orthodox witness in the world and the spiritual force of increase in power?

Summing up the yield on the 'autocephalous' status my humble opinion, let me say that in fact appeared in the Church as well, and if the intentions, the violation of sacred rules in no way lead to positive results. The results of irregularities, sooner or later we find before us, as happened recently (2009) with the decisions of the Fourth Pre-Conciliar Pan-Orthodox Conference in Geneva Chambésy. While the OCA that began with the entirely commendable optimism unification of all Orthodox in the U.S. and consolidating the conscience of such locality, is today an obstacle and a problem to epilysin because there is a church recognized by all Orthodox. This is because according to Article 1 of the Rules of Operation of the Episcopal Assemblies and approved by the Fourth Pan-Orthodox Pre-Conciliar Conference: "Always the Orthodox bishops of each Region, as of the Fourth Pan-Orthodox Pre-Conciliar Conference set, which is in normal society after bass of the local autocephalous Orthodox churches establish their own Episkopikin Assembly. Moreover, Article 2c of the decisions of this Pan-Orthodox Conference, provides in the Orthodox diaspora that: "The issues on Against this lamvanontai decisions throughout omofonianChurches and self worth which represented the concrete Assembly.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate organized ecclesiastical jurisdiction in the U.S. after the transplantation of believers from the regions of Thrace, Pontus and Asia Minor, after the great disaster experienced. This is natural and has historical explanation. He founded the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese J. North and South America, this does not mean that the Greeks created for the race. This is evidenced by the fact that the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, including Albania, Ukraine, karpathorossous and Palestinians, but none of them ever feel exellinizomenos deteriorating by this fact. The very founder of the Archdiocese Patriarch Meletios Metaxakis the enthronement of reason talks of the Pastoral Care of all Orthodox Christians of the diaspora, with particular reference to the faithful of the United Politeion15. This patriarch not only distinguish the faithful according to their ethnic origin, but refers directly to the decisions of the Great Synod of Constantinople in the year 1872, which condemned the ethnofyletismo. I recall that the Synod has declared schismatic who epixan 'own altar "and recommended" individual fyletikin parasynagogin "is based on purely racial grounds, to be judged" ... designed to teach the Gospel and ierois kanosi percent of the Blessed Our Father "16.

The non-jurisdictional autonomy of the archdiocese was not an obstacle to spiritual and organizational progress. At least no one can now ichyristhei that the Archdiocese of us lacks something of the 'autocephalous »OCA in any field. Instead, we saw take place in life without it ceases to be direct jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, the vision of the late Professor Anton Vladimirovich Kartashoff for compensation "insobornost (Ie the responsible participation of all the people of God, clergy and people in the life of the church) from the top to the base ... "17.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate always faced with understanding the historical difficulties through which passed the OCA. When this had to face the question of regularity that the Church of Russia in Soviet times, the Ecumenical Patriarchate has maintained fruitful cooperation and community. Even if, contrary to normal meaning to order almost certainly got a so-called "autocephalous" of the Orthodox Church saw it more as a pending settlement with the Moscow Patriarchate and showing understanding is not stopped, applying the ecclesiastical economy, society, and her continued Concelebrants the hierarchy. We want now to develop the anti-evolution arguments that the Ecumenical Patriarchate, which also are known and recorded. But I consider it my duty to emphasize the common vision and our common principles, which are often disadvantaged and are lost in the jurisdictional dispute which usually monopolize our relations. I recall the words of the late Bishop Galanakis, who in a Christmas message to the Orthodox patriarchs in 1966 said "... unity can be achieved only by an agreement between all the national churches "18Therefore, not by unilateral actions of questionable regularity.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate did not come to America as a national Church, to establish a national jurisdiction, because it is also contrary to the ecclesiological principles and his own identity and its history. The Archdiocese is our "Greek" in the sense that you have discussed it at the beginning of my speech, this does not mean that it will terminate and suppress ethnic origin, language and culture of believers who are the jurisdiction, whether they be Greek or not. In this also I think symfonoume19.

Ground being on the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese in America, I want to say that one can encounter parishes, where the Greek is widely spoken and where the sequences are particularly sacred to the Greek in two languages: Greek and English. But there are many parishes where the Greek is not in use and is spoken only English. In other words, one can get the impression of a dominant influence in the Greek church, which is not true.

Further I would like to draw your attention to the following argument. The Greek language is also a victim of rising nationalism and became a target even in the U.S. by car to the idea of courses of treatment, the Mother Church. But the Greek language is not just a national language but the language of the Gospel, the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils, the Fathers of the Ekkliias and functional prototypes and devotional texts of Orthodoxy.

Finally, I wonder why the Archdiocese of the Ecumenical Patriarchate can not be an expression of all united Orthodox presence in the U.S., because the title has the word "Greek" and the same claims to be the OCA, despite the fact that by 1970 brought officially titled "Russian" (and "Greek") and until recently run by the bishops of Russian origin?20

The meaning is "Greek" was not an obstacle to our loyal Americans are genuine, loyal U.S. citizens and willing defenders of the interests.
It is understandable and perhaps just a degree of labeling of certain difficulty to accept the term diaspora, which includes the element of precarious. Certainly the bulk of the orthodox believers in the U.S. - but not only - the element of precariousness of their existence in these areas is an anachronism. But we must understand that when we say we do not refer only spread to people scattered in other words, but rather - now - the geographical area in which it has been spreading. In this sense, then, is neither dishonorable nor anachronistic to refer to a geographic specificity in terms of a separate ecclesiastical terminology. I do not think that anyone who does not accept the pastoral care of the areas outside the geographical limits of local churches currently employs throughout the Orthodox and should at least be defined and onomatistei so then analyzed and addressed. The once scattered, today is indigenous, rooted Christians who flourished and bore fruit at home.

This is in itself a the American dream, which you claim is right, does not require the removal of historical memory and culture of the people who compose it, but promotes the creative composition in the essence of flourishing U.S.. "We hold these truths self-evident, that all men are molded and have equal endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights including the right of zis, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," says the American Declaration of Independence. President Jimmy Carter, but adds that "we do not take up a pot but a beautiful mosaic. Different people, different beliefs, different goals, different hopes, different dreams "21. Here the views of those steps Vice Hubert H. Humphrey: «It is, thankfully, long since passed the time when people liked to believe that the United States as a kind of container of assimilation, which took men and women from all over the world and to transform American uniform. Eimate, I think, has become more mature and wise. As we welcome a world of otherness, the glory of American otherness - the increasingly wealthy America because of the many different and distinct yarns that are woven "22.

Katakleiontas's suggestion, I think that the irregularities, even dictated by historical necessity, not a good choice because it will always stand before us towards the Pan-Orthodox unity and witness.

The decisions of the Fourth Pan-Orthodox Pre-Conciliar Conference is a historic opportunity for Orthodoxy in America to overcome the competitive mentality of the past and see that the Ecumenical Patriarchate is governed by the same principles yperthenikes both the OCA and the U.S.. Respect the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils, the observance of the Orthodox tradition and faith are the only way in Christ, unity and progress.

In his address to the Primates of the Orthodox Church by the Assembly in October of 2008 the lighthouse, the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew said:

"Ileithimen the Lord to anikomen at the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church, whose faithful follower and exponent in the History of the Holy Orthodox Church Prayer. Parelavomen and sustained the alithinin faith as handed on to us by the holy Fathers of the Ecumenical Councils of the undivided Church. Koinonoumen the same Body and Blood of Christ in the one Eucharist, and metechomen of these holy sacraments. Kept basically the same liturgical typical dioikoumetha and in the same Holy Canons. However always ensure the unity of us, and provide basic conditions through the witness of our modern world now.

However, due to omologisomen the honesty that is sometimes given the poor image of unity as we are not a Church but a confederation federation of Churches ... Of course, apantisis to this question, which is usually given is that despite dioikitikin katatmisin Orthodoxy remains united in faith, sacraments, etc. But is this enough? When before non-Orthodox emfanizometha often divided in their theological dialogues and elsewhere where the adynatomen to prochorisomen pragmatopoiisin in the long-promised the Holy and Great Synod of the Orthodox Church ∙ sterometha a single voice on current issues and Instead, sygkrotomen bilateral dialogues on issues moreover, made after the non-Orthodox or when ∙ adynatomen to sygkrotisomen unitary Orthodox Church in the so-called Diaspora in conformity with the ecclesiological and normal all of our Church ∙ apofygomen how we can split the image of Orthodoxy, and public and on the basis of non-theological, secular criteria?

We have lifted, hence, require more unity to emfanizometha out to be not just a federation of Churches but as one single church. The latter from the throne through the centuries, particularly after the schism, nor the Church of Rome ceased to be found in society after the Orthodox, was asked by the normal range ministered to the unity of the Orthodox Church as Protothronos this, which they did over time call panorco'doxo met throughout several summits on critical issues of church, and always ready to provide aid of the and in this symparastasin emperistatous Orthodox Church, where it has been requested by him. Diemorfothi so a normal taxi, whereby the coordinating role of the Patriarchate exisfalize unitary result of the Orthodox Church, with no complaints to the paravlaptitai meiotai the autonomy of the local autocephalous Churches by whose intervention in the internal thereof. Indeed it is a healthy sense of the autocephalous institution that, while ensuring the self-governed each church as to this life and esoterikin organosin on matters relating to the entire Orthodox Church and to the outside relations of each autocephalous Church does not act independently, but ἐν coordination after the other Orthodox Churches. If the coordination eliminate the latter from atonisi the Autocephaly is "aftokefalismos, toutesti dividing factor and not a unity of the Orthodox Church.

We are called therefore prosfilestatoi brothers in the Lord, to symvalomen by all means against the unity of the Orthodox Church, regionalism is always the temptation to ethnikofyletikon energomen a single Church, as in normal sygkekrotimenon body. This is certainly not easy. There diathetomen as happened in Vyzantinin period, guaranteeing civic leaders - the sometimes imposed - our unity. Ecclesiology nor allows us sygkentrotikin power to become liable to impose unity from above. This unity is for us in the conscience of us. The synaisthisis need and our debt as apotelomen sygkekrotimenon the normal body, one Church, is likely to safeguard the unity of us, without outside interference oiasditinos.

Thursday, June 10, 2010

facebook commentary, oca agendas, ep trumps and triumphs


First let me just clarify a few things. According to the requirements of several vocal groups in the U.S. by demanding an American National to pave or lead the way for the U.S. church is misguided. So the olympian greats of Orthodoxy by that standard would need not apply: Gregory the Theologian, Chrysostom, Basil, Palamas, etc all out . Faith and religion transcend culture, generation, time and nationality all of which are transitional incidentals.


I was accused earlier of being into conspiracy theories frankly I'm not; although there is a strong underground, a culture of people who are pushing this American patriarchate in theory and in practice that he must come from the American fronteer.  Regardless of race, culture or nationality one like Arch Demetrios could lead a unified autonomous church without seeking a patriarchate. Also I would like to mention that there is no justification to push for one.


While  former heirachs of the OCA were looting the treasury, the future custodians cleaned up the accounting and set the sights on power; shoring up their position and linguistically hijacking and controlling the rhetoric as their agenda moves forward. Meanwhile the GOA developed all the flourishing ministries of SCOBA while almost dismissing but certainly marginalizing the OCA; who seemed perpetually embroiled in scandal; or defending their irregular past to explain away their illegitimacy with new resolutions and sweeping statements. The OCA machine with their non-official media groups have started to reframe the debate and have doubled their propaganda efforts and revisionist history. Hiding behind the pure cloak of serving the 'unchurched' by setting up missions throughout the u.s. within 5 min. drives from GOA parishes is poaching not evangelizing and attempting to boost failing statistics. All this for 'the sake of service' it seems only like the OCA is helping themselves to second helpings. Gross.


Archbishop Demetrios outlined the real concern ecclesiastical discrepancies. The OCA has been quietly and methodically setting the tone firming up their base by getting organized. According to commentary on facebook America needs a patriarch to serve as a father to the faithful who are currently split by jurisdiction as  there needs to be unity for we are one flock. I  believe the EP serves the role. And being westernized should not a lithmus test regardless.


I heard Met. Jonah personally state in a small OCA parish the he saw the path for an American patriarchate on his lifetime.He repeated similar comments and disparaging ones about HAH until a video went viral on youtube. The church isn't about being the American church it is Christ's. The ability to relate with the flock comes directly form the unity of faith not culture. HAH effectively pastors his churches in Asia, Africa, Europe, south America, and north America. I have seen him personally on American soil three times.


At a time when the world is shrinking with the aid of technology and we are in fact having a one world culture this argument seems lame. The OCA's church membership didn't soar when they went from Slavonic to English and it will not be flooded with faithful if they create a schism and erect their own patriarch. Remember even their autocephaly is not conciliatorily recognized and are mentioned only barely in a few diptych.
These are not irrelevancies and can't be rightly marginalized. I understand their canonical status it's their autocephaly which is in serious breach and was acknowledged by Jonah's admittance into the assembly as a common bishop though perhaps he should have been assigned to Moscow.


God bless you and goodnight.

Tuesday, June 8, 2010

Worth Re-stating, FAB FIVE EXTREMIST

AOI APOSTATES George Michalopulos, Scott Pennington, Al Green, Chrys, Dean Calvery, Eliot Ryan, Michael Baumanand, Isa I renounce your extremist partisan politicking. You willfully denounce and defame what is holy and sacrificial the Holy Mother Church. I find your stench offensive to my sense. Cowering beneath ominous cloak of Fr. Johannes Jacobse cut off from ventilation you have gone mad over the edge.

You are welcome to disagree and express your irreverence if you wish to clothe yourself in that filth. I however will not engage with your silliness as it has no merit and I give it no credence. Like unruly children you will be ignored. What you wish for is attention and to be some powerful lobby but you are even an embarrassment to those you claim to endorse. Like emotionally disturbed step children you have been tolerated.
May the loving and living Christ convict you in your conscience to that you may turn from your unorthodox hatred for what is just and good and righteous the Ecumenical See. If not you might one day hear a loud SPLAT as you are swatted away by the faithful masses of the Holy Orthodox Church.
It would be my esteemed pleasure if Fr. Johannes Jacobse would simply remove all my posts to his heretical blog and orgie of schismatics. He has along history of removing and banning any commentary which he and his posse can't bash with their extremist tactics.
Robert F. Kennedy wrote: "What is objectionable, what is dangerous about extremists is not that they are extreme, but that they are intolerant. The evil is not what they say about their cause, but what they say about their opponents."
The following are the traits and tactics utilized by political extremists.
This is also true of the orthodox brethren which consistently and willfully position themselves on the fringe of orthodoxy. They have yet to awaken to the cry of the church to return and will find themselves apostates.
Laird Wilcox on Extremist Traits
1. CHARACTER ASSASSINATION.

2. NAME-CALLING AND LABELING.

3. IRRESPONSIBLE SWEEPING GENERALIZATIONS.

4. INADEQUATE PROOF FOR ASSERTIONS.

5. ADVOCACY OF DOUBLE STANDARDS.

6. TENDENCY TO VIEW THEIR OPPONENTS AND CRITICS AS ESSENTIALLY EVIL.

7. MANICHAEAN WORLDVIEW.

8. ADVOCACY OF SOME DEGREE OF CENSORSHIP OR REPRESSION OF THEIR OPPONENTS AND/OR CRITICS.

9. TEND TO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES IN TERMS OF WHO THEIR ENEMIES ARE: WHOM THEY HATE AND WHO HATES THEM.

10. TENDENCY TOWARD ARGUMENT BY INTIMIDATION.

11. USE OF SLOGANS, BUZZWORDS, AND THOUGHT-STOPPING CLICHES.

12. ASSUMPTION OF MORAL OR OTHER SUPERIORITY OVER OTHERS.

13. DOOMSDAY THINKING.

14. BELIEF THAT IT'S OKAY TO DO BAD THINGS IN THE SERVICE OF A "GOOD" CAUSE.

15. EMPHASIS ON EMOTIONAL RESPONSES AND, CORRESPONDINGLY, LESS IMPORTANCE ATTACHED TO REASONING AND LOGICAL ANALYSIS.

16. HYPERSENSITIVITY AND VIGILANCE.

17. USE OF SUPERNATURAL RATIONALE FOR BELIEFS AND ACTIONS.

18. PROBLEMS TOLERATING AMBIGUITY AND UNCERTAINTY.

19. INCLINATION TOWARD "GROUPTHINK."

20. TENDENCY TO PERSONALIZE HOSTILITY.

21. EXTREMISTS OFTEN FEEL THAT THE SYSTEM IS NO GOOD UNLESS THEY WIN.

Patriarchates of the Undivided Early Church’s Pentarchy

The Patriarchates of the Undivided Early Church’s Pentarchy:
  1. THE PATRIARCHATE OF JERUSALEM:  Epicenter of ancient Jewish customs made-anew in Christ Jesus serving as the essential foundation for the Jewish Rite of the Christian Church. Officially declared a Patriarchate at the 4th Ecumenical Council, 451 AD, which established universally tthe dual  nature of Christ condeming the Monophysite Christian Heretics.

  2. THE PATRIARCHATE OF ANTIOCH: Epicenter of the ancient Syrian civilizations made-anew in Christ Jesus serving as the essential foundation for the  first Gentile Rite of the Christian Church. Affirmed a  Patriarchate at the 1st Ecumenical Council, 325 AD, which established Jesus as God, One in Being with the Father condeming the Arian Heretics.

  3. THE PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA: Epicenter of the ancient Egyptian civlization made-anew in Christ Jesus. Affirmed a Patriarchate at the 1st Ecumenical Council, 325 AD, which established Jesus as God, One in Being with the Father condeming the Arian Heretics.

  4. THE PATRIARCHATE OF ROME Epicenter of Roman civiliztion made-anew in Christ Jesus. Esblishing the Roman Rite of the Christian Church. Affirmed a Patriarchate at the 1st Ecumenical Council, 325 AD, which established Jesus as God, One in Being with the Father condeming the Arian Heretics.

  5. THE PATRIARCHATE OF BYZANTIUM/CONSTANTINOPLE. Epienter of the ancient Greek civilization. Estsablishing the Byzantine (Greek) Rite of the Christian Church.   Officially declared a Patriarchate at the 4th Ecumenical Council, 451 AD, which established universally tthe dual nature of Christ condeming the Monophysite Christian Heretics.
Now this is what all can agree is true diversity.

Words from a righteous man: Fr. Makarios Griniezakis is an Archimandrite of the Ecumenical Throne:
“…even a cursory study of history shows us that every heresy, schism and ecclesiastical division stemmed from personal ambition and egotism, only later to be robed in the mantle of dogmatic diversity”.
“When we emphasize our vastness and point to statistical demonstrations, it means that we are not shepherds, but rather operatives of power, exploiting the administrative and spiritual authority that springs forth from our position”.
"The pentarchy is comprised of Old Rome, New Rome (Constantinople) and the Patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem. Not only was Moscow never considered a member of the pentarchy, but also there are no ecclesiastical or canonical texts that designate Moscow as the replacement or substitute for Old Rome”.
“It is clear from the discussion that the Ecumenical Patriarchate will certainly not lose the position of primacy that it maintains; the ranking of the Orthodox Churches will not change; and the committee in question--or any other committee that is formed--will not institute rebellious changes in the Orthodox Church”.
“The truth will release us from our parochial attitude and self-love; the truth will liberate us from spitefulness and our egos; the truth will allow us to move beyond feelings that instigate internal quarrels and erect narcissistic partitions. 'The truth shall set us free.’”

Friday, June 4, 2010

OCA Follows Gillquist Lead

Is the Orthodox Church creating new protocols of anomaly to forgo the hard work of a robust dialogue on issues of independence, territories and revisionist history. This rightly could have been a prerequisite for participation in the assembly. For instance, in the case of Met. Jonah who participated simply as a bishop  why was he not then represented with Russia?
Met. Jonah and the OCA's nuanced admittance to the Orthodox Assembly is reminiscent of Peter Gillquist and his Campus Crusading followers. The Gillquist group who arrived on the seen as 'bishops' with 'flock' in hand, were rejected by all legitimate churches. Only later to be accepted by the erratic reasoning's of the Antiochians; who simply demoted their rank and  ordained them as priests and accepting their mass conversion. Thereby, fore-going the sureity of a proper Orthodox catechism, seminary study or training!!! Thousands of people where assimilated into the orthodox faith without any appropriate pastoral direction. Are we succumbing to political pressure to make nice and include everyone?
If exceptions are being made then it is assumed they are done for the overall economia of the church.  I don't know if caving to disorder or an ambush is well and good.

Thursday, June 3, 2010

Turkey Ripped

Sofia News Agency HAH in His Own Words

An exclusive interview of Novinite.com (Sofia News Agency) with His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew I.
 
What would you say are the major, basic characteristics that continue to distinguish today Eastern/Greek Orthodox Christianity from the other Christian churches?
It is sometimes best to discern similarities and common ground, rather than differences and distinctive features among Christian Churches. There is often more that unites us than separates us, and we should not be complacent in a defensive presence of Orthodox Christianity in the world.
Nevertheless, the Orthodox Church has a profound wealth in its spiritual tradition, which retains a more cosmic, liturgical and mystical world view.
This is why current issues of global concern, such as the ecological crisis, are of utmost importance to us inasmuch as they underline how doctrine and ethos are integrally related. The way we worship and pray to God reflects the way we lead our lives and treat our planet.
What is the most unique thing about the tradition of Eastern/Greek Orthodox Christianity? What should members of the other Christian churches or other religions know about it?
The Orthodox Church is often seen as a traditional Church. And, while it is true that we preserve many elements from the early Apostolic community, which witnessed the Resurrection of our Lord and the Pentecost of the Church, we are also a Church that seeks to dialogue with the present.
In this regard, we are a Church that looks both to the past (with the treasures of the Church of the Fathers) as well as to the future (with an expectation of the heavenly kingdom, as we profess in the Nicene Creed). This all-embracing theology and all-encompassing spirituality is “always prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks us to give the reason for the hope that lies within us.” (1 Peter 3.15)
There is a widespread impression that Western churches are generally more pro-active with respect to social causes and initiatives.
What is the main attraction and the main message of the Eastern Orthodox Church in the 21st century, the rapidly changing time of the Global Age?
In many ways, there is truth in that widespread impression, and it would be helpful for us as Orthodox Christians to be prepared also to learn from our Western brothers and sisters.
As we observed earlier, it is more helpful and beneficial for us to work together in a spirit of healthy ecumenism, rather than work in an isolation that resembles a closed ghetto-like community. From as early as the third century, the West emphasized the role of the Church in the present world, excelling in law, ethics, and the worldly institution.
By contrast, the East stressed the heavenly (or eschatological) dimension of the Church, presenting unparalleled models and examples of mysticism and spirituality. So both East and West can learn from one another.
The Orthodox Church can reveal how the Holy Spirit and the Divine Liturgy are able to inspire all aspects of the earthly Church – including the organizational leadership of the Church and the social standards of the people.
Is it correct to say that the Orthodox Christian religion is a key trait of a Greco-Slavic Civilization, as it is often described by western scholars?
While it is true that Orthodox Christianity was the cradle of civilization on the Eastern world – both Greek and Slavic – the unfortunate truth is that the Western world has neglected its Byzantine roots.
It is a sad reality that Western historians have been dominated by the importance and influence of the Renaissance, while overlooking the fact that Constantine the Great moved the capital of the Empire to New Rome, Constantinople, in 330AD as well as the fact that all seven Ecumenical Councils of undivided Christianity were held not in Greece or Rome, but in the East, in what is now Turkey.
Nevertheless, more recent scholarship has embraced a more comprehemsive view of history. As shown in Dr. Runciman’s great books, the memory preserved by the Mother Church of Constantinople through the centuries was the memory of an Orthodox ecumenical civilization. However, it is not easy to turn around a tide of historical prejudice.
Greeks and Bulgarians used to have more powerful medieval empires, which boosted Orthodox Christianity. What is the role of these two nations today as far as Orthodox Christianity is concerned? Is it fair to say that Russia is the leading Orthodox nation nowadays?
We should remember that the situation of the first millennium no longer prevails in our world, and we should not live in such a manner that reflects those circumstances. Moreover, while the original system of Pentarchy emanated from respect for the apostolicity and particularity of the traditions of these ancient Patriarchates, the autocephaly of later Churches grew out of respect for the cultural identity of nations.
Thus, today, we have reached the perception that Orthodoxy comprises a federation of national Churches, frequently attributing priority to national interests in their relationship with one another. Yet, secular forces have never been the primary focus or foremost definition of Orthodox ecclesiology.
Our criteria of ecclesial identity and unity are not the measures of this world – of numbers and wealth – but derive instead from the Holy Spirit, as this is revealed in the Church Councils and the Holy Eucharist.
We do not, as during Byzantine times, have at our disposal a state factor that guaranteed – and sometimes even imposed – our unity. Nor does our ecclesiology permit any centralized authority that is able to impose unity from above.
Our unity depends on our ecclesial conscience. The sense of need and duty that we constitute a single canonical structure and body, one Church, is sufficient to guarantee our unity, without any external intervention.
This is precisely why we have to date convened five meetings (Synaxes) of Heads of Orthodox Churches throughout the world, while we have at the same time insisted on advancing preparations for the Holy and Great Council of our Orthodox Church.
We have been blessed with a recent official visit to Russia at the invitation of His Beatitude Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and we have, therefore, witnessed the vital rejuvenation as well as the complicated adversities of the Russian nation.
From your position as the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople you have sought to promote peace among Christians, Muslims and Jews. What are some of your successful initiatives in that respect? In an age of rising sectarian violence, what can religious figures of your rank do to help bring about peace and understanding?
In addition to the bilateral academic dialogues that we hold on a regular basis with both Jews and Muslims (since the early 1970s), the initiatives that we have promoted in recent years include: the Peace and Tolerance Conference (Istanbul, 1994); the Conference on Peaceful Coexistence between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (Brussels, 2001); the Conference on Religion, Peace and the Olympic Ideal (Athens, 2004); and the second Peace and Tolerance Conference (Istanbul, 2005).
These gatherings, and others like them, have proved both pioneering in purpose and historical in substance. For they opened our eyes to the diversity of cultures and religions that comprise our fragmented global world. It is our firm conviction that all religious leaders can benefit from such meetings inasmuch as they widened people’s appreciation of racism and fundamentalism, while assisting in distinguishing between religious tolerance and religious absolutism.

Ecumenical Patriarch has 'Super Fatigue Resistance'

Major confusion about the status of the "American church" (whatever that is)  leads one to presume such confusion is  the result of red herrings propagated intentionally by commandos (AOI, OCL...) shooting blanks.  First let's openly acknowledge SCOBA is defunked. Now in the spirit of truth let's clear the path. While the OCA's Mysteries are recognzied by the GOA, claims of universally accepted autocephaly is outlandish. The anomaly which preceded and drove the autocephalous claims are not accepted as valid. There are protocols which are not randomly dismissed for convenience or political advantage and then forced upon right thinking jurisdictions. Like Job they were called to suffer well, not declare independence. Much to the dismay of some deluded and vocal anarchists the Ecumenical Throne is not simply an honorary title or  some nostalgic position.
His All-Holiness brings with him the full force of the "Historical and Martyric See of Ecumenical Patriarchate" which attests before mankind and God its legitimacy; which the OCA or its mother church the Moscow Patriarchate, with its self-indulgant Czarist expanionist ideologies doesn't deny.  The Ecumenical Patriarch while a 'citizen of a second class' in his own country; is a preeminent leader on the world stage. HAH is actively engaged with environmental and ecological discussions being noted as one of Time Magazine Top 100 most influential people. He grants audiences with world leaders and has an extensive international platform and impressive CV (resume). His charitable work is impressive by any measure for example the Baloukli Hospital serves 40,000+ Turkish citizens each year including government officials. They have every discipline necessary with both in-patient and out-patient services provided at no charge. There is also the Home for the Aged exclusively for orthodox Christians.
To endure such human rights violations and limited civil liberties, like religious freedom afforded 'first class citizens' His All-Holiness the Ecumenical Patriarch must has a kind of 'super fatigue resistance' an obvious gift of the Holy Spirit for a believing people!! His All-Holiness has a greater capacity to perceive current events in their transitional, acute state, having a depth of perception which alludes the myopic view of the narrow-minded anarchists.
His All-Holiness' Pastoral care is evident in his youth rallies, symposiums, international pilgrimages, encyclicals, critically acclaimed books....

Tuesday, June 1, 2010

aberrant egotism & false prophets Met. Philip

I continue in prayer. I openly protest any person, affiliation, juristiction, group or government which seeks to undermine its sovereignty.


I'm taking pointers from Bishop Savas on false prophets.

  • "Their end is destruction; their god is the belly; and their glory is in their shame; their minds are set on earthly things" (Phil 3:19).

  • "For such people do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the simple-minded" (Rom 16:18).
I would like to say upfront I speak only my conscience and am not an official authority for any jurisdiction or affiliate. I am however officially making my claim speaking against any disparaging comments or innuendo or claim made contrary to the Ecumenical See. I perceive the distinction between papist insanity and loyalty, commitment and truth.
The attitudes which appear systemic and deeply ingrained  Met. Philip and those of like-mind are easily understood.  Such personas are the direct result of the tremendous misfortune of being plagued with organic disorders coupled with chronic exposure to aberrant egotism, logic tight compartmental thinking and dysfunction. Basically they are out of their right mind.

Now from the Gospel reading: The Lord said, "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit. A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will know them by their fruits. Not every one who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."

Dalai Lama, Islam, Heresy, Ecumenical Patriarchate

There are more Dalai Lama sympathizers amongst orthodox activists then genuine supporters of the Ecumenical Patriarch. There is more tolerance for Hindu believers then for the adherence to orthodox doctrine. There is more attention payed to rearing our children for social and economic success then true orthodox piety. We respect more the Muslim rites of worship and their religious dedication to their ancient heresy while  practicing orthodox laity everywhere are met with critical and disapproving nods. Heterodox and heretics alike quote three or four references to assert fallacious and inane arguments to justify schismatic and unholy self serving ends.
Know this we are being sifted separated one from another like wheat from the shaft. To paraphrase  a notable church father 'one who has no help during time of war (to include spiritual warfare and territorial power grabs) should take no comfort in times of peace'.  I am sad to see so many bend to their knees to offer worship to temples dedicated to their own ego. They justify divergent positions on some higher kind of thinking. Something which alludes the rest of us. 
Saint Paul was big on order deciding who and where and when churches were to be established and led. The litmus test for correct praxis is multidimensional not flat. If I am wrong I suffer no ill or at the most suffer well; if you are error on this point all could possibly be lost for you. Don't let your super-intellect be a stumbling block.