The EU is Finished and the Third World War Has Started, Says Cypriot Metropolitan

Metropolitan Neofitos of the Church of Cyprus has said that 2017-18 mark the end of the EU project, that the EU party is over. This is according to the website AgionOros.ru. He explained:

‘We can see that the EU is collapsing, there remains only the German Europe of the strong, with which we Cypriots have nothing in common. Unfortunately, we have bet on the wrong horse. The alienation of Europe from Orthodoxy had moral consequences, they have legalized debauchery, idolatry and deified the flesh’. The Metropolitan further quoted the great Serbian saint, Nikolai Velimirovich, who wrote decades ago that ‘the tragedy of Europe is that it has rejected the Kingdom of Eternal Life’.

He added that: ‘The Third World War started six years ago in Syria. This was the prophecy of that man of God Metropolitan Antonios (Kompos) (1920-2005). Shortly before his repose, he said: ‘When the disaster starts in Syria, pray. Everything will start from there, from Syria’’.

On the French Elections

The possible next President of France, Emmanuel Macron, is a young, naive and politically inexperienced Rothschild puppet. A Blairite narcissist, he is easily manipulated once his ego is flattered (‘every man has his price’, as the elite knows), with no programme of his own, neither left nor right. He has no depth, merely image. However, he is clearly programmed by the Brussels and EU banking and industrial elite to implement their globalist policies. The elite had despaired of the Obama-sponsored hater of the French people, President Francois Hollande, with his popularity ratings of 4% (compare Vladimir Putin’s at 84%) and in 2016 found Macron and groomed him with its media in time for the 2017 elections. He represents the global elite and the oligarchy, with its control of the EU media. If he is elected, Macron will be used, manipulated and thrown away once he has served his purpose, his moment of glory over.

On the other side of the contest is Marine Le Pen, much slandered and vilified by the elite-controlled French media. She represents sometimes ugly French xenophobia and nationalism, as well as patriotism, independence and sovereignty, she is of the people (a ‘populist’, as the slanderers say). She is a Gaullist, like the anti-US and anti-NATO De Gaulle, who was overthrown in the CIA-run French coup d’etat of 1968. She is against the EU and against the euro and represents the wave of anti-EU sentiment that has swept all EU countries, resulted in riots in Greece, Brexit and the rise of anti-EU parties in all EU countries. There is a very clear choice here, between globalism (with all its dangers) and nationalism (with all its dangers). Nevertheless, whoever wins in France will face parliamentary elections; it will be hard for any President to do anything without a majority in the Parliament. But this is not the problem.

The problem is that whoever wins, the much favoured Macron, or the much maligned Le Pen, Brussels and the global elite must understand that the peoples of Europe are deeply unhappy. The mere fact that the anti-EU, pro-Frexit Le Pen has enough popular support even to be a second-round Presidential candidate, means that the EU is over. Whoever wins, the EU project must disappear – at least in its present form of wanting to destroy every single national identity and culture in the EU and making Europe into a colourless and cultureless imitation of the USA. This concerns us here, because the EU in its present form is anti-Christian, hysterically refusing and rejecting the Christian roots, values and culture of Europe in an attempt to commit suicide. Nobody knows the future, we can only pray that Europe may yet survive through repentance.

Why the United Nations Organization Should Move to Saint Petersburg

History tells us that the spiritual father of the United Nations was the last Christian Emperor, Tsar Nicholas II. At the very end of the century before last, it was he who called for an international organization where peace could be negotiated and war stopped. It was he who wanted to ban cruel arms such as chemical and biological weapons, bombing from the air (at that time from balloons) and attacks from under the water. Although the International Court in the Hague did come from his initiative, that was taken over by those who seized power worldwide after the Russian Revolution and is not used for what it should be.

As regards Tsar Nicholas’ calls for peace, they were firmly ignored by the Western Powers and only five years later, in 1904, they unleashed the Western-armed and Western-financed militaristic Japan on the peaceful Russian Empire. On the verge of victory, despite treason inside his Empire, Tsar Nicholas made peace with a bankrupt Japan, in the hope that the Western Powers had learned their lesson; they had, but only for a few years, until 1914. Thirty-six years later the two largest Western Powers then reaped the whirlwind that they had sown in Japan in 1904 at Pearl Harbour and at the surrender in Singapore, where the hopelessly under-equipped British Army was utterly humiliated by the Japanese.

Nevertheless, Tsar Nicholas’ idea for an international form for peace also bore fruit in the League of Nations and then in the UN. Unfortunately, this latter was taken over by the world elite, which set it up in New York and used it as just another instrument, like NATO in Brussels, its EU next-door neighbour, the G7, the International Court in the Hague or the Nobel Foundation. Today, as before, the UN is not representative of the real world, being a corrupt pawn in the elite’s hands. What can be done?

Firstly, surely the UN Security Council could in the future represent the continents of the real world. At present North America is represented by the USA, Europe by its largest nation, the Russian Federation, and Asia (including the tiny population of Australasia) by China. However, South America and Africa are not represented at all, neither is the second largest population in the world in India, and tiny Western Europe is represented by two small nations, American vassals, that no longer count in today’s world. Surely, instead of all this, powerful India should have a place in the Security Council (through China and India nearly one third of the world’s population would be represented), followed by the largest nation in South America, Brazil, and the most powerful nation in Africa, the Republic of South Africa.

Secondly, let the UN be transferred to Saint Petersburg, the city where Tsar Nicholas II first had the idea of an international organization to avert war. Transferred from the manipulations of the global warmongers of the world and their genocidal histories, the United Nations Organization, made representative of the real world and not of the ghetto of the rich and power-grabbing West, could then at last be successful.

On Orthodox Missionary Work

Now that the Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) has officially taken up the task of missionary work in the renewed Diocese of the British Isles and Ireland after several decades of disruption, it would be well to consider the nature of the missionary work that we need to do.

First of all, we must understand that there is only one sort of authentic missionary and pastoral work. This serves the people as a community, it is not an ideological plan on a map with pins in it, it is not top-down, but down-top, from the grassroots. Now, wherever there is a demand, ROCOR will do its best to meet that demand, setting up parishes where there is a need, now with official support. Where there are thirsty Orthodox people (at least one of whom can sing and read) and where there are premises, we will provide a priest. We can think of many cases in history of such missionary work, for example the mission of St Augustine in England in 597 or that of Sts Cyril and Methodius to St Rostislav, always in answer to a request. We can build nothing where there is not a spiritual need and a willingness to make sacrifices.

But what of areas where there is no actual demand, but just unconverted souls, potential Orthodox? Here we can take the examples of St Herman in Alaska and St Nicholas in Japan. They lived simply in a place for many, many years, praying, learning and understanding the people among whom they lived, before missionary work began. They waited for people to come to them, they did not serve themselves by imposing themselves on others. Self-serving (usually in the name of some personal problem and unfulfilled ambition) is pseudo-missionary work. It tries to impose itself, being characterized by gurus, vagantes and clericalists who like fancy titles, dressing up and having their photographs taken. They who do not look after the people, do not travel to meet people, even despising them for their simplicity.

We should be wary of the sort of ‘missionary’ work that despises the people, their languages and their customs and tries to force them into a strange mould that is not theirs. That is the false missionary work of those who use their personalities, not heartfelt faith in God, to convert others.

An Interview: University College, Oxford and Russian Orthodoxy in Oxford (1974-77)

Christ is Risen!

He is risen indeed!

What made you choose Oxford to study over forty years ago?

I did not choose to go to Oxford, Oxford chose me. Had I known what it would be like, I would have chosen to study at the School of Slavonic and Eastern European Studies in London. But I was given no advice and so knew no better.

What did you make of Oxford University in general?

At that time it was a University of public school snobs, a clique who froze out anyone unlike themselves. Those who did not come from public schools and rich families either, as Establishment careerists, conformed and pretended to be public school elitists, or else, like myself, as free spirits, effectively had as little as possible to do with the University. Thus, I spent my time at the Russian Orthodox church in Oxford and reading about Orthodox theology and history, Russian literature and history and the history of England – my three great interests.

Which college did you study at?

University College, the oldest in the University.

What did you make of University College?

University College was and is famous for Alfred the Great and infamous for the decadent Prince Felix Yusupov. The first is said to be its founder. Of course, this is a myth, but with my lifelong veneration for King Alfred and later as the compiler of the Church service to him, it was pleasant to think of this while I was there. As for the transvestite occultist Yusupov, a graduate of the College, his room was still there and he is infamous as the sadistic torturer and mutilator of the holy monk Gregory Rasputin-Novy. Called Gregory the New, he was the first martyr of the British-orchestrated Russian Revolution and was murdered by a British spy, whom Yusupov had met in Oxford.

Did you meet anyone well-known at the College?

Two of my contemporaries became government ministers. Lord Moynihan and Philip Hammond, but I had and have nothing in common with them. Others are millionaires, academics, judges, barristers, businessmen, civil servants, writers and so on. There were other famous/infamous people at the University then, such as the assassinated President Benazir Bhutto and a couple of BBC correspondents who are very well-known in the UK. But they were Establishment types, without independent personalities, just tide-swimmers, and I had little to do with them.

What did you think of your tutors?

They were very clever people and I profited from listening to their knowledge. But I also saw their severe limitations and they helped me to understand once and for all that the aim of human life is not to collect knowledge and that the source of knowledge is not in books, but in a clean soul.

What did you specialize in as part of your course?

Russian religious thought. The tutor was an Anglican vicar and the course was very disappointing, as it referred only to the thought of intellectuals and philosophers of the Parisian type, whereas I was interested in real Russian Church thought, which is totally different, as it is the thought of saints, gathered from a clean soul.

What did you learn from Oxford?

I learned about the arrogance and elitism of the Establishment and learned distrust for its inherent corruption and decadence.

How did Oxford shape you?

I am not sure that it shaped me, as I already knew what I wanted and where I was going in life, that my place was in the Russian Orthodox Church, beyond all sectional labels. The essentials of my world view had already been formed. But in Oxford I was able to work out details and to verify what I knew by instinct.

What was the most memorable phrase you heard in your time there?

I think it was when a typically elitist Oxford Orthodox priest (now defrocked) told me in 1975 that ‘there is no such thing as ordinary people’. He was effectively saying that the vast bulk of humanity, myself included, had no existence or reality for him. At that point I became interested in the real Russian Orthodox Church elsewhere, outside the limited confines of academic intellectualism, in the real world, where I had come from.

What can you say about Russian Orthodoxy in Oxford of that time?

What was interesting here is that all the different trends, both good and bad, were present. This was because the University had attracted Russian academics.

For example, there were a mother and daughter who were very right-wing, sectarian and nationalistic and would only attend the Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) Cathedral in London and like several there had probably worked for the British secret services. Anti-Communism seemed to be far above Orthodoxy for them. They were also so nationalistic, not to say racist, that they were opposed, like most of the ROCOR emigration in London, to the use of a single word of English in services. At the other extreme there were the Patriarchal Lamperts, equally nationalistic and racist, but in the Soviet sense. They were convinced that Communism, Lenin and Stalin, were wonderful and that there had never been any persecution of the Church in the Soviet Union. Their nationalism had also made them completely blind to reality. Extraordinary!

Inbetween, there was the third extreme, equally blind, the extreme of him who had chosen to be my godfather Nicholas Zernov (which was the extreme of most of the others in Oxford). He was Parisian to the core and preached a sort of Anglican Orthodoxy, in which he saw no contradiction between conservative High Anglicanism and the very bourgeois Parisian Orthodoxy of liberal intellectuals and freemasons. Among such people there was the Anglican convert, Fr Kallistos, a public-school gentleman of the old type, who had made a liberal, ecumenical compromise between Establishment High Anglicanism and Paris Orthodoxy under the US-run (formerly Anglican-run) Patriarchate of Constantinople. He was beloved by Anglicans and ex-Anglicans, but did not appeal to those of other cultural backgrounds and never became a diocesan bishop.

Where did you fit into this panorama?

I would say that there were three people whom I admired in Oxford. One was an elderly Russian peasant woman from Latvia called Ala. She had settled in Oxford after 1945 and was very simple and lived in a council flat in the poorest part of the town, well outside the elitist and wealthy University. She was a granny with a heart of gold and had nothing to do with Parisian professors, who ignored her anyway as a result of their academic snobbery. As for her, she had no understanding of their prejudices and ideologies and also little understanding of English. To me she was a beacon of real Orthodoxy.

Then there was the elderly Countess Elizabeth Kutaisova, from a famous aristocratic family. She was the epitome of the best of White Russia, a real gentlewoman, noble, traditional, elegant, tasteful and patriotic. I will always remember her sitting on a bench in front of a flowering shrub in the Oxford park after church, reading the Russian emigre newspaper Russkaya Mysl.

And finally there was Sir Dimitri Obolensky, whose lectures on King Arthur I attended. A distinguished scholar, he was both a Russian prince and a courteous English gentleman. I discovered more about him in the 1990s through a parishioner and his childhood friend, Baroness Olga von Uxkull, who so fondly referred to him simply as ‘Dima’ and gave me a 1930s photograph of him, which I still have. Dimitri had fallen neither into émigré right-wingery, which put anti-Communism above the Church, nor into the illusions of Soviet patriotism, which put the Soviet Establishment (and personality cults) above the Church, nor into bourgeois Parisian Orthodoxy which so despised Russia that it put the West above it, but had remained faithful to the eternal Russian Orthodox Church, where I too belonged and belong.

In other words, unlike the vast majority, the above did not put their secular prejudices higher than the Church. I think all three of them represented the real Church beyond man-made jurisdictionalism and narrow sectionalism, which had so divided the Church in the emigration. They were all waiting for the great restoration, which has been under way in Russia for the last 25 years, but which still has so far to go. They were what the Church outside Russia should really be about, instead of various sorts of sectarianism.

Thank you.

The Last 100 Years: Revelation 8 and 9

There will be a terrible revolution in Russia…But the Lord will have mercy on Russia and will lead her through sufferings to great glory.

Prophecy of St Seraphim of Sarov, as related to the future Fr Nicholas Gibbes and believed in by Tsar Nicholas II

The Lord will restore Russia and it will become great once more and be the strongest bastion in the world for the future struggle with Antichrist himself and all his hordes.
St Seraphim of Sofia

When your sufferings are over….peoples will come to thy light and kings to the shining light rising up above thee.

St John of Shanghai

Such are the statements of three of the witnesses to the future of the Church Outside Russia. They, like all other Church people in the Russian emigration, Archbishop Theophan Bystrov, Fr Konstantin Zaytsev, Professor I. M. Andreyev, Bishop Nektary Kontsevich, Archbishop Averky Taushev, Bishop Mitrofan Znosko-Borovsky, Fr Seraphim Rose and many others, knew that the essential mission of the Church Outside Russia has always been to restore him who restrains now (2 Thess 2, 7) by repenting for the conditions that resulted in the ‘treachery, cowardice and deceit’ which overthrew the Lord’s Anointed in 1917.

The Balfour Statement made by bankrupt Britain in 1917 and the subsequent US foundation of Zionist Israel in 1948, the inevitable wars that followed, the capture of Jerusalem by the Zionist State in 1966, the instability caused a generation later, exactly as was predicted, by the imperialist invasion of Iraq in 1991 (the so-called ‘Gulf War’) and the results, especially the anti-Islamic war of greed, carried out by Western weapons of mass destruction, to steal Iraqi oil and gas in 2003, have caused wars and instability in Egypt, Libya, Syria and the Yemen, satanic terrorism and the mass migration of the wretched to Western Europe.

The whole of the Muslim world, much of it arbitrarily created by Britain and France some 100 years ago (sometimes with the help of chemical weapons), some much more recently, is in turmoil. From Bosnia to Kosovo, from Nigeria to Turkey, from Morocco to Uzbekistan, from Libya to Egypt, from the Sudan to Somalia, from Afghanistan to Iraq, from Saudi Arabia to Pakistan, from Bangladesh to Indonesia, there is today a powder keg, spilling over through the land between the rivers to the whole world. As is written in the Book of Revelation: Loose the four angels that are bound in the great river Euphrates (Rev. 9, 14).

We live in pre-apocalyptic times. The 53 million ‘beautiful babies’ slaughtered by US Presidents since 1970 scream it, as do the 2,000 slaughtered under President Trump’s watch today, as do the tens of millions of such babies in Western Europe. We all know it, as we have lived in these pre-apocalyptic times for exactly 100 years, ever since the diabolical export of Western materialism became the State ideology of the anti-Christian Bolshevik Soviet Union. When in 1917 the immoral British Prime Minister Lloyd George rejoiced at the British-engineered fall of the last Christian Emperor, he was rejoicing at his own fall.

The fall by betrayal of the Soviet Union three generations later was celebrated by the Western world as some sort of victory. That too was a mistake of hubris, for the West was in fact celebrating the downfall of its own materialistic ideology. Communism, crassly inefficient because State-run, was only a variation of the Western ideology of the far more efficient private-run Capitalism. If you see the fall of Communist materialism, you will inevitably, within a generation or two, find yourself seeing the fall of your own Capitalist materialism.

We will shortly celebrate the Resurrection of Christ over suffering and death, His triumph over Satan and the spoiling of Satan’s hellish kingdom. Now Orthodox of all races must come together in order to prepare to meet God’s chosen, the coming Orthodox Emperor, who will come among us before Antichrist appears openly in the Western lands, which are preparing through their institutional vice to greet him. The coming Emperor will cleanse as much of the earth as wishes to be cleansed before the end. Let us make ready to receive him. All is being prepared now, all conscious Orthodox Christians have become forerunners in these prophetic times.

The World Takes a Step Closer to Insanity

With the US elite and the elites of its vassal states (‘the G7’), representing a mere 10% of the world, unable to agree on further war crimes against Syria and attacks on Russia (though every day for the last week the roads in the East of England have been full of military traffic and the skies full of military planes, all heading for the Russian border in Estonia), the world breathes a little easier. As for the warmongering British Foreign Secretary, he has not yet understood that Britain has not been a Great Power for 100 years, but is merely the poodle of Washington. That self-evident truth is clearly not taught at Eton. The temporary victory of the Trotskyite neocons in Washington may however be shortlived:

http://www.unz.com/tsaker/a-multi-level-analysis-of-the-us-cruise-missile-attack-on-syria-and-its-consequences/

Syria

Where is the Declaration of War from Congress? This is a blatantly unconstitutional act by the President, whom I voted for. Not to mention where is the proof that the poison gas attack was not a false flag attack to trigger U.S. intervention? And since when is dying by poison gas worse than getting napalmed or firebombed to death? Where is the President’s campaign rhetoric about “America First” and staying out of foreign wars? Syria is NOT a vital interest of the United States. Period. This reeks of Israeli, NeoCon, and Military-Industrial Complex subversion of this Presidency.

From an American Correspondent

Sadly, the probable provocation of chemical weapons (‘Made in Turkey’ according to various sources) in Syria has further ruined US relations with the rest of the world. The affair reeks of the infamous, fabricated American War against Spain in 1898 or the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964, which both gave the US military industrial complex the excuse to start Wars which led to invasions, occupations and the slaughter of over 2 million innocent people. (However and whyever would the Syrian government (‘regime’ in propgandaspeak) launch a chemical weapons attack, when it has no chemical weapons? Meanwhile the same complex slaughters hundreds of women, children and ‘beautiful babies’ in Mosul, while maiming and killing British bombs take Yemen back to the Stone Age. Such is the abhorrent hypocrisy of the Western Powers.

The question now is what is the future of the bitterly divided USA? The unprovoked US attack on a sovereign country many thousands of miles away, without any mandate whatsoever, merely reinforces the trigger-happy, cowboy image of the US around the world. The USA is more and more seen as a terrorist state, with its propaganda inventions of ‘weapons of mass destruction’ and foundation by the CIA in the 1980s of Al-Qaeda. It was after all the US neocons who created Islamic Sate through their maniacal invasion of Iraq in 2003. Carried out largely for domestic reasons in order to reassert a tottering presidency, this attack could have consequences that could be very serious internationally. Syria, quite literally, borders on Armageddon. Is that really what the American people want?