angelburst29
The Living Force
According to the Vatican, Pope Francis will visit the site of the former Auschwitz death camp during a July 27-31 trip to Poland. The Pope will come to Poland in connection with July 27 World Youth Day at Poland’s third-highest-populated city, Krakow.
Pope Francis to Visit Auschwitz During Trip to Poland
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20160610/1041100127/Pope-Francis-Visit-Auschwitz-Poland.html
Francis will be the third Pope to visit Auschwitz, preceded by Pope Benedict XVI, a German, in 2006, and Pope John Paul II, a Pole, in 1979.
Located in the town of Oswiecim, around 70 km from Krakow, Auschwitz-Birkenau was one of the so-called death camps built by Nazi Germany specifically to exterminate people. Some 1.4 million, 1.1 million of them Jews, were killed at Auschwitz between 1941-1945, by the Nazis. Other victims included non-Jewish Poles, gypsies and Soviet prisoners.
Initially built to imprison unwanted members of society, the site developed into a vast complex of barracks, workshops, gas chambers and crematoria, becoming a dark icon of genocide and Nazi atrocity.
The camp was liberated by Soviet Red Army on January 27, 1945. Since 2005, January 27 has been designated by the United Nations General Assembly as International Holocaust Remembrance Day.
During Pope Benedict XVI's 2006 visit, the pontiff famously bowed to pray for the victims, as 'a son of the German people.' As a youngster, Benedict XVI was obliged to serve in Hitlerjugend, a Nazi youth organization. During his 1979 visit, Pope John Paul II called the camp a "Golgotha of the modern world."
Russian Orthodox Church to Skip Pan-Orthodox Council
http://sputniknews.com/russia/20160610/1041120026/council-orthodox-church-crete.html
The Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church, also known as the Pan-Orthodox Council, is a planned synod of the bishops of all autocephalous local churches of Eastern Orthodox Christianity. The Council is set be held on the Greek island of Crete on June 16-27, after more than 50 years of preparations. The Bulgarian Orthodox Church, the Antiochian Orthodox Church, and the Serbian Orthodox Church refused to participate in the Council.
"Metropolitan Hilarion is currently in Moscow. Given that a number of churches does not find it worthwhile sending its representatives to take part in composing the message of the Pan-Orthodox Council, the Russian church has decided that the participation of its representative is untimely as long as issues of the feasibility of convening the council itself are unresolved," the source said.
Earlier this week, the Russian Orthodox Church proposed to the Patriarchate of Constantinople to hold an extraordinary meeting no later than June 10 in the light of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church’s refusal to participate in the Pan-Orthodox Council. The proposal was denied, with the Patriarchate of Constantinople saying that the Council would be held despite the Bulgarian Church’s move, as no institutional structure could revise the council process once it began.
"Yesterday, we received an official refusal regarding this proposal by the Patriarchate of Constantinople. We intend to carefully study positions of other churches and listen to the expressed opinions," the source added.
Problems voiced by the Russian church are known to the Patriarchate of Constantinople, the source added, stating that the patriarchate is trying to resolve the problems and is certain that all churches will take part in the council.
The council is set to be the first pan-Orthodox gathering in over a 1,000 years, but will not be ecumenical, as it will not decide on doctrinal issues, introduce innovations or change canonical structures, according to Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Kirill.
Serbian Orthodox Church Proposes Postponement of Pan-Orthodox Council
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20160609/1041074282/serbia-church-council.html
The Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church, also known as the Pan-Orthodox Council, is a planned synod of the bishops of all autocephalous local churches of Eastern Orthodox Christianity. The Council is set be held on the Greek island of Crete on June 16-27, after more than 50 years of preparations.
"Our Church is having difficulties with participation in the convened Council and suggest postponing it for some time," Patriarch Irinej of Serbia said in a statement, addressed to Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople.
He cited the Bulgarian Orthodox Church's decision to refrain from participation in the Council among the reasons to propose the postponement of the event.
Patriarch Irinej suggested that the forthcoming meeting in Crete should be regarded as not the Pan-Orthodox Council, but as a pre-Council all-Orthodox conference, which would deal with additional preparations or would be the first step toward convening the Council.
Earlier this week, the Russian Orthodox Church proposed to the Patriarchate of Constantinople to hold an extraordinary meeting no later than June 10 in the light of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church’s refusal to participate in the Pan-Orthodox Council. The proposal was denied, with the Patriarchate of Constantinople saying that the Council would be held despite the Bulgarian Church’s move, as no institutional structure could revise the conciliar process once it began.
Georgian Orthodox Church Not to Participate in Pan-Orthodox Council
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20160610/1041128230/georgia-orthodox-council-russia.html
The Georgian Orthodox Church will not take part in the Pan-Orthodox Council in Crete, local media reported Friday.
The Georgian Orthodox Church has not made an official statement over this issue yet, the Imedi TV broadcaster said.
11 reasons not to participate in the Pan-Orthodox Council
http://katehon.com/article/11-reasons-not-participate-pan-orthodox-council
The idea of a new Council that may resolve long-standing problems and contradictions among different Orthodox jurisdictions has been discussed for 100 years. From the very beginning this initiative provoked stormy discussion among Orthodox clerics and laics on the necessity of this event. Today these contradictions threaten to disrupt the holding of the Pan-Orthodox Council. Russian and Georgian Orthodox Churches expressed serious concerns about some of the wording of the Council. Kinot of Holy Mount Athos demanded inclusion in the documents of the Council's position that non-Orthodox denominations should not be referred to the churches, and all forms of joint prayers and liturgical action with them should be discontinued. The Russian Church urges to convene a Pan-Orthodox pre-meeting to resolve questions that confuse the faithful.
The greatest concern is the tendency to establish ecumenist agenda as a long-term priority of the Church. The will of the Constantinople Patriarch is to transform his Superiority of the Honor in something like Orthodox Papism and renovationist trends. However, Constantinople rejected to make any adjustments and pronounced against calls for any Pan-Orthodox meeting.
The Antiochian Orthodox Church and the Bulgarian Orthodox Church have refused to take part in the Council. Thus, it has lost the status of All-Orthodox. Now the arrival of representatives of other Orthodox Churches is questionable. What can cause a refusal to participate in the Council?
1. Unreasonable claims by the Patriarchate of Constantinople for primacy in the Orthodox world. The Patriarch of Constantinople controls only a small quarter of Phanar in Istanbul and a number of parishes abroad. When in the beginning of Ramadan Turkish authorities initiated Muslim religious ceremonies in the Hagia Sophia, the Patriarch of Constantinople was silent. So, if the Patriarchate of Constantinople cannot and even does not dare to defend Christian holy places in the city of his residence, how can he pretend to unite the Orthodox World?
2. The refusal of the Council to resolve the issues actually dividing the Orthodox world. Constantinople’s failure to contribute to the solution of the dispute between the Jerusalem Patriarchate and the Patriarchate of Antioch caused the rejection of the last Pan-Orthodox Council. The Patriarchate of Jerusalem in 2014 established a metropolitan in Qatar, which is considered the canonical territory of the Patriarchate of Antioch. In this regard, the Patriarchate of Antioch from April 2014 stopped communicating with Jerusalem and is constantly waiting for assistance in solving the problem on the part of world Orthodoxy.
3. Unresolved issues will be unresolved. The aforementioned problems remained untouched in the agenda of the Council. So the Council will not fulfil one of its previously mentioned aims. Constantinople did not listen to any opinions of the Russian Orthodox Church, neither Georgians nor Kinot Mount Athos. If it has not done so already, you should not expect that it would do it at the Council.
4. Ecumenism. The Ecumenical Patriarch will pray together with the Pope, which the rest of the Orthodox Church considers to be a heretic.
According to canonical norms, the Patriarch of Constantinople should be deposed from his rank. By participating in the Council, which is convened by Constantinople, all other local churches formally recognize his seniority, and therefore favor a policy of rapprochement with the heretics. The documents, which speak of relations with other Christian confessors, are sustained in an ecumenical spirit. In particular, it approved the activities of the World Council of Churches.
The draft document "of the Orthodox Church's relations with the rest of the Christian world" provoked the greatest debate and criticism in the various Local Churches. It is of great concern that Christians, who have fallen away from the Church, are not called by traditional theological terms as heretics and schismatics anywhere in the project, and only the "Christian churches", "confessions" (p. 6), "near and far" (p. 4). Observers from the Protestant religious communities that ordain women and sodomites will attend the Council.
5. The absence of a legitimate authority that can convene the Council.
Previously, Orthodox emperors convened all the Ecumenical Councils. Thus, the importance of the status of the emperor as "the bishop of Foreign Affairs of the Church" and a representative of the laity was demonstrated. In addition, such a scheme is deprived of any possibility of any Patriarch’s claim to rule over others.
6. Provoking further splits in the Church as a result of the Council. In connection with the aforementioned circumstances, a substantial part of conservative Orthodox Christians are against the council. In these circumstances, the conduct of the Council and the adoption of trade-offs will provoke new divisions, as has occurred previously. The Council will cause a schism, not unity.
7. At the Council, representatives of Western intelligence agencies will work actively. Their main task is to enlarge division and discord in the world Orthodoxy and use the Council for the decisions that are not consistent with the Orthodox creed to weaken the unity of the Orthodox world. Representatives of the American special services landed on the Greek island of Crete, where the Pan-Orthodox Council will be held at the end of June this year. This declaration was made by chairman of the Supervisory Board of the analytical center "Katechon" Konstantin Malofeev on the air of Russian TV Channel Tsargrad. According to him, the Americans arrived in Crete on the pretext of ensuring security of the Orthodox hierarchy. In fact, US intelligence agencies tend to secure complete control of everything that happens at the council.
8. The control of Western elites over some Orthodox Churches. Some commentators mentioned earlier:
This is the enslavement of several countries concerned with the atheist European Union. Notably, there is the fact that the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Jerusalem are basically appointees of the Greek Foreign Ministry and Greece, as well as Cyprus, Bulgaria, and Romania, where the EU is pouring money into for the building of 'ecumenical centres', are indebted feudal fiefs of the EU. Moreover, given the ambitions of Turkey to join the EU, the Turkish-based Patriarchate of Constantinople, with their own imperialistic ambitions in Ukraine, Estonia, and throughout the Diaspora, is also subject to the EU, itself a creation of US foreign policy .
9. The uncertain status of the Council. Initially, it was positioned as the Eighth Ecumenical, but later it was announced that it would not consider dogmatic issues. Nevertheless, the Council assumes the format of its binding decisions for all participating churches.
10. The 22nd item of the Project document "Relations of the Orthodox Church with the rest of the Christian world" is puzzling. It pre-announces decisions of the Pan-Orthodox Council to be infallible and protects them from possible legitimate criticism. Needlessly classified Council decisions binding before their reception by the Orthodox world seems to be contrary to the spirit of the Orthodoxy for many Christians:
No meeting of representatives of the Local Churches can be called a Council before it has taken place. To call it so is pure politics. What is important is if the Holy Spirit inspires any such meeting. If it is, there the people will receive it. Only on reception by the faithful, can we then give that meeting the title of a 'Council'.
11. The Council - this is not the format to demonstrate "the unity of the Orthodox world" for political purposes. Firstly, as noted above, it does not solve the existing conflicts, but generates new splits. Secondly, to demonstrate such unity formats of "Meeting" or "Conference" are enough, whose decisions are deprived of general validity of the measurement. Thirdly, the Orthodox Church has always had unity. To suggest that the Church is not already One suggests that Christ is not One. The lack of administrative unity, or different views on some issues of social life, rites if the tents of faith are not charged, does not demonstrate disunity, but variety and diversity.
Pan-Orthodox Council or Bartholomew’s Benefit?
http://katehon.com/article/pan-orthodox-council-or-bartholomews-benefit
In Russian history, many things have split our existence into “before” and “after” - before the “Christianization of Rus,” before the “Mongol and Tatar raids,” before the “Time of Troubles,” before the “Schism,” before “Peter the Great,” before the “Revolution,” before “the war.” But there are also events which are at first glance not so epochal, but which have immensely influenced the course of history. Among the latter, without a doubt, is the recent pilgrimage to Holy Mount Athos by the Patriarch of the Russian Church and the head of the Russian state.
Of course, Patriarch Kirill and Vladimir Putin visited Mount Athos. But the fact that on Saturday the spiritual and national leader of the country united in prayer in the place where for centuries the traditions of the Eastern Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, were carefully preserved, is extremely important. Such an event is like one from a thousand years ago, when the first Russian monks become monks of Mount Athos, when the kingdom of Muscovy was the heir of the fallen empire of the Romans.
We should remember that, following the Florentine Union of 1439, the Second Rome, the Constantinople Patriarchate, joined the Catholics and thus lost its role as the guardian of Orthodox Christianity. When Constantinople sent Metropolitan Isidore, who signed the union, to Moscow only for him to be expelled for having done so, the role of Orthodox guardian passed to the Russian Church and the Russian state.
Meanwhile, still considering themselves to be the “ecumenical” patriarchs, the bishops of Constantinople continued to interfere in the internal life of the autocephalous Russian Church throughout history. The most vivid intervention was the active role of the Greek hierarchs in implementing the tragic church reforms of the second half of the 17th century which gave rise to the worst split in the history of the Russian Church.
The further course of the church, after the Turks occupied Constantinople, only became more questionable from the point of view of patristic Christianity, Orthodoxy. This was especially evident in the 20th century when, for example, in 1920 Locum Tenens of the Patriarchal See Metropolitan Dorotheus of Bursa issued encyclical “On the Church of Christ in all the world” in which he arbitrarily assigned himself the role of “Pan-Orthodox Pope” and called upon all Christians, regardless of their doctrinal difference with Orthodoxy, to embrace ecumenical unity. At the same time, as a first step towards this rapprochement, he offered to adopt a uniform calendar with Catholics and Protestants.
At the same time, the throne of the Constantinople Patriarchate was occupied under questionable circumstances by the notorious Meletios (Metaxakis), who was a member of the Masonic lodge “Harmony.” Patriarch Meletios played a fateful role in the demarcation of the Russian and Constantinople Churches. In 1923, he convened the so-called Pan Orthodox Sanhedrin (Congress), which recognized Soviet dissident reformists as well as various churches as independent (such as the Ukrainian and Estonian). The same fake synod adopted a series of anti-Orthodox decisions contrary to canonical law, which included changing the church calendar and the right of priests to second marriage. In addition, the Sanhedrin of Meletios indirectly called for St. Tikhon of Bellavina, the Patriarch of Moscow, to leave the patriarchal throne in favor for a reformer.
The subsequent weakening of Russian statehood during the collapse of the Soviet Union gave rise to a new confrontation between the Moscow and Constantinople patriarchates. The latter became a patron of schismatic groups such as the independent Estonian and Ukrainian churches and the Constantinople Patriarch Bartholomew I recognized the so-called Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church which, in turn, led the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church on February 23rd, 2016 to historically decide to postpone the canonical and eucharistic communion with the Patriarchate of Constantinople and the Finnish autonomous Archdiocese, as well as forego commemoration with the Patriarch of Constantinople of the diptych of local Orthodox churches.
Although this issue was then politically resolved, relations between the Russian and Constantinople Churches were not healed. The upcoming Pan-Orthodox Synod, which is scheduled to be held June 16th-17th on Crete, is the most evident example. Personally, I am far from accusing the hierarchy of the Russian Church of planning to take part in this council in order to compromise and retreat from church orthodoxy.
The fact remains that it is Patriarch Kirill (along with a number of Greek and Georgian hierarchs) who has maintained consistent positions.
But the coming Pan-Orthodox Council has raised many controversies, including those which have appeared in the prepared documents bearing a mildly “diplomatic” attitude towards non-Orthodox Christians, whom Orthodox consider to be not “heterodox,” but heretics. The political implication of this council is no less important for the Church. After all, if the Council will be held as scheduled, then it will be a kind of “benefit” for Constantinople Patriarch Bartholomew I. Yes, we recognize his historically established “primacy of honor” in the diptych of local Orthodox churches, but we also perfectly know that this man has been involved with Western intelligence agencies and that he has made many inherently Russophobic statements in recent years (including openly critiquing the concept of the Third Rome).
Hence why today many Orthodox Christians are seriously concerned that the planned Pan-Orthodox Council will not be a representative meeting of the Orthodox bishops of local Churches, but a kind of simulacrum of the Eighth Ecumenical Council. That means a fake Council at which Patriarch Bartholomew will try to impose his personal will (and thus, the will of his Western curators) upon the Orthodox world. In the end, this formal event will not lead to a convergence between Orthodox Christians, but will lead new confrontations and even splits.
Thus, although disagreeing with the hysterical “true Orthodox people” who today organize various acts of disobedience and groundlessly criticize our hierarchy, I nonetheless wonder: is the game worth it? Is it necessary to solve issues in this format? Perhaps instead of going to Western intelligence agencies-infected Crete in June, it would be better to buy a moth and go fishing, something which is so historically beloved by the Russian people, including Church hierarchy.
Pope Francis to Visit Auschwitz During Trip to Poland
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20160610/1041100127/Pope-Francis-Visit-Auschwitz-Poland.html
Francis will be the third Pope to visit Auschwitz, preceded by Pope Benedict XVI, a German, in 2006, and Pope John Paul II, a Pole, in 1979.
Located in the town of Oswiecim, around 70 km from Krakow, Auschwitz-Birkenau was one of the so-called death camps built by Nazi Germany specifically to exterminate people. Some 1.4 million, 1.1 million of them Jews, were killed at Auschwitz between 1941-1945, by the Nazis. Other victims included non-Jewish Poles, gypsies and Soviet prisoners.
Initially built to imprison unwanted members of society, the site developed into a vast complex of barracks, workshops, gas chambers and crematoria, becoming a dark icon of genocide and Nazi atrocity.
The camp was liberated by Soviet Red Army on January 27, 1945. Since 2005, January 27 has been designated by the United Nations General Assembly as International Holocaust Remembrance Day.
During Pope Benedict XVI's 2006 visit, the pontiff famously bowed to pray for the victims, as 'a son of the German people.' As a youngster, Benedict XVI was obliged to serve in Hitlerjugend, a Nazi youth organization. During his 1979 visit, Pope John Paul II called the camp a "Golgotha of the modern world."
Russian Orthodox Church to Skip Pan-Orthodox Council
http://sputniknews.com/russia/20160610/1041120026/council-orthodox-church-crete.html
The Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church, also known as the Pan-Orthodox Council, is a planned synod of the bishops of all autocephalous local churches of Eastern Orthodox Christianity. The Council is set be held on the Greek island of Crete on June 16-27, after more than 50 years of preparations. The Bulgarian Orthodox Church, the Antiochian Orthodox Church, and the Serbian Orthodox Church refused to participate in the Council.
"Metropolitan Hilarion is currently in Moscow. Given that a number of churches does not find it worthwhile sending its representatives to take part in composing the message of the Pan-Orthodox Council, the Russian church has decided that the participation of its representative is untimely as long as issues of the feasibility of convening the council itself are unresolved," the source said.
Earlier this week, the Russian Orthodox Church proposed to the Patriarchate of Constantinople to hold an extraordinary meeting no later than June 10 in the light of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church’s refusal to participate in the Pan-Orthodox Council. The proposal was denied, with the Patriarchate of Constantinople saying that the Council would be held despite the Bulgarian Church’s move, as no institutional structure could revise the council process once it began.
"Yesterday, we received an official refusal regarding this proposal by the Patriarchate of Constantinople. We intend to carefully study positions of other churches and listen to the expressed opinions," the source added.
Problems voiced by the Russian church are known to the Patriarchate of Constantinople, the source added, stating that the patriarchate is trying to resolve the problems and is certain that all churches will take part in the council.
The council is set to be the first pan-Orthodox gathering in over a 1,000 years, but will not be ecumenical, as it will not decide on doctrinal issues, introduce innovations or change canonical structures, according to Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Kirill.
Serbian Orthodox Church Proposes Postponement of Pan-Orthodox Council
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20160609/1041074282/serbia-church-council.html
The Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church, also known as the Pan-Orthodox Council, is a planned synod of the bishops of all autocephalous local churches of Eastern Orthodox Christianity. The Council is set be held on the Greek island of Crete on June 16-27, after more than 50 years of preparations.
"Our Church is having difficulties with participation in the convened Council and suggest postponing it for some time," Patriarch Irinej of Serbia said in a statement, addressed to Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople.
He cited the Bulgarian Orthodox Church's decision to refrain from participation in the Council among the reasons to propose the postponement of the event.
Patriarch Irinej suggested that the forthcoming meeting in Crete should be regarded as not the Pan-Orthodox Council, but as a pre-Council all-Orthodox conference, which would deal with additional preparations or would be the first step toward convening the Council.
Earlier this week, the Russian Orthodox Church proposed to the Patriarchate of Constantinople to hold an extraordinary meeting no later than June 10 in the light of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church’s refusal to participate in the Pan-Orthodox Council. The proposal was denied, with the Patriarchate of Constantinople saying that the Council would be held despite the Bulgarian Church’s move, as no institutional structure could revise the conciliar process once it began.
Georgian Orthodox Church Not to Participate in Pan-Orthodox Council
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20160610/1041128230/georgia-orthodox-council-russia.html
The Georgian Orthodox Church will not take part in the Pan-Orthodox Council in Crete, local media reported Friday.
The Georgian Orthodox Church has not made an official statement over this issue yet, the Imedi TV broadcaster said.
11 reasons not to participate in the Pan-Orthodox Council
http://katehon.com/article/11-reasons-not-participate-pan-orthodox-council
The idea of a new Council that may resolve long-standing problems and contradictions among different Orthodox jurisdictions has been discussed for 100 years. From the very beginning this initiative provoked stormy discussion among Orthodox clerics and laics on the necessity of this event. Today these contradictions threaten to disrupt the holding of the Pan-Orthodox Council. Russian and Georgian Orthodox Churches expressed serious concerns about some of the wording of the Council. Kinot of Holy Mount Athos demanded inclusion in the documents of the Council's position that non-Orthodox denominations should not be referred to the churches, and all forms of joint prayers and liturgical action with them should be discontinued. The Russian Church urges to convene a Pan-Orthodox pre-meeting to resolve questions that confuse the faithful.
The greatest concern is the tendency to establish ecumenist agenda as a long-term priority of the Church. The will of the Constantinople Patriarch is to transform his Superiority of the Honor in something like Orthodox Papism and renovationist trends. However, Constantinople rejected to make any adjustments and pronounced against calls for any Pan-Orthodox meeting.
The Antiochian Orthodox Church and the Bulgarian Orthodox Church have refused to take part in the Council. Thus, it has lost the status of All-Orthodox. Now the arrival of representatives of other Orthodox Churches is questionable. What can cause a refusal to participate in the Council?
1. Unreasonable claims by the Patriarchate of Constantinople for primacy in the Orthodox world. The Patriarch of Constantinople controls only a small quarter of Phanar in Istanbul and a number of parishes abroad. When in the beginning of Ramadan Turkish authorities initiated Muslim religious ceremonies in the Hagia Sophia, the Patriarch of Constantinople was silent. So, if the Patriarchate of Constantinople cannot and even does not dare to defend Christian holy places in the city of his residence, how can he pretend to unite the Orthodox World?
2. The refusal of the Council to resolve the issues actually dividing the Orthodox world. Constantinople’s failure to contribute to the solution of the dispute between the Jerusalem Patriarchate and the Patriarchate of Antioch caused the rejection of the last Pan-Orthodox Council. The Patriarchate of Jerusalem in 2014 established a metropolitan in Qatar, which is considered the canonical territory of the Patriarchate of Antioch. In this regard, the Patriarchate of Antioch from April 2014 stopped communicating with Jerusalem and is constantly waiting for assistance in solving the problem on the part of world Orthodoxy.
3. Unresolved issues will be unresolved. The aforementioned problems remained untouched in the agenda of the Council. So the Council will not fulfil one of its previously mentioned aims. Constantinople did not listen to any opinions of the Russian Orthodox Church, neither Georgians nor Kinot Mount Athos. If it has not done so already, you should not expect that it would do it at the Council.
4. Ecumenism. The Ecumenical Patriarch will pray together with the Pope, which the rest of the Orthodox Church considers to be a heretic.
According to canonical norms, the Patriarch of Constantinople should be deposed from his rank. By participating in the Council, which is convened by Constantinople, all other local churches formally recognize his seniority, and therefore favor a policy of rapprochement with the heretics. The documents, which speak of relations with other Christian confessors, are sustained in an ecumenical spirit. In particular, it approved the activities of the World Council of Churches.
The draft document "of the Orthodox Church's relations with the rest of the Christian world" provoked the greatest debate and criticism in the various Local Churches. It is of great concern that Christians, who have fallen away from the Church, are not called by traditional theological terms as heretics and schismatics anywhere in the project, and only the "Christian churches", "confessions" (p. 6), "near and far" (p. 4). Observers from the Protestant religious communities that ordain women and sodomites will attend the Council.
5. The absence of a legitimate authority that can convene the Council.
Previously, Orthodox emperors convened all the Ecumenical Councils. Thus, the importance of the status of the emperor as "the bishop of Foreign Affairs of the Church" and a representative of the laity was demonstrated. In addition, such a scheme is deprived of any possibility of any Patriarch’s claim to rule over others.
6. Provoking further splits in the Church as a result of the Council. In connection with the aforementioned circumstances, a substantial part of conservative Orthodox Christians are against the council. In these circumstances, the conduct of the Council and the adoption of trade-offs will provoke new divisions, as has occurred previously. The Council will cause a schism, not unity.
7. At the Council, representatives of Western intelligence agencies will work actively. Their main task is to enlarge division and discord in the world Orthodoxy and use the Council for the decisions that are not consistent with the Orthodox creed to weaken the unity of the Orthodox world. Representatives of the American special services landed on the Greek island of Crete, where the Pan-Orthodox Council will be held at the end of June this year. This declaration was made by chairman of the Supervisory Board of the analytical center "Katechon" Konstantin Malofeev on the air of Russian TV Channel Tsargrad. According to him, the Americans arrived in Crete on the pretext of ensuring security of the Orthodox hierarchy. In fact, US intelligence agencies tend to secure complete control of everything that happens at the council.
8. The control of Western elites over some Orthodox Churches. Some commentators mentioned earlier:
This is the enslavement of several countries concerned with the atheist European Union. Notably, there is the fact that the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Jerusalem are basically appointees of the Greek Foreign Ministry and Greece, as well as Cyprus, Bulgaria, and Romania, where the EU is pouring money into for the building of 'ecumenical centres', are indebted feudal fiefs of the EU. Moreover, given the ambitions of Turkey to join the EU, the Turkish-based Patriarchate of Constantinople, with their own imperialistic ambitions in Ukraine, Estonia, and throughout the Diaspora, is also subject to the EU, itself a creation of US foreign policy .
9. The uncertain status of the Council. Initially, it was positioned as the Eighth Ecumenical, but later it was announced that it would not consider dogmatic issues. Nevertheless, the Council assumes the format of its binding decisions for all participating churches.
10. The 22nd item of the Project document "Relations of the Orthodox Church with the rest of the Christian world" is puzzling. It pre-announces decisions of the Pan-Orthodox Council to be infallible and protects them from possible legitimate criticism. Needlessly classified Council decisions binding before their reception by the Orthodox world seems to be contrary to the spirit of the Orthodoxy for many Christians:
No meeting of representatives of the Local Churches can be called a Council before it has taken place. To call it so is pure politics. What is important is if the Holy Spirit inspires any such meeting. If it is, there the people will receive it. Only on reception by the faithful, can we then give that meeting the title of a 'Council'.
11. The Council - this is not the format to demonstrate "the unity of the Orthodox world" for political purposes. Firstly, as noted above, it does not solve the existing conflicts, but generates new splits. Secondly, to demonstrate such unity formats of "Meeting" or "Conference" are enough, whose decisions are deprived of general validity of the measurement. Thirdly, the Orthodox Church has always had unity. To suggest that the Church is not already One suggests that Christ is not One. The lack of administrative unity, or different views on some issues of social life, rites if the tents of faith are not charged, does not demonstrate disunity, but variety and diversity.
Pan-Orthodox Council or Bartholomew’s Benefit?
http://katehon.com/article/pan-orthodox-council-or-bartholomews-benefit
In Russian history, many things have split our existence into “before” and “after” - before the “Christianization of Rus,” before the “Mongol and Tatar raids,” before the “Time of Troubles,” before the “Schism,” before “Peter the Great,” before the “Revolution,” before “the war.” But there are also events which are at first glance not so epochal, but which have immensely influenced the course of history. Among the latter, without a doubt, is the recent pilgrimage to Holy Mount Athos by the Patriarch of the Russian Church and the head of the Russian state.
Of course, Patriarch Kirill and Vladimir Putin visited Mount Athos. But the fact that on Saturday the spiritual and national leader of the country united in prayer in the place where for centuries the traditions of the Eastern Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, were carefully preserved, is extremely important. Such an event is like one from a thousand years ago, when the first Russian monks become monks of Mount Athos, when the kingdom of Muscovy was the heir of the fallen empire of the Romans.
We should remember that, following the Florentine Union of 1439, the Second Rome, the Constantinople Patriarchate, joined the Catholics and thus lost its role as the guardian of Orthodox Christianity. When Constantinople sent Metropolitan Isidore, who signed the union, to Moscow only for him to be expelled for having done so, the role of Orthodox guardian passed to the Russian Church and the Russian state.
Meanwhile, still considering themselves to be the “ecumenical” patriarchs, the bishops of Constantinople continued to interfere in the internal life of the autocephalous Russian Church throughout history. The most vivid intervention was the active role of the Greek hierarchs in implementing the tragic church reforms of the second half of the 17th century which gave rise to the worst split in the history of the Russian Church.
The further course of the church, after the Turks occupied Constantinople, only became more questionable from the point of view of patristic Christianity, Orthodoxy. This was especially evident in the 20th century when, for example, in 1920 Locum Tenens of the Patriarchal See Metropolitan Dorotheus of Bursa issued encyclical “On the Church of Christ in all the world” in which he arbitrarily assigned himself the role of “Pan-Orthodox Pope” and called upon all Christians, regardless of their doctrinal difference with Orthodoxy, to embrace ecumenical unity. At the same time, as a first step towards this rapprochement, he offered to adopt a uniform calendar with Catholics and Protestants.
At the same time, the throne of the Constantinople Patriarchate was occupied under questionable circumstances by the notorious Meletios (Metaxakis), who was a member of the Masonic lodge “Harmony.” Patriarch Meletios played a fateful role in the demarcation of the Russian and Constantinople Churches. In 1923, he convened the so-called Pan Orthodox Sanhedrin (Congress), which recognized Soviet dissident reformists as well as various churches as independent (such as the Ukrainian and Estonian). The same fake synod adopted a series of anti-Orthodox decisions contrary to canonical law, which included changing the church calendar and the right of priests to second marriage. In addition, the Sanhedrin of Meletios indirectly called for St. Tikhon of Bellavina, the Patriarch of Moscow, to leave the patriarchal throne in favor for a reformer.
The subsequent weakening of Russian statehood during the collapse of the Soviet Union gave rise to a new confrontation between the Moscow and Constantinople patriarchates. The latter became a patron of schismatic groups such as the independent Estonian and Ukrainian churches and the Constantinople Patriarch Bartholomew I recognized the so-called Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church which, in turn, led the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church on February 23rd, 2016 to historically decide to postpone the canonical and eucharistic communion with the Patriarchate of Constantinople and the Finnish autonomous Archdiocese, as well as forego commemoration with the Patriarch of Constantinople of the diptych of local Orthodox churches.
Although this issue was then politically resolved, relations between the Russian and Constantinople Churches were not healed. The upcoming Pan-Orthodox Synod, which is scheduled to be held June 16th-17th on Crete, is the most evident example. Personally, I am far from accusing the hierarchy of the Russian Church of planning to take part in this council in order to compromise and retreat from church orthodoxy.
The fact remains that it is Patriarch Kirill (along with a number of Greek and Georgian hierarchs) who has maintained consistent positions.
But the coming Pan-Orthodox Council has raised many controversies, including those which have appeared in the prepared documents bearing a mildly “diplomatic” attitude towards non-Orthodox Christians, whom Orthodox consider to be not “heterodox,” but heretics. The political implication of this council is no less important for the Church. After all, if the Council will be held as scheduled, then it will be a kind of “benefit” for Constantinople Patriarch Bartholomew I. Yes, we recognize his historically established “primacy of honor” in the diptych of local Orthodox churches, but we also perfectly know that this man has been involved with Western intelligence agencies and that he has made many inherently Russophobic statements in recent years (including openly critiquing the concept of the Third Rome).
Hence why today many Orthodox Christians are seriously concerned that the planned Pan-Orthodox Council will not be a representative meeting of the Orthodox bishops of local Churches, but a kind of simulacrum of the Eighth Ecumenical Council. That means a fake Council at which Patriarch Bartholomew will try to impose his personal will (and thus, the will of his Western curators) upon the Orthodox world. In the end, this formal event will not lead to a convergence between Orthodox Christians, but will lead new confrontations and even splits.
Thus, although disagreeing with the hysterical “true Orthodox people” who today organize various acts of disobedience and groundlessly criticize our hierarchy, I nonetheless wonder: is the game worth it? Is it necessary to solve issues in this format? Perhaps instead of going to Western intelligence agencies-infected Crete in June, it would be better to buy a moth and go fishing, something which is so historically beloved by the Russian people, including Church hierarchy.
