Before the trespasses reported below, GOC had always been on friendly terms with RTOC. But even during the best times, not since briefly in 2009 has the GOC considered that RTOC could be canonical. Internet users who read a lot of Euphrosynos Cafe and NFTU with its associated forums/blogs are often surprised to learn this. The former (Euphrosynos Cafe) is heavily infiltrated with jurisdictional ecumenists, and the latter (NFTU) is owned and operated by jurisdictional ecumenists. Jurisdictional ecumenists want to project the idea that all old calendarist jurisdictions (valid and bogus alike) will someday unite and on some level they are already united. -jh
14 ноября 2013, 17:13
(14 November 2013)
ENGLISH VERSION: Bishop PHOTIOS of Marathon, GOC under Archbishop Kallinikos: “RTOC bishops proves themselves even more untrustworthy, as they broke their promises so easily"
In August 2011 hieromonk Akakios in Serbia left GOC Synod of Archbishop Kallinikos in order to be ordained as Bishop by hierarchs of RTOC (Russian True-Orthodox Church, one of the “fragments” of ROCOR in Russia). About half of True-Orthodox Serbs followed him, the second half continue to be obedient to the Greek Old-Calendatists under Archbishop Kallinikos. The group of Bishop Akakios proclaimed itself to be the Local Church in Serbia. On October 27, 2013, RTOC helped to ordain the second bishop for this group.
«Portal-Credo.Ru» has interviewed Bishop Photios of Marathon, who is responsible for True-Orthodox Serbs who does not recognize Bishop Akakios.
«Portal-Credo.Ru»: The second bishop was ordained on October 27 for the group of Bishop Akakios. What is your attitude to this event?
Bishop Photios: About this ordination the only comment that I have to do is that it is a pity for Fr. Nektarios (whom I consider as a very good man and a pious hieromonk) to accept such an uncanonical ordination. Unforunately the Tikhonites continue their uncanonical actions and RTOC bishops proves themselves even more untrustworthy, as they broke their promises so easily. Archbishop Tikhon (just a few months before receiving Fr. Akakios and those with him) had promised our Holy Synod that he would never interfere in Serbia, unless we had invited him.
- When Hieromonk Akakios left your church, how many people went with him? Was it more them half of your Serbian people?
- In July 2011, before the Akakian fraction broke with our Church, I was there and I wrote a report for our Holy Synod. I had collect statistical information, so I know that in Serbia and Bosnia there were totaly about 240 true orthodox Christians, Clergy, Monastics, men, women and children. After the schism in Serbia in August of 2011, Fr. Akakios was followed by less than the half of them, about 100 supporters.
- How many parishes did he have when he left and how many priests?
Before the Akakian Schism in Serbia and Bosnia there were 3 parishes (about 50 faithful each) in Belgrad, Novi Sad and Smederevo, and 2 parishes under formation (about 20 faithful each) in Nis and in Bosnia. Novi Sad and Nis and some faithful from Belgrad parish, followed Akakios. Two priests followed him, Fr. Nectarios and Fr. Stephan.
- RTOC published the information that he has more them 10 parishes now. Could you comment this?
- I doubt this information. Where is the list of this parishes and how many faithful attend the services?
- How many parishes and clergy do you have in Serbia?
a. Saint Savvas of Serbia in Belgrad, Davidovacka 2/ 11211 BORCA, PALILULA, BELGRAD. Email: email@example.com Website: http://svetisavasrpski.blogspot.gr/
b. Saint Stephan Miloutin in Smederevo, Davidovica 13/0,11300 SMEDEREVO – SERBIA. Tel.: 0038-164-223-3904
c. Dormition of the Mother of God in Pirkovci, UGLIEVIK 75340, BOSNIA (Parish and a Convent beside it)
d. Hesyhasterion of Saint Nicholas in Serbia.
There are two priests: Fr. Sava Mikic in Serbia and Fr. Methodios Zaharic in Bosnia.
- How do you see the future of the group of Bishop Akakios in Serbia
- We shall see what will happen. For us his situation is uncanonical from its foundation from the Tikhonites. And, as it is written, “Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.” (Matth. XIV 13).
Photo: Archbishop Kallinikos of GOC visits Serbisn parish after the split.
Fr. Victor in action defending our Church
Reader Daniel sharing
newer comments added in green
And, All comments, thru google, (as of morning of June 27), under article on internetsobor.org about RTOC & ROAC uniting, etc.
Dear Fr. Victor,
Your answers are wonderful and directly to the point.
You know what you are talking about, while these confused critics of our church, do not.
But, what ignorant accusations they throw at us, are typical.
All of them think that they know the fullness of Orthodoxy, and that they alone can judge others, and us.
Vladimir Moss is usually their main 'spiritual guide'.
Lie is the authors' contention that the Decree # 362 laid the foundation and RTOC RPATs. RPATs broke away from ROCOR Metropolitan. Vitaly on an absurd statement en. Valentine that he personally went into effect Decree # 362, because especially in the face of legitimate VTsU ROCOR for it ceased to exist: en. Valentin repeatedly called from Suzdal to New York, I could not get through and talk to the Met. Vitali! RTOC also broke away from the Met. Vitali - from his mansonvilskogo Synod "ROC in Exile" and made for themselves uncanonical episcopal ordination. Calving grounds of split RTOC "ROC And" not served Decree # 362, and the note Mitropa. Vitaly where he pointed out that he personally had no objection to the organization of the Synod on the territory of the Russian Federation, if such act mansonvilsky Cathedral confirm if Synod in Russia will is subordinated mansonvilskomu synod if candidates for bishops in the Russian Federation will have them, the Metropolitan Cathedral and the "ROC AND "approved. Organization mansonvilsky RTOC Synod Council is not claimed in the nominations of bishops nor Metropolitan RTOC. Vitali nor mansonvilskim cathedral is not approved, self I RTOC subordinated mansonvilskomu synod was not included. What does note Met. Vitali has to Decree # 362 of the Patriarch? should add that if in the opinion of the authors of Appeal between RTOC RPATs and "there are no differences or disagreements religious character", the RTOC initially in Russia had no right to exist instead samovozniknoven Notices and split "ROC And "RTOC had to join the already existing structures in Russia RPATs. Thus, with respect to the RTOC RPATs too, from the first day of its existence - split. RPATs If RTOC and really want to execute the Patriarchal Decree number 362, it would have to immediately join their existing before samovozniknoven Notices and existing now legitimate to the Supreme Church Authority - Synod ROCA, ie join the Metropolitan Agathangelus. Other
RE: From adding splits get more of a split - ELENA 26.06.2014 10:54
You outdated erroneous administrative th opinion, which led to the union of the ROCOR with the MP as the SEA led by the patriarch. You are substituting the Eucharistic unity of the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ on administrative unity is It seems to me, to the Historical canonical cal help, which is attached to this petition: http://catacomb.org.ua/modules.php?name=Pages&go=page&pid=2043, quite reasonably explains why no part of the ROC can not claim to be complete VTsU ROC. It all looks very convincing. Because really Decree 362 does not give anyone the right to the fullness of the PSEA, even ROCA. Most likely, the problem is an incorrect interpretation of the Decree 362, and you and many others, TS in the style of the administrative -bureaucratic thinking of. But the Church and the truth is not administrative -bureaucratic apparatus of th
RE: From adding splits get more of a split - FR. VICTOR 26.06.2014 16:27
Canonical robes of Christ's Church - dilapidated clothes, and you talk like to put to him and patches RTOC RPATs of new tissue, rough and unbleached. Thought you certainly innovative, but not go into any "obsolete" canonical gate: What happened at your request - a new canonical "hole will be worse" (Matt. 9:16). To the RTOC and talk about RPATs Eucharistic unity, it is necessary first to join the Church - the Mystical Body of Christ. As long as the newly-named self-image tion are outside the boundaries of the church, where sacraments are not committed, what kind of Eucharistic unity can there be? Perhaps you believe that in the Sacrament of renegades in parasinagogah and splitters are made? Or think that the canonical status or RTOC RPATs something superior status catacomb RTOC Venidikta Molchanov or CPI Raphael Motovilova? If you think so, then much deceived.
RE: From adding splits get more of a split - READER MAXIM 6/27/2014 00:14
Father Victor is silent about a very important moment in the structure of their "PSEA". Namely. Eminence Agafangel sobornago decision went against the ROCOR in 1990, which was not to take ukaznogo bishops from sekachevskoy branches without full ordination! He took them through hirotesiyu, and then the correction of the cathedral church, literally made himself Metropolitan. With this step, the current ROCOR (A) became uncanonicity organization and fell into schism. For those who do not know Victor O., he likes to manipulate the canons as he pleases, but until this step Agafangel Lords will not be allowed, standing ROCOR (A) against sergianism and ecumenism is hypocritical! (There are youtube videos that show this "Cathedral"
RE: From adding splits get more of a split - FR. VICTOR 27/06/2014 3:32
You are mistaken. ROCA PSEA could not sinned by default or change of its own previous decisions. Constant practice of any ecclesiastical authority in time to vary between the extremes and acrivia economia on the same issue. After retiring in split MP Metropolitan Laurus Group, formed in 2007 ROCA PSEA (now - it ROCOR Synod chaired by th en. Agafangel: in While the "fragments" of the ROCA as RPATs "ROCA (V)", RTOC IRPTSZ, RosPTs, etc., etc., etc. are schisms and parasinagogi), before taking the "sekachevtsev" are inseparable canonical continuation of that same Supreme Church Authority ROCA authorization th Patriarch Tikhon and educated at Metropolitan. Antonia by Decree # 362. Consequently, since the ROCA PSEA was a same old laws supreme ecclesiastical authority ROCA, it was not obliged to comply strictly with first developed their own decisions, and if necessary they could alter, amend or repeal all. So if the ROCA PSEA decided to take sekachevtsev-general without any yakih, it would not be a violation of his previous rulings. Regarding election is. Agafangel in ROCOR Metropolitans, we also do not have even a shadow of doubt. Elections were held in the presence of co-Diaspora and Bishops' Councils and delegates from the ROCOR parishes from around the world, ie COMPLETENESS ROCA ecclesiastical authority in accordance with the procedure All-Diaspora Council agreed and approved before the start of the vote. I, unlike you was at the council as a delegate and secretary of the council. Your application for flouting catholicity Met. Agafangel false and utterly baseless and provocative. you falsely represent that took over as sekachevtsev hirotesiyu, ROCA became non-canon. Hopefully that you really wanted to say that part of the episcopate ROCA became non-canon, as ROCA church structure, canonicity from the beginning, can not suddenly become non-canon. canonical sekachevskogo ROCA episcopate does not cause even a shadow of doubt. Sekachevskie canonical bishops were taken through hirotesii equal consecration. If you do not understand the canonical terminology, read on this topic here: http://sinod.ruschurchabroad.org/09
RE: From adding splits get more of a split - FR. VICTOR 27/06/2014 3:33
You make false claims that "the amendment of the cathedral church, Agafangel literally made himself the Metropolitan." Obviously, your opinion about the All-Diaspora Council is not very high. Do you think that at the Council sitting round the idiots who did not realize what was happening and how to vote? What is. Agafangel was selected in full compliance with the procedures of the cathedral - an indisputable fact. And he did not himself Metropolitan, but against his will, was chosen by voting Canonical Fullness ROCA. From his false statement you make a false conclusion: "this step, the current ROCOR (A) was the non-canonical organization and fell into a split." Even if elections Diaspora Council had already Chairman of the Council of Bishops and the Synod of ROCOR is. Agafangel in metropolitans were irregular, how suddenly our ROCA, ie All-Diaspora Council, the Bishops and the ROCOR Synod were in schism? In a split from whom? From themselves? This does not happen! On the other hand, is. Agafangel before elections in metropolitans and has been Chairman of the First Hierarch of the ROCA PSEA, and then Synod. Consequently you have, unknowingly, to our correspondence, could arise only about the legality mitropolichestva ow. Agafangel, but not in its First Hierarch or presiding th e in the Supreme Church Authority ROCA. Hopefully my words to you, Reader Maxim, reach through someday.
RE: From adding splits get more of a split - ELENA 6/27/2014 9:52
How is all this artificial Your casuistry far from living the Christian faith. Thank God, the true Church - this is not your manipulation of the canons and the church is not the bureaucracy with its endless intrigues, narcissism, etc.
RE: From adding splits get more of a split - INTERNET CATHEDRAL 27/06/2014 10:04
And that close? RPATs and RTOC?
RE: From adding splits get more of a split - ELENA 06/27/2014 10:46
All at the same position - and ROCOR (A), and the ROCOR (V), and RTOC and RPATs. All, without exception. If everyone understood this, and finally ceased to regard themselves as the only "correct" and the most "canonicity", then the union of the fragments would have taken place. And so solid feud squabbles and splits .... painful and embarrassing. For all without exception. Shame.
RE: From adding splits get more of a split - FR. VICTOR 27/06/2014 16:08
Your desire to equalize all the "fragments" and put on a par with samosvyatami, parasinagogami and splits real ROCA - a wild misunderstanding of church polity and the Holy Canons. You wrote: "All at the same position - and ROCOR (A), and the ROCOR (V) and RTOC and RPATs. All, without exception. If everyone understood this, and finally ceased to regard themselves as the only "correct" and the most "canonicity", then the union of the fragments would have taken place ... " If you are among these canonical structures of the Church and not you believe it, you know that the combination of these bezsmyslenno splits and create a larger split. What is the Church - the Church can not be, even if you, Elena, really want this. Another thing, if you are among these jurisdictions is real, ie canonicity of the Church. In this case the situation is solvable: You should identify kakya of these jurisdictions is not a new self-image- vaniem is canonical and inseparable extension of the Church Administration ROCOR headed canonical, ie Primate legitimate consists of Orthodox Episcopate canonicity. instead of the Bride of Christ to you, Elena, do not join presenting itself as se Conchita Wurst, I would suggest a simple method. First consideration little interest to you canonical issues immediately criterion for themselves vozmite name jurisdiction. For example, if a structure is called RosPTs, ROCiE etc. etc., then can not continue - it numerous "children of Lieutenant Schmidt." Name of the Church, its name - it is the immutable, that the Church is. This method is simple and highly accurate: as if we were looking for you, Elena, but suddenly jumped to the bearded Bob and said that he is you - Elena! when you find and identify the true ROCOR have other "fragments", which are splits and parasinagogi, will be able to turn to the Church - but not through FRAGMENTS CONNECTION BUT IN CONNECTION CHURCH FRAGMENTS.
not through FRAGMENTS CONNECTION, BUT IN CONNECTION CHURCH FRAGMENTS
This means: True unity will be achieved not by the fragments uniting (jurisdictional ecumenism), but rather by the fragments reuniting with the Church, (returning to the ROCA).
RE: From adding splits get more of a split - FR. VICTOR 27/06/2014 15:57
And RAC and RTOC - birds of a feather. RPATs under the leadership of its founding father archbishop. Lazarus appeared broken away from the ROCOR. Shortly after the perpetration of the schism of Archbishop. Lazarus personally acknowledged RPATs split, repented and was taken back to the Church Abroad. Split RPATs recognized split tsvoim founder and its former canonical authority - ROCOR Synod, however, continues to exist today with uncanonical episcopate because en. Valentin was banned, and then plucked from the Synod of ROCOR dignity. Parasinagoga RTOC under the leadership of its founder, the same archbishop. Lazarus came later, having broken away from mansonvilskogo split "ROC in Exile", has been recognized by its canonical ecclesiastical authority in the person of Metropolitan. Vitaly "is outside the church fence", ie in schism, and consecration to the newly x RTOC Bishops were recognized by her mother-church th - "ROC in Exile" Neka boundary. Unlike ROAC RTOC etc. splits and psevdotserkovnyh structures ROCOR Metropolitan. Agafangel never anywhere ROCA not go away and not create new church offices, but left after retiring from a recent ROCA - Met. Laurel and his minions-Uniates MP.
RE: From adding splits get more of a split - FR. VICTOR 27/06/2014 16:14
As you accused me of canonical casuistry and the absence of a living faith of Christ, in his defense he better keep silence, but for your admonition remind you the words of the saints, in my opinion is extremely important for your salvation: So how do you, Elena, Cyprian of Carthage said: "Outside Church can be not only the Christian life, but also the Christian doctrine. Because any separation from the Church certainly involves a distortion of the faith. " Augustine of schismatics and heretics said: "Christ have a sign by which you can know His disciples. This feature - not Christian teaching, not even a sacrament, but only love ... "... you know that you are my disciples, if ye have love one to another" (John 14:35). Who separated from the Church, in fact there is no love. No love of God in those who do not like the Church's unity - in vain, he says, as if Christ is love. Love can be maintained only with the unity of the Church, because the Holy Spirit animates the only body of the church. " If there is in you, Elena, the true Christian faith and love, if you are looking for and want Christ in His Mystical Body - Welcome to our church - accept all with love. If for you the Holy Canons, the Church's unity and love - an empty phrase, we have nothing more to say to you. Sorry.
# RE: From adding splits get more of a split - ELENA 06/27/2014 18:43
Again battery citations, manipulate them and dead casuistry. PSEA vl.Agafangela was again established in 2007 And here it may somewhat better than others, but not much. How not cool, and all the fragments, including and ROCOR (A) - neoplasms, as you say. ROCOR Synod full staff entered into communion with the Moscow Patriarchate, ROCOR (A) from him was postponed until 2007 and established its PSEA, once again, as well as other fragments, referring to Decree 362. As for the old name, and (ROCA B) it also has ... can any samovnushat yourself that only "we" most "true", the most "correct" most "canonicity", but that will not change anything. It is best not to exercise in these complexes, and honestly admit how it really is and go for a rapprochement with other such fragments. Decree 362 just makes this a real basis. And I fully agree with those arguments that are set out in the Appeal and applied thereto Help (read it surprisingly very sensible document). I think this is the only way to reconciliation and mutual recognition. Anyway, in recent years, no other real reconciliation mechanism was proposed. Yes it does not exist, except the Decree 362.
# RE: From adding splits get more of a split - INTERNET CATHEDRAL 27/06/2014 21:07
We waited a year after 2007, that some of the fragments will respond to our invitation to participate in the All-Diaspora Council, but it never came. Lord Agafangel officially sent out letters to all vozglavitelyam "fragments" of a proposal to start talking, but no one wanted. Our ROCOR did everything I could, and I had to do in those circumstances. It's true.
Would eat from you, Elena, or. Victor, or, say, from me, something depended in this situation, it would be possible to decide something. And so, perhaps, to talk, and then, though would not quarrel once again.
# RE: From adding splits get more of a split - ELENA 28.06.2014 20:18
It's all nice words. Beautiful statement did everything besides RTOC even the first. There is another problem that vl.Agafangel and others saw only in the form of union dissolution and adherence to their splinter (each was referring only to himself, "pure as crystal"). And it is fundamentally wrong, and as explained by the authors of the above Decree 362 - contrary to its very essence. The dispute was not about unity, but about who is in charge. But it was necessary to offer not to join, and vzaimopriznat each other, to accept the fact of the existence of each samostoyatelnog (for reasons that were obektivnye and Providence of God), to reconcile and start communion, and then think of a single administration, if only in this there is a need. Only in this way can be restored unity. Thank God that there were people who understood it, and explained to propose specific way to achieve such unity. I support the motion with both hands Lesna monastery. Thank God, of the same opinion and is, George (Kravchenko). The faster the bishops of all fragments will come to understand the truth of it is this way, the sooner will the long-awaited unity in the Chalice. Otherwise, if everyone trebovat kapetulirovat before him and join him, every single fragment, including and ROCOR (A), doomed to marginalization. So initiative Lesna monastery only need support and not criticize style is all nabivshih nauseam manipulation and casuistry o.Viktora
# RE: From adding splits get more of a split - INTERNET CATHEDRAL 28.06.2014 20:48
It is your imagination. You missed that we YEAR waited and made proposals to participate at ALL so important for those who are connected with the ROCA, Diaspora Council. Came just is. Stefan Potentilla, and then, in order to "see" and poagitirovat against us.
Lord Agafangel razsylal ALL vozglavitelyam "fragments" of a proposal to start at least some conversations. NOBODY has not responded. And later, Bishop Agafangel proposed to convene Diaspora Council, together with the "fragments", to resign himself to a worthy re-elected Primate Cathedral. Again, all the "godly" silent.
Understand Elena - a union nobody needs of "fragments" of what will soon be able to once again see.
# RE: From adding splits get more of a split - FR. VICTOR 28.06.2014 00:31
You stated: "The Synod of ROCOR full staff entered into communion with the MP"
There are inaccuracies in your statement - it happened not at full strength. Through the remainder of the parishes is. Agafangel - a member of the Council and Synod of ROCOR - formed, according to the Decree entered in 362, PSEA retained direct canonical ties with the former Higher Church Administration ROCA, though the Synod as the canonical one, remained and continued chlenstvovat only one bishop - ow. Agafangel.
Another inaccuracy of your statement, to say that the ROCOR Synod entered into communion with the Moscow Patriarchate.
You should say:
a) The Bishops' Synod of Metropolitan composition. Laurel left ROCOR sergianist split.
b) the composition of the Synod of Bishops Met. Laurel joined the ecumenical, anathematized tion ROCA heresy MP.
Rule 32 of Laodicea:
Not befitting of heretics prinimat blessings that are idle talk more so than a blessing.
It is not proper to pray heretic or an apostate.
Rule 45 of the Holy Apostles:
Bishop, or Presbyter, or Deacon tokmo praying with heretics, let him be excommunicated. If ye also allow them to act that either, for they ministers of the church, let him be deposed.
Rule 46 of the Holy Apostles:
Bishop, or presbyter, Priya baptism or sacrifice of heretics, izvergati ordain.
Thus, the actions of the Synod of Metropolitan Laurus forced gracious and faithful remnant Church Abroad tion, to maintain its canonical, applied to heretics and schismatics 32 and 33rd Terms Laodikiyskago Holy Cathedral and 45 and 46th Ave Avila St. Apostol and interrupt ecclesial communion Metropolitan Laurus and his followers.
As you can see, no new jurisdiction, ie Synod, was not created, it was only interrupted communication with apostates.
# RE: From adding splits get more of a split - FR. VICTOR 28.06.2014 00:36
In this VTsU ROCA - Synod, baring not only the bishops, but May 17, 2007 ceased operations in bukvvlnom sense of the word entered in violation of the Charter of the ROCOR Synod MP canonical submission. This fact triggered the Ukaz Patriarch # 362 provided it is in case Ecclesiastical Authority will cease operations - the need to create the remainder of the interim governing body PSEA followed by reduction of the permanent governing body, ie VTsU, Synod - which literally was done.
As we see any new names jurisdiction nor new Synod nor new dioceses, unlike your beloved "Children of Lieutenant Schmidt" ROCA not created - the whole church structure remained as it was, just in time to fill the vacant seats saved canonical structures.
In other words saying - Met. Laurel and his followers left the ROCOR, as previously it has consistently gone out of Met. Eulogy (Paris Archdiocese), Plato (OCA), Valentin (ROAC), Vitaly (ROC AND), but the ROCOR and we Agafangel lord it remained. I deliberately missed zdes RTOC - this jurisdiction split in 2002 not by ROCA, but from "the ROC in Exile."
If you are interested in the details of how it was that all of the ROCA gone, and we were - read http://sobor2006.livejournal.com/
I hope that now it will be easier to decide where do you find this mysterious ROCA you stop and put the Church in a row with schisms and parasinagogami.
If you and now I have cited facts seem insufficient, I hope that someone can help you poumneee. I, with all due respect to you, Elena, our dialogues forced to stop due to an acute shortage of time budget.
# RE: From adding splits get more of a split - READER MAXIM 28.06.2014 04:32
O. Victor, imagine for a moment that all the Bishops of ROCOR in 2007 would be united with the Moscow Patriarchate and tolkko several priests with their parishes would remain faithful children of the Church. These priests look and see that there RTOC and RPATs, two churches which had not worshiped ecumenism and sergianism. It seems to me that more is not necessary to say where they would go.
I gave it that would make you understand that your ROCOR (A) is not the only church that protivoborstvue t present apostasy. Main problem is that you and your Victor O. Metropolitan Agafangel all who hochit not be subservient to your will .... that is parasinagogoy and split. All canons on your side and let someone tolkko dare encroach upon standing in the Truth ... if not with you ... split.
Two points have been made by me and this acceptance sekachevtsev violation catholicity when elected Metropolitan Cathedral on your.
First about sekachevtsev. In the youtube video that I put in the first part of Bishop Sofronii tries to explain how he had seen these sekachevtsev on his arrival, as they have suffered for their faith and how it has become clear that they have apostolic prieemstvennost s. He also ssylalsya to the archives where it allegedly Witness vanno.
Where, in what century, what country, when Li Bai who could see how people live and thus "see" it apostolic priemstvo??! This is what is nonsense! Then, when asked to show archives, had not yet been elected Metropolitan Bishop Agafagel said "look on the internet" and that "he never saw them again."!!!
Okay, let's assume that the Master Agafangel was just tired and did not have time to look at these files ... but then he dared to refute previous Conciliar Decree ROCA without any specific data that!?!
Next ... go. When Master Agafangel appeared at the cathedral, he vyskazalya that now is not the time to choose the Metropolitan .... but then why would he take the bulls bishops?? Because he needed the bishops who have made up for it "Synod".
There can be no end to throw each other canons and Decree 362. But it's much easier is explained. You wanted to become a Master Agafangel Metropolitan. He was elected with the help of these same bulls. He trampled the catholicity of the church so that it took for themselves the ordination of bishops doubtful bulls and then when I passed a vote (where joking and laughing in disgracing his predecessors, even if it is still possible to speak) was elected without a lot. Besides, why is it the day before, said that he had brought St. Filaret hood!? I. .. it was the will of God Metropolitan? Forgive O. Victor, this is not a movie or theater and you made it so. God will judge. I hope the people in your church come to their senses. And you too.
# RE: From adding splits get more of a split - INTERNET CATHEDRAL 28.06.2014 4:59
Why the hundredth time to repeat what has already been discussed for a long time? Sekachevtsy were ordained at reception (Read were all necessary for the consecration prayer, as there was full confidence in the fact that their ordination).
If again this empty topic here will continue to procrastinate, then these messages will continue to be deleted.
Why the hundredth time to repeat what has already been discussed ?
# RE: From adding splits get more of a split - FR. VICTOR 29.06.2014 3:47
Dear Fri. Maxim!
Since RTOC RPATs and other "Skolkov" are outside the fence of the Church of Christ, the Church of Christ and do not represent His Body are not, in other words - do not have Christ, I personally would not go to the RTOC (or any other "splinter" ROCA) even if RTOC would remain the last and only on this planet "jurisdiction."
Think it is better to die for the salvation without guidance and without a funeral than to partake and be incorrigible in parasinagoge.
Confrontation ecumenism sergianism and vices MP, raised into dogma, peculiar for samosvyatov and splitters. It can not serve as the basis for the orthodox union. Wahhabis also hate any MP that same ("the enemy of my enemy - my friend"), and they should be combined? The correct position of the Church should not be determined on the basis of it is fighting against whom, and for what it is worth. Damn this unfortunate MP tomorrow, immediately lost her together and RTOC and RPATs, because not stuffed, they shake, and scare bunch of his followers. Not Christ, but the fight with the MP - the meaning of their existence and way of self-preservation. Therefore, the Holy Canons and truth for them - a hindrance and an empty phrase.
Church of Christ leads men to Christ, in His Tserstvie, and confronts the modern vices and heresies precisely because of fulfilling its mission, not as an end in itself.
It seems to me that you, Maxim - ecumenist. Unlike me, you believe that among the "fragments" not true, canonical Church of Christ, but believe that if you build these "fragments" together, then they get the Church!
Or you ecumenist and do not believe that collecting splinters uncanonical ROCA get together the Church? Then why pick up the pieces? To be more efficient and to resist vices and other MP Ecumenists, schismatics and heretics - this is the meaning of your Christian life? But what is the point person to deal with the MP, heresies and ecumenism MP if he has no relation to the Church?
RTOC and ROAC in America- - Rd. Daniel 25.06.2014 15:48
Here, both of Those churches are not very large or powerful, but They Constantly TRY to steal from our ROCA, our Priests, parishes, and laity.
Constantly They slander and malign Met. Agafangel and our ROCA.
RTOC-Trenton, Stefan Sabelnik, [A Basically Meaning well but Confused man], Takes His orders and advice as to What Should he do, or Say, from ... His close friend Andre ROAC Maklakov.
Maklakov says many strange Words, That Could we expect from mental Patients.
Those WHO disagree with HIM, on any church matter he proclaims That They are "Crucifying Again Christ on His Cross!".
ROAC Maklakov interfers into our church ROCA Life, Constantly. He claims to be an Expert on the Canons!!!
Most of the clergy That are Under Either of Them, are rejects from our church, from the old ROCOR, or anyway very mislead and Confused Souls.
Yes, They as with us, are Anti-Anti-MP and ecumenist.
I pray for Confused These ones, Priests and laity, That They Wake up and Leave RTOC and ROAC and Come to us.
Most of Them are good people.
But here in America, little ROAC already controls little RTOC-Trenton. It is the fact. But as I view Them, They both are Dying.
RE: RTOC and ROAC in-America - Metropolitan Agafangel 25.06.2014 18:14
Yes, of course - in any case, we can only hope to those people who are able to hear and talk.
RE: Handling of the clergy and religious to the Synod of the RTOC and RPATs - Metropolitan Agafangel 06/24/2014 18:00
God forbid, even if they unite. But I, personally, have lost faith in what they agree to even talk with each other. I'd be happy to make a mistake in this case. In true Church of Christ must be laid at the base of her principle of creation, rather than crushing and destruction. "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another" (John 13.35). This is forever.
RE: Handling of the clergy and religious to the Synod of the RTOC and RPATs - ELENA 26.06.2014 10:44
The site also appeared RTOC this appeal only with the application - Historical canonical cal reference: http://catacomb.org.ua/modules.php?name=Pages&go=page&pid=2043
• Human English (Two articles)- Sharing for A Better Picture of what is happening in Ukraine: Washington Post: Is anyone in charge of Russian nationalists fighting in Ukraine:?http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/06/26/is-anyone-in-charge-of-russian-nationalists-fighting-in-ukraine/
• "How Beautiful it is, when brothers dwell together in unity!"
Official visit of GOC Archbishop Kallinikos and Metropolitan Cyprian to the Romania Old Calendar Church Many Photos
More proof in our faces, of how the MP is but a tool of the Kremlin KGB: Kyrill-Gundaev honours Communist Party Leader, Gennady Zyuganov
Reader Daniel comment: And this MP 'patriarch', is who Hilarion Kapral and his ROCOR/MP have tied themselves to, and who are in full, fraternal subjugation to.
WHAT A MASSIVE BETRAYAL of our old free ROCOR!
"Happy Birthday, Comrade!"
Russian Patriarch Honors Communist Party Leader
The head of the Russian Orthodox Church has awarded Communist Party leader Gennady Zyuganov with an order for "glory and honor."
Patriarch Kirill gave the order to Zyuganov in Moscow on June 27, one day after the longtime communist leader celebrated his 70th birthday.
Kirill said Zyuganov -- who in 2010 called for the re-Stalinization of Russia and has called the Soviet Union "the most humane state in human history" -- deserves the award as "one of the most famous Russian politicians who has expressed interest in the welfare of the nation and the protection of traditional moral values."
Zyuganov has been the head of Russia's Communist Party since 1993.
During the Soviet era, the Communist Party severely supressed the Orthodox Church, killing and jailing its priests and thousands of followers while destroying churches and confiscating church property.
Official Congratulatory Letter
Chairman of the Comunist Party faction in the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of Russian Federation, GA Zyuganov
Dear Gennady Andreyevich
I heartily congratulate you on the remarkable date.
Being one of the most prominent politicians of modern Russia, you strive to look after the welfare of the people and protect traditional moral values.
I hope that in the future your fruitful activity will promote social initiatives and the moral transformation of society.
I wish you good health, peace and divine help in all your good deeds and endeavors.
I Believe it is fair to honor you with the order of "Glory and Honor» III degree".
+ Kirill, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia
photo of original letter:
Fr. Seraphim Rose noticed that:
"The outward Gospel of social idealism is a symptom of loss of faith."
Fr. Seraphim Rose
Check this out.
Heritage Foundation Panelist on Radical Islam
Unusual Answer from Panelist Receives Standing Ovation at Benghazi Coalition Meeting
Department of Foreign Relations
ROCOR Synod Newsletter
February 1977, page 4
OBSERVATIONS OF A HETERODOX
The official publication of the Antiochian Exarchate in America, The Word, has published in its Feb. 1977 edition, the observations of an Episcopal priest, Rev. M. Bourdeaux, made about the East.
Rev. Bourdeaux is the head of an information agency "Keston College" in England. He has written several books mainly dedicated to the situation of the Church in Communist countries, especially in the USSR.
The Director of Kreston College noted that, "The fat Christianity of the West might be less long-lasting than the lean Christianity, the suffering Christianity of the East. We have already witnessed, although the world hasn't really learned about it yet, a major miracle – the resurrection of the Faith in a situation of total suffering, in the Soviet Union ....... The Christian Faith was to all intents and purposes eradicated, as a visible organization at any rate .... say by 1941 in the Soviet Union, and we now, in the 30 years that have passed, have seen a rebirth of that Christian faith."
While predicting that the time will come when American Christianity will need the Russian Christianity to be injected into it in order to survive at all, Rev. Bourdeaux makes a very thoughtful observation.
"One cannot simply go out and become a Russian Christian .... one has to be spiritually aware of what the message of the Russian Christian is, and here is something for which we have not even begun to prepare ourselves."
(Fr. Seraphim Rose made this same observation.)
Department of Foreign Relations
ROCOR Synod Newsletter
April-May 1977, page 3
PRIESTS IN GERMANY WORK FOR KGB
This is the headline under which "Die Welt", the widely circulated paper in Germany published the following information on March 30th.
The paper underlines that there is a close connection between the clergy of the Moscow Patriarchate abroad and the KGB, as stated by the German Intelligence Agency. The KGB is looking for the legalization of a "German Orthodox Church", hoping that the members of the Moscow Patriarchate will then have free entrance into various German circles. In West Germany there are 3 Soviet bishops and 17 priests. Besides that, 7 more priests serve in Berlin. Through the establishment of an autonomous Church in German, the Soviets hope to cut short the anti-Soviet activity of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia. They try in this manner to gather in some 20,000 Russian emigres who live in Germany and Austria. According to the information of the German Intelligence service the Patriarchate not only strongly supports Soviet foreign policies, but also is very active in the field of espionage. Many of her priests are serving as active agents.
The report says: "It is known from exiles and deserters from the USSR that the KGB tries to fill with their trusted people as many church positions as possible. All candidates for the priesthood, even before they are permitted to study theology, are checked by the KGB. From the point of view of the KGB, independent candidates, in general, should not be allowed to enroll in theological school. Besides, the KGB specifically assigns its agents in order that they study in those schools and later be ordained."
Following the Holy Fathers:
Fr. Theodoros Zisis escaped the Babylonian Captivity of ECUMENISM
"Formerly I was a disciple of the ecumenists, but I have become a disciple and follower of the Holy Fathers. And I glory in this fact!"
- Fr Theodoros Zisis.
Recently a number of texts written by the well-known, and now retired, Professor of Patristics, Protopresbyter Theodoros Zisis, have 're-emerged', reaching the English-speaking Orthodox faithful via the internet. Originally published in the 1970's, these texts, particularly one entitled 'The Ecumenical Patriarchate and Archimandrite Justin Popovich', speak glowingly of the Ecumenical Patriarchate and of Patriarch Athenagoras, and are critical of the recently recognized Serbian saint, Justin Popovich. One might wonder, what renders the 'rediscovery' of these old texts particularly newsworthy? It would seem to be the fact that Fr Theodoros is now, some roughly thirty years later, a leading light in the Orthodox world, calling on the Orthodox faithful - hierarchs, clergy and laity alike - to uphold the Tradition of Church as expressed in the writings of the Holy Fathers and the sacred canons, in the face of the pan-heresy of ecumenism. He is, in other words, calling on us to follow in the footsteps of Saint Justin Popovich, thus checking the uncanonical, ecumenist practices of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
A number of possible motivations emerge when considering why these now-thirty year old texts are being circulated, then. Might this be an attempt to discredit Fr Theodoros' witness to the contemporary Church; to create the impression that he is somehow inconsistent? Could it be an attempt to disappoint those who have seen in him the light of Christ, the light of Truth, by showcasing their leader as a former ecumenist? One need look no further than two great Orthodox confessors, Saint Mark of Ephesus and Gennadios II Scholarios - both much loved by Fr Theodoros himself - to discover that these precise tactics have been used throughout history against those who have dared oppose false unions.
Whatever the motivation for calling attention to these texts, God has allowed it to become an opportunity for our spiritual benefit. As the Righteous Joseph said, consoling his brothers after their great betrayal: "[Y]e meant evil against me; but God meant it unto good". As a result of these recent events, Fr Theodoros came to the decision to describe his journey from the ecumenist mindset, or what he has called, "the Babylonian captivity currently gripping the Ecumenical Patriarchate", to that freedom which is obedience to the Tradition of the Orthodox Church. In what follows I will provide a summary of this path as he himself described it in a public confession which, as of 12 April 2011, has reached the internet only in video format. It both clears up any confusion surrounding the history of the texts in question and provides an important witness to the contemporary Church.
2. Early Education.
That Fr Theodoros was at one time in his career a 'philopatriarhikos' is far from secret. In his recent discussion of this issue he has suggested that, while the young man who 'rediscovered' these thirty-year old writings felt "he had discovered America", a quick scan of his biographical details reveals these early inclinations to any who cares to look. A student at Aristotle University of Thessaloniki between 1961 and 1965, Fr Theodoros was enveloped within a theology faculty which did not boast a single anti-ecumenist on staff. The faculty was not only entirely ecumenist; it was enthusiastically so, drawing inspiration from the Ecumenical Patriarch, Athenagoras. Patriarch Athenagoras was projected as a prophetic figure to the impressionable youth, an idea reinforced by the images of the Patriarch who looked like a new Moses with his long beard, meeting and enveloping the Pope with outstretched arms when the two met in Jerusalem in 1964. Fr Theodoros' advisor at the university, the well-known Patrologist Panagiotis Chrestou, was himself close to Athenagoras, having been appointed director of the Patriarchal Institute for Patristic Studies at the Patriarch's behest. Having breathed the air of such an environment throughout the initial years of his education, it should be no surprise that Fr Theodoros was initially enamored with both ecumenism and the Patriarchate. Thus, prior to 1976, all of his works were purely theological - largely studies of the Fathers - and none were written against ecumenism or the Patriarchate – many, like the writings in question, even reflected positively on these.
3. A First Glance through the Clouds.
As a young professor, having graduated with top marks and possessed of a great love for the Ecumenical Patriarchate, it is perhaps not surprising that the name 'Theodoros Zisis' became closely associated with the Phanar. He soon became "the chosen one" of the Patriarchate, writing hundreds of speeches and other documents for Patriarch Demitrios. This relationship would soon become uneasy, however.
Between 1978 and 1980, Fr Theodoros undertook an in-depth study of Gennadios II Scholarios, the first Patriarch of Constantinople after the city's fall in 1453, in the hopes of producing a monograph. He has described this decision as being the product of "divine intervention", and "divine illumination", since he had never really considered taking up the theme previously and it was this very study which brought before him for the first time the whole of the Church's tradition as it relates to Papism, the events of the Council of Ferrera-Florence, and the struggles of Saint Mark of Ephesus. Through this study he learned many things that had been hidden from him in his prior university studies. Comparing the path he was currently on to that which his recent studies had opened up before him, Fr Theodoros began to realize that he had been mistaken. Thus began the process of re-orientation.
Combined with his study of the Orthodox tradition, his unease continued to grow the more time he spent representing the Orthodox Church at Orthodox-Roman Catholic dialogues. Having undertaken this task initially in 1985 at the request of Metropolitan Dionysios of Neapoleos and Stavropoleos who complained that there were no representatives of the Theological School at Thessaloniki included in the Orthodox delegations, this experience painted for him a picture of what the word 'dialogue' truly meant in the context of modern ecumenism.
Despite his growing unease with the ecumenical stance of the Patriarchate, in 1991, at the relatively late age of 49, Fr Theodoros accepted ordination. He was ordained at the Patriarchal Monastery of Saint Anastasia the Pharmacolitria just outside of Thessaloniki. For the event Patriarch Demetrios sent the highest ranking bishop of the Patriarchate, Bartholomew of Chalcedon, to perform the ordination. At this point, Fr Theodoros suggested that he had been willing to live with his misgivings about the orientation of Constantinople vis-à-vis ecumenism with the understanding that as a clergyman inside the Patriarchate he might possibly affect some positive change.
Shortly after his ordination, however, Fr Theodoros was faced with an event within the context of the dialogue which proved particularly shaking: the condemnation of Unia at Freising. In 1991, the Orthodox and Catholic delegations had both signed a condemnation of Unia. Fr Theodoros had played an instrumental role in drafting the documents and brokering the agreement between the Orthodox and the Vatican representatives. Before the related documents became widely circulated, however, Metropolitan Stylianos of Australia visited his home in the presence of his Presvytera requesting that Fr Theodoros help to cover up the already signed documents. Here a clear victory for truth had been achieved - a victory for Holy Orthodoxy - and he was being asked to make sure it passed unnoticed! Within two years, through the Vatican's great influence, the documents were made to vanish and a new consultation was held at Balamand, Lebanon which cleared Unia's reputation, pretending that the condemnation at Freising had never occured. Fr Theodoros wrote a critique of the Balamand agreement - a document which would prove to be the beginning of the end of his co-operation with the Patriarchate.
5. The Ascension of Patriarch Bartholomew.
During the period between Freising and Balamand, Bartholomew of Chalcedon ascended to the Patriarchal throne of Constantinople. Soon after his ascension, the new Patriarch called Fr Theodoros into his office. He had a question: "Will you work for me - writing speeches, etc. - as fervently as you worked for my predecessor?" With that the Patriarch had offered to make Fr Theodoros his official logographos. In his discussion of these events, Fr Theodoros describes "going cold" while sitting in the Patriarch's office; knowing that co-operation was becoming increasingly difficult based on what he now understood. In addition to the offer of a position, the Patriarch said that he was planning a trip to Germany for an ecumenical event and that he wanted Fr Theodoros to come with him as an expression of thanks for all that he had done for the Patriarchate.
In 1993 they made the trip to Germany. At the ecumenical event the Orthodox delegation vested and engaged in a clear instance of joint prayer with heretical groups. Not believing his eyes, Fr Theodoros stood to the side by himself. This fact was noticed by the future Metropolitan of South America, then a deacon, who asked him: "Fr Theodoros, will you not come up and join the group?" He now knew that the charges that the Patriarchate and the Orthodox ecumenists were engaging in joint prayer with heretics had been true all along; that this had not been slander as he had originally thought. His mind was decided: "I cannot work for a church that does not follow the Holy Canons." Upon returning home Fr Theodoros received a call from someone telling him that the Patriarch needed him to produce several documents for him. Fr Theodoros refused, ending his co-operation with the Patriarchate.
6. The Coming Storm.
Fr Theodoros' critique of the Balamand agreement, his refusal to suppress the decisions of Freising, his actions at the ecumenical event in Germany, as well as his general change of mindset, were all duly noted by those in places of importance. The Vatican, displeased with the condemnation of Unia and its chief architect, expressed its displeasure to the Patriarch, who, after also seeing Fr Theodoros' open criticism of the new Balamand document, sent a letter stating that Fr Theodoros Zisis was no longer to be used by the Orthodox Church in the dialogues with the Roman Catholics. This, however, was only the beginning.
Soon after, he received another letter from the Patriarchate. This time he was asked one simple question: "To which Metropolis should we send your papers?" In a matter of a few short years, Fr Theodoros notes that he went from being the "chosen one" to a persona non grata at the Patriarchate, simply for changing his mind about ecumenism on the basis of academic research and experience. These events left Fr Theodoros in an awkward position since he had not particularly expected them. The repose of Metropolitan of Thessaloniki, Pantelemon, added further complexity to his situation since it would be impossible to request a transfer until the new Metropolitan was elected. He thus replied to the Patriarch accordingly, suggesting that he could do nothing until a new Metropolitan was chosen. With no immediate solution in view the matter was forgotten for a period.
This peace did not last for long, however. When the Patriarch received the Pope at the Phanar, Fr Theodoros again responded writing an article entitled: 'Far from the Path of the Holy Fathers' in which he described the meeting and the mindset that lay behind it. This time a second letter was sent and the Patriarch's request was fulfilled; Fr Theodoros was accepted and registered as a clergyman of the Holy Metropolis of Thessaloniki, officially ending his association with the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
7. Saint Justin Popovich.
Having discussed how his worldview changed from the time when he originally wrote the articles in question up to the present day, Fr Theodoros turned directly to the matter of his relationship to Saint Justin Popovich.
Fr Theodoros suggested that if one reads the articles in question for oneself, he will clearly see that although he disagreed with the great Serbian elder at the time, he still bore the utmost respect and love for him. Although he disagreed with Saint Justin's remarks about the Ecumenical Patriarchate and its active promotion of ecumenism, he was always impressed with the Saint's spiritual caliber and was conscious of the fact that he was relating to a spiritual giant of our times. When he wrote his article entitled, 'The Ecumenical Patriarchate and Archimandrite Justin Popovich', however, the two were travelling on different paths; they belonged to different circles. Fr Theodoros openly confesses that he believed the defense of the Patriarchate he wrote at that time, but within a few years of writing those words things had dramatically changed for him.
Subsequently during his talk, Fr Theodoros took the opportunity to publicly ask the Saint's forgiveness. "I have repented (metanoesa) in the true sense of the word." He confesses before the world to have 'changed roads' and that he now strives to follow the path laid down by the Saint Justin.
What took the contributor to the website "Amen" ten minutes to 'find' has helped uncover a much larger and more important story; one which may otherwise have gone a long time without being told in detail. Yes, Fr Theodoros Zisis was once high in the Patriarchate and was its enthusiastic defender. Yes, this meant that at times he defended ecumenism. Yes, he once disagreed with Saint Justin Popovich. However, God, Seeing his personal struggle and erudition, and his great love for the Holy Fathers, reached through an opening in the clouds of deception and rewarded him with Truth. This struggle has cost him dearly; both in terms of that which he had to give up in order to embrace the truth he encountered, and in terms of the wrath he faced for the inconvenience this truth represents to others. May God, in His rich mercy, continue to grace us with such souls, who, seeing truth for themselves, become beacons unto others.
16 April, 2011
From: Bishop Chrysostomos
Subject: How the Orthodox Ecumenists Hide Dissent
Date: 24 June 2014 18:34:04 GMT+01:00
Apostles Bartholomew and Barnabas
Metropolis Clergy, Faithful, and Friends:
Evlogeite. Evlogia Kyriou.
The following article was sent to me this morning. Unfortunately, I know nothing of its provenance, but I am distributing it as a rare revelation, both instructive and disquieting, about the underbelly of ecumenism, which, however high-sounding its goals and however sincere some who are innocently caught up in may be, is a largely political movement that is antithetical to the Orthodox Church's dogmatic claims to primacy in Christendom. In the name of love and toleration, it also constitutes an insidiously deceptive movement that hides the truth, at times, and maligns or misuses those who oppose it.
In our own case, one can find spiteful and biased "exposés" of our former "Synod in Resistance" (which is now united with the Church of the True Orthodox Christians of Greece) on the Internet; slanderous, insulting "exposés" of our clergy for their anti-ecumenical stand; and misleading attacks on the anti-ecumenical struggle that lack the very toleration, love, and lofty principles that ecumenism purports to uphold. Disgraceful personal attacks and degrading comments are passed off in the context of "scholarly" defenses of this or that ecumenist, or of certain contradictions in ecumenical ideology and ecumenical practice that impugn the integrity of ecumenism.
His Grace, Bishop Auxentios and I have written a great deal about the misgivings of the late Father Georges Florovsky, whom we both knew at Princeton during his later years. We have been treated to some of the "charity" of certain Orthodox ecumenists, who have, in print, quite literally called us untruthful for bringing up and writing about these misgivings, or accusing us of trying to "re-invent" Father Georges as a fellow anti-ecumenist. In fact, his concerns about ecumenism were different from ours; he was not anti-ecumenist of the kind we are; and his views, as always, were nuanced and subtle.
But Father Florovsky was, nonetheless, a critic of certain aspects of ecumenism and became more critical as he aged and as the ecumenical movement took on new dimensions. To deride us for presenting his spoken objections to ecumenism―as the late Professor Constantine Cavarnos (Schemamonk Father Constantine) put forth such objections straight from Father Georges' own publications―in order to hide the fact that such a pillar of ecumenism (indeed one of the direct inspirers and founders of the World Council of Churches) came to question the course of ecumenism, is reprehensible and not entirely honest. I have made that point before, only to be further insulted in the most insolent of language. I will nevertheless continue to tell the truth.
I would like, now, to add to the record of what His Grace and I, as well as others, have written about Father Georges Florovsky's reservations about ecumenism, the story of Father Theodore Zeses (or Zisis), a former Professor of Theology at the University of Thessaloniki, who has in recent years written blistering commentaries about Orthodox ecumenism and its adherents, but whom some less than honest ecumenists on the Internet have tried to portray as an ecumenist by obfuscating the fact that, like Father Florovsky, Father Theodore has, albeit with a far more extensive and candid negative assessment of it, reassessed over the years his involvement and endorsement of the ecumenical movement.
I absolutely loath the tendency in Orthodoxy to skirt facing reality and facts (such as the reality of the Orthodox Church's belief that it alone constitutes the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, or the fact that such a belief is diametrically opposed to the principles espoused by the World Council of Churches and most ecumenical organizations) by insulting, discrediting, and abusing any messenger who opposes someone's beloved theological, ethnic, or personal outlook. This tendency is the bane of our Church today. My opposition to ecumenism is very similar to my distaste for this trend in Orthodoxy, since, as the following article avers, ecumenists not only abuse those who resist their views, but they even stoop to misrepresenting and hiding the truth.
When I was a young university student, having been reared in a very large family with Orthodox, Protestant, Roman Catholic, and even Jewish believers in its background (whether by marriage or direct or distant bloodlines), I was very taken with ecumenism, which in the late 1950s and 1960s was in vogue and immensely popular. I am sure that I wrote several things that expressed my views openly. During the same period, in the spirit of the impetuosity of youthful intellectual experimentation, I also involved myself with what I would today call "extremist" religious circles. And I am sure that someone can find some rather stark statements written by me of a rigid kind.
Over the years, however, I saw the "chinks in the armor" of ecumenism and extremism alike. I therefore came to the positions that I hold today. I neither betrayed nor dismissed my past loyalties, but simply matured in my own way and with degrees of intensity in realignments of my thought peculiar to me. Such is exactly the case with most thoughtful and educated people, and it was certainly the case with Father Georges Florovsky and, as we see in the following article, with Father Theodore Zeses. I think, therefore, that any objective ecumenist, rather than falling to the dishonesty of misrepresenting the process of intellectual and spiritual growth by which one reassesses many of his ideas, would do well to read Father Zeses' comments about the true nature of ecumenism and its insidious effects, not just on faith, but personal growth in the attainment of the "mind of the Fathers." We anti-ecumenists can, in turn, take courage from Professor Father Zeses' words.
† Bishop Chrysostomos
Metropolitan of Etna