Category Archives: Phyletism

It’s 1055 in Lubbock

By Dionysius Redington

The appointment (one can call it “election” only in the narrowest etymological sense) of Metropolitan Elpidophoros (Lambriniadis) as Archbishop of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America will no doubt be remembered as a significant turning point in the history of the twenty-first Century Church. Whatever hope might have existed that the schism between Constantinople and Moscow over Ukraine is merely a temporary, unimportant event has surely now been extinguished

Archbishop Elpidophoros is a distinguished and knowledgeable theologian. As a Turkish citizen, he is a leading and obvious candidate someday to succeed His All-Holiness Bartholomew on the Ecumenical Throne. In the major controversies of Bartholomew’s reign (the Cretan Council as well as the Ukrainian schism) he has consistently and staunchly defended the Patriarch’s positions and authority. While there is no reason to doubt the sincerity with which he has taken these stances, it is evident that he has a vested interest in strengthening a presently feeble jurisdiction which he is one day likely to command.

Thus his appointment to the second-most powerful post in the Ecumenical Patriarchate has a two-fold significance.

On the one hand, it telegraphs that there is unlikely to be any backtracking at the Phanar when Patriarch Bartholomew leaves the scene. On the other, it raises the theological stakes, because Archbishop Elpidophoros does not consider the Ukrainian affair a trivial matter of reasserting Constantinopolitan control over a wayward province illegally dominated for a few centuries by Moscow.

On the contrary, he uses the most serious term of opprobrium in all of Orthodoxy to describe his opponents, one the Phanar generally goes out of its way to avoid employing. He says they are heretics.

In 2009, then-Archimandrite Elpidophoros delivered a memorable speech at Holy Cross School of Theology which may still be found online, for example at https://www.aoiusa.org/ecumenical-patriarchate-american-diaspora-must-submit-to-mother-church/. In this speech he makes the following interesting statements, which he has elsewhere expanded into his well-known thesis that the Ecumenical Patriarch is “primus sine paribus”:

“Let me add that the refusal to recognize primacy within the Orthodox Church, a primacy that necessarily cannot but be embodied by a primus (that is by a bishop who has the prerogative of being the first among his fellow bishops) constitutes nothing less than heresy. It cannot be accepted, as often it is said, that the unity among the Orthodox Churches is safeguarded by either a common norm of faith and worship or by the Ecumenical Council as an institution. Both of these factors are impersonal while in our Orthodox theology the principle of unity is always a person. Indeed, in the level of the Holy Trinity the principle of unity is not the divine essence but the Person of the Father (“Monarchy” of the Father), at the ecclesiological level of the local Church the principle of unity is not the presbyterium or the common worship of the Christians but the person of the Bishop, so to in the Pan-Orthodox level the principle of unity cannot be an idea nor an institution but it needs to be, if we are to be consistent with our theology, a person… In the Orthodox Church we have one primus and he is the Patriarch of Constantinople.”

Note first the phrase “constitutes nothing less than a heresy”.

Note second the theologoumenon that the person who acts as the principle of unity for the Church Universal is not Christ Himself, but rather some bishop.

Note finally that the bishop in question is not (as a naively literal reading of the Holy Canons would seem to indicate) the bishop of Rome, but that of New Rome. (This latter is a serious point much neglected in the present controversy. Whatever the role of the Primus may be in Orthodoxy—i.e. whether the he is “primus inter pares” or “primus sine paribus”—there is no doubt that for centuries the historical Primus was the Roman Pope. The only reason for rejecting Roman primacy today is that the Roman Church has abandoned Orthodox teaching. And yet Constantinople, with its lifted anathemas, has more than any other Orthodox Patriarchate seemed to imply that no such apostasy exists. How then can the Phanar claim to be essential to the Church, when the Vatican would have to have a stronger claim? If the ecumenical movement were to succeed and full communion with Rome be re-established, would Constantinople gladly cede its primacy? And how does the existence, if only formerly, of Orthodox Rome agree with the Phanar’s claim that the Church “cannot exist” without the Patriarch of Constantinople?)

Perhaps his words are subject to misinterpretation, but Abp. Elpidophoros seems to believe that the Ecumenical Patriarch is a sort of Pope, the Vicar not of Christ, apparently, but of God the Father! He also seems to believe that those who disagree with this view are heretics.

This is a rather more serious claim than “You know, now that the USSR is gone, there really should be an autocephalous Ukrainian Orthodox Church free from Moscow.”

How can world Orthodoxy maintain communion with a Patriarchate that promotes an alien ecclesiology, and refers to those who object as “heretics” (a term it does not apply to Roman Catholics and Protestants)?

There is another aspect to Elpidophoros’s elevation that the 2009 speech also illuminates. Although the Phanar has historically been very opposed to ethnophyletism (in part to stop the incursions of the Bulgarian and other churches into its canonical territory), it is a matter of historical record that the Patriarchate has always seen itself as the bulwark of Greek nationalism. (Patriarch Bartholomew himself would probably neither deny this nor see any problem with it, as is clear from his 2018 remarks about the “predecence” of “our people”.)

In his speech, delivered at America’s only Greek seminary, Elpidophoros is largely concerned with this exact issue. He says that “ecumenicity is the heart of Hellenism and by definition alien to any form of nationalism or cultural chauvinism.” He adds that “diaspora” refers not to people temporarily living in lands beyond the Roman Empire, but to those who live there permanently. Nevertheless, in a seeming contradiction, his vision of these people is limited to immigrants from traditionally Orthodox countries and their progeny. His primary concern is the maintenance of (in this case Greek) culture and tradition without assimilation, and he has this to say about “converts”:

“Another great number of candidates to the priesthood come from converts, who possess little, if any, familiarity with the Orthodox experience and they are usually characterized by their overzealous behavior and mentality. It is of interest that the converts who become ordained into priesthood represent a disproportionally greater percentage than the converts among the faithful. The result of this disanalogous representation is that, more often than not, convert priests shepherd flocks that are bearers of some cultural tradition, but because their pastors either lack the necessary familiarity with that tradition or even consciously oppose it, they succeed in devaluing and gradually eradicating those cultural elements that have been the expression of the parishes that they serve.”

While this is a legitimate concern, it is notable that Elpidophoros nowhere talks about an evangelical mandate to bring Americans as an whole into Orthodoxy, nor does he discuss parishes which do not have a single (or any) ethnicity. In the context of a talk at a seminary (where the Dean at the time was named Fitzgerald) the speech seemed to have a clear message summed up in the sarcastic nickname some people gave to it: the “Too Many Xenoi” speech.

I am a xenos. So far as I know, the interaction of my post-Schism ancestors with Orthodox Christians was limited to fighting them on the Eastern Front. My wife and I converted to Orthodoxy in 1988 at the OCA cathedral in Boston. We were the founders and editors of the now-dormant Saint Pachomius Library, one of the first Orthodox patristics websites, in 1994. We used to teach Church history online, and I was involved for a number of years in Orthodox evangelical outreach to the Rastafarian sect. In 1997, we moved from Boston to Lubbock, Texas, where I was ordained a reader in GOARCH and served as a chanter at Saint Andrew Greek Orthodox Church until last October.

Lubbock is a university town with a population of about a quarter-million. It lies in the center of the Llano Estacado, a vast thinly-populated plateau straddling the Texas-New Mexico state border. The first Orthodox in Lubbock were probably Lebanese merchants who arrived around 1900, but there was no parish until a few Greeks decided to found one in the 1970s. They succeeded, after great struggle and many difficulties: Lubbock, although fairly large, is invisible to most Americans because of its isolation. St. Andrew did not have a priest until 1996; before that, people would drive over 100 miles to Amarillo for liturgy.

When my wife and I arrived, we were not sure what to expect. We found a parish that was part of the Greek Archdiocese, but also very multi-ethnic and welcoming. The liturgical rubrics and music were Byzantine, but the services were entirely in English, and every effort was made to accommodate people of different backgrounds: Greeks of course, and converts, and Arabs, Ukrainians, Russians, Serbs, Romanians, Bulgarians… and probably members of other nationalities I am forgetting. The “Greeks” in the parish were themselves a mixture of recent immigrants and families that had been in the US for several generations. Both of the priests who served in my 21 years at Saint Andrew parish were graduates of Saint Vladimir’s (OCA) Seminary.

The parish was not utopia, but it had its successes. Two of the parish’s young men (both of them converts, as Archbishop Elpidophoros might have predicted) went on to become priests of the Greek Archdiocese, a remarkable record for a parish so small and young by Greek standards. They are both, I might add, outstanding, even saintly, clergymen. One of them, whom I especially admire, was featured on the national GOARCH webpage in March. Neither of them answers to Abp. Elpidophoros’s caricature of the convert-priest as a fanatic ignorant of Greek culture (indeed, both of them married Greeks!)

My wife and I were very impressed by the generosity of the Greek parishioners at St. Andrew, their commitment to the religious education of their children, and above all by their sheer persistence in keeping alive a parish in an uncomprehending Protestant fundamentalist town, ignored by the rest of the country, always on the edge of financial collapse. At least twice, the parish seemed certain to close; once it was saved by an “anonymous” donation actually from the diocesan bishop, a very good and holy man.

Then in 2018, the current schism happened. My wife and I had been unhappy with the direction of the Greek Archdiocese for some time (I had been parish council president during the Council of Crete) but had always managed to convince ourselves to stay, if only because there was nowhere else to go: The Amarillo parish 100 miles away was still the nearest, and it, too, is Greek. Moreover, we did not want to cause a division in the already embattled local community; we respected our metropolitan; and (as I remember saying on more than one occasion) “If this were really heresy, and not just rhetoric, surely at least one of the other Orthodox churches would break communion over it”.

The Ukraine issue, however, made Patriarch Bartholomew’s more-than-papalising claim of being “primus sine paribus” impossible to ignore. We decided to leave the parish, and to hold reader’s services privately. We did not however tell anyone what we were doing except for the parish priest. We did not wish to be seen as sowing dissension, and we still hoped that the affair would be resolved in a few weeks. Then we found out that other people had noticed our absence, and eventually we decided to announce publically that we were starting a new parish, under the protection of St. Catherine of Alexandria.

At first we had no place to meet, so we met outdoors, at a park bench on the university campus, with the dome of heaven over our heads, flocks of pigeons (and the occasional hawk) circling above us. A few joggers looked at us in amazement, but for the most part we were ignored. For three months, this was our church.

I had imagined that once we announced our existence, many of our fellow-parishioners at Saint Andrew would wish to join; after all, the theological issues seemed rather clear-cut. This did not happen. Instead, the old parish split along neatly ethnic lines. Nearly all of the parishioners who came from the former Soviet Union joined our group; almost no-one else did. (It might interest Archbishop Elpidophoros that the converts have—so far—stayed with GOARCH.)

This is the tragedy of what is happening: an already barely-viable multi-ethnic parish has become two. Our parish is, I am confident, the Orthodox one, and the other is under a Patriarch and an Archbishop who are in communion with schismatics. But this is not the fault of the remaining parishioners of Saint Andrew. Few if any of them care at all about Constantinopolitan hegemony, much less Ukrainian autocephaly. For them, the parish of Saint Andrew is the Orthodox church, the church they or their parents built from nothing with sweat and sacrifice, the church where they were baptized or married or where they expect their funerals to be served. It is where they have met the Lord every Sunday in the Eucharist. Perhaps it is as impossible for them to leave GOARCH as for French peasants in the twelfth Century to have repudiated papism; for them, it would be “leaving the Church”.

But with the elevation of Archbishop Elpidophoros, surely that is what things are coming down to.

At the mission parish of Saint Catherine, we have had rapid progress.  We were accepted into the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia almost immediately. The Dean of Texas, Fr. John Whiteford, has been named our acting Rector; although distance has prevented him from yet visiting in person, we have had two liturgies served by Hieromonk Aidan (Keller) from Austin.

We no longer have to worship on a park bench; an Anglican parish allowed us the use of their abandoned Sunday School chapel, complete with amusing stained-glass windows depicting happy 1930s children from around the world. A parishioner (Alexey Ageev, who deserves mention by name) built a traditional wooden altar and donated some hundred icon prints. God willing, through the prayers of St. Catherine the Great Martyr (and of St. Andrew the First-Called!), we will perhaps, despite our sins and weaknesses, be able to ensure a witness for Christ on the Llano Estacado.

But what about the other parish? What about the Greek “diaspora”? How will they fare under Archbishop Elpidophoros?

The year is now 1055.

 

New Schism of a Schism in the Ukraine

When last January the Patriarchate of Constantinople under strong US State Department pressure on its puppet regime founded a new schismatic religious grouping (‘Church’) in Kiev, it isolated itself from the rest of the Orthodox world. Today this schismatic group has itself split into two, much to the embarrassment of its founders in Istanbul and Washington. One of its pseudo-bishops, ‘Patriarch Philaret of Kiev’ has split away from another, the so-called ‘Metropolitan Epiphanios Dumenko’, and promised to consecrate yet more pseudo-bishops throughout the Ukraine. It will soon have more pseudo-bishops than people. This small group will almost certainly split further.

It seems to be a spiritual law that the sectarian spirit which creates schisms always then creates more schisms. Rabbits breed rabbits.

This can be seen to be true in the history of Catholicism, which, having split from the Church in the eleventh century, continually splits into various sects, from medieval ‘orders’ and groups, persecuted by crusades and inquisitions, to Protestant groups, to Jesuitism, to Uniatism, to Old Catholicism, to Traditionalism and various liberal ‘charismatic’ groups, which appear to have nothing to do with Catholicism. There are now said to be up to 40,000 such sects, all born from the original split in Rome in 1054.

This can be seen to be true in the Greek Old Calendarist schisms. Many years ago I was told that there were no fewer than thirteen Greek Old Calendarist ‘Churches’. I have no idea how many there are today. This can be seen to be true in the tiny sects, a few hundred in each, which broke away from the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia in 2007; those infected with the sectarian spirit immediate split into four groups, apparently there are even more today! This can be seen to be true in the tiny modernist Paris Rue Daru group, which has already split into three (some returning to the Russian Church; some going to the Bulgarian; the remnant for the moment staying with Constantinople, though it is widely rumoured that the remnant will split into two by or in September this year.

Now we see the same in the Constantinople-founded ‘Orthodox Church in the Ukraine’. The crisis will deepen until Constantinople renounces its error. Already it is facing serious divisions in the ‘three As’ (in America, Australia and ‘Anglia’ – the Greek word for England). Here the Turkish-led Greek nationalist Church has imposed, without consulting the grassroots, three hardline bishops, who already have scandalous reputations. It would seem a good time for all concerned to leave the sinking ship of the Phanar in Istanbul. Not everyone wants to be playing in the band on the deck or rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.

Sources:

https://spzh.news/ru/news/63015-v-seti-opublikovano-postanovlenije-pomestnogo-sobora-upc-kp

https://spzh.news/ru/news/63005-filaret-na-pomestnom-sobore-upc-kp-my-postavim-mnogo-novyh-arkhijerejevhttps://spzh.news/ru/news/63018-upc-kp-otobrala-u-pcu-vse-imushhestvo-v-kijevehttps://spzh.news/ru/news/63022-filaret-v-ukraine-tepery-tri-cerkvi-upc-pcu-i-upc-kphttps://spzh.news/ru/news/63025-konstantinopolyu-nuzhno-reshity-chto-delaty-s-filaretom–religiovedhttps://spzh.news/ru/news/63027-filaret-my-postavim-stolyko-jepiskopov-skolyko-budet-nuzhno

My Life, the Last Battle and the New Orthodox World (N.O.W.)

‘Tell the people: Although I have died, I am alive.’

St John of Shanghai

Foreword: The War

Forty-five years ago I was told by one who could have known better that, as I had been waiting for years to join the Orthodox Church, I now faced a choice: I could either join the Greek Church of Constantinople or the Church of Russia; it was all the same. But only to him was it all the same, as, in spite of, or rather because of, his great intellect, he was spiritually confused. He lived in an alien compromise, washing his hands before the critical choice. I joined the Russian Church because, since the age of twelve, I had known through revelations to my soul that my destiny was most definitely in the Russian Orthodox Church. However crippled it may have been after 1917, I was destined to share in that agony, indeed, although it seemed foolishness to the Jews and to the Greeks alike, only by sharing in that agony could I hope to find my own salvation. I sensed even then that what he had told me was somehow untrue. At best it could only have been a delusion. It was not all the same – and recent very sad events have shown this to all absolutely clearly. Let me explain:

The Church is not to be found in a people who believe that it is a chosen people. Many Hebrews believed that they were the chosen people, but they stoned the prophets and crucified the Son of God. To this day many of their descendants reject Christ, some considering themselves superior to the rest of humanity. Then the Western European elite came to believe in their ‘exceptionalism’ (that is, their claim that they too were above God) too, all in order to justify their organized barbaric aggression. So a thousand years after Christ, they too fell away from the Church, rejecting the Holy Spirit and seizing control of the Church in the West in order to justify their conquistador power-grab. So, like pirates, they began persecuting us ordinary Christians and conquering the rest of the world by fire and the sword. Then their secularist descendants, in turn the Portuguese, Spanish, French, British, German and finally American elites, did exactly the same, demanding world hegemony (‘globalism’), also rejecting Christ because they consider themselves superior to the rest of humanity. (Hence their anti-Semitism: the other ‘chosen people’, the Jews, were rivals to them, therefore they had to be eliminated). In the Church there has now come the turn of certain Greeks, telling us that only they are Christians, that God speaks only Greek, and, as one very well-known Cypriot archimandrite told me, even that their pagan ancestors had prepared the way for Christ! Many Russians fell victim to the same delusion, in the same way believing in themselves instead of believing in God, taking communion only once a year. So they lost everything and overthrew the God-appointed Christian Emperor in 1917. Only through the blood of the New Martyrs and the tears and sweat of the New Confessors did repentance eventually begin to come to them.

All these ‘chosen peoples’ failed to understand that salvation comes only from the Heavenly Jerusalem of the Church of Christ through the Mercy of God and the Holy Spirit – not from some earthly ‘Jewish Rome’ of some mythical ‘chosen people’. For this reason, once I had chosen the Russian Church, I was to spend the rest of my life at war, in tireless battles, in unceasing strife, in the trenches, on the Western Front, fighting for real Christianity, for the real Russian Orthodox Church, together, of course, with many others. We all fought against the narrow-minded, nationalist delusions and impurities of those who had lost the big picture, who could not see the wood for the trees. They told us that only Russians could be Orthodox, that only their own exclusive little fragments of the great Imperial Orthodoxy, which had not undergone the blood, tears and sweat of others, could be right, that God’s Church needed ‘saving’ or ‘reforming’ (naturally, by themselves!). Some of them even persecuted and took to court as a common criminal the greatest saint among them all, St John of Shanghai. Little wonder that the Lord sent me to a military Church. I never sought any of this; it was all imposed on me. My soul would have died had I not taken part in this spiritual warfare. My life has been unceasing warfare in four battles, all fought beneath the Protecting Veil, which my patron-saint saw and which is the only reason why I am still alive.

Three Battles

My first battle was to take part in the struggle to help free that small part of the Russian Church Diaspora in England, which was dependent on Moscow, from spiritual impurity. After nine years, by 1983, I realized that I would fail in this. It was a task quite beyond me, with my very feeble abilities and from my modest, provincial, rural background; the enemies were invested with the strength of a personality cult, with all the authority of men and their city establishments, they had no time for a ploughman’s grandson. I was knocking my head against brick walls. So I left into exile, seeing my limitations. I understood that it would take far-reaching political changes inside Russia and indeed the departures or deaths of some outside Russia before this battle could be won (I did not know then that this would mean twenty-four years). Victory was inevitable, but only God Who created time, could in time bring the victory. My battle had been premature. By myself I could do nothing. It was good for me to know this.

My second battle was to take part in the struggle to help free that small part of the Russian Church Diaspora, which was dependent on Constantinople (Rue Daru), from spiritual impurity. I fought in Paris and thought that this battle was winnable. It was – almost. However, after six years in 1988 there came a turning-point when I saw that I would fail in this battle too. The intrigues of freemasons in high places meant that I could not help win this battle – all my friends were in low places. I knew then that this Paris group would eventually (I did not know then that this would mean thirty years) disappear into spiritual irrelevance. Those who had betrayed the Tsar and made him and his Family into martyrs had also betrayed the Church. So I left, having understood that here too it would take far-reaching political changes inside Russia and indeed the departures or deaths of some outside Russia before the battle to bring even a part of this group home to the Russian Church could be won. Victory was inevitable, but only God Who created time, could with time bring the victory. My battle had been premature. By myself I could do nothing. It was good for me to know this.

My third battle from the first day of 1989 onwards was to take part in the struggle to help free that part of the Russian Church Diaspora, which was dependent on New York (ROCOR), from spiritual impurity. Here there was a much greater chance of success, for the contaminating Protestant disease of ‘super-correctness’ (as another disciple of St John of Shanghai called it), with its ignorance, phariseeism, extremism, sectarianism, old calendarism, psychological (not theological) deviations of convertitis and Cold War money, had many opponents in the USA itself and even more in Western Europe where I was fighting on the Front. And above all, my Diocesan Archbishop supported me and I supported him. The ever-memorable Archbishop Antony of Geneva, a spiritual son of and the European successor to St John of Shanghai, was in effect the first real Orthodox bishop I had met. We had an identical understanding of the Church. By myself I could do nothing, but now I was far from being alone; I was simply one of very many, a little cog in a large machine. I did not know then that this struggle would take eighteen years, for only in 2007 did the Church win the day. I was taking part in our first victory, together with millions of others, in the Church of the New Martyrs and Confessors, to which I had always belonged in spirit. Only geography had ever divided us.

After the Three Battles

Once this battle, in which I had played only a tiny role, eventually from my provincial home-town, had been won by the many, especially by the bishops who had been inspired by the grace of God, I knew that the two other houses of cards where I had earlier lost the day would fall in their turn. I just did not know that it would take another twelve years. Between 2007 and today, in 2019, I have seen both these first lost battles won. History won them. What I knew in the past, that they would be won only in God’s own time, has come to pass. What we have fought long and hard for has been obtained. Thus, we now at last have for our Diocese of the British Isles and Ireland a bishop, pleaded for during over four decades. He is Orthodox, understanding the local language and people, not phyletist, venerating the local saints and not denying them, missionary-minded like us, encouraging us and not destroying us, not under the control of laypeople, in good health, and who will be resident here in just a few weeks from now.

Secondly, the Russian Orthodox Exarchate of Western Europe, awaited for over three decades, was at last established in Paris only a few weeks ago. This means that our House will be built on rock, not on sand, and that the ‘Euro-Orthodox’ fantasy of the Paris Brotherhood is now dead. The future Local Church of Western Europe will be authentically Orthodox. For what we have sought for and fought for since 1988 now is. There is now a real Orthodox Exarchate for Western Europe, with many regional dioceses and young bishops, hundreds of parishes and several monasteries, venerating the local saints and not denying them, the foundation of the new Local Church. Led by Metropolitan John in Paris, who bears the name of our missionary father in Christ, St John of (Shanghai and) Western Europe and so continues in the tradition of Archbishop Antony of Geneva, it will of course need much more time to develop. It consists of the generally newer Russian Orthodox parishes of Western Europe, in many dioceses and with many bishops. However, alongside it and complementing it, also stand the two (Western European and German) dioceses of ROCOR, with their five bishops, two of them younger and active. This consists of the generally older, more integrated, Russian Orthodox parishes of Western Europe, a few of them until recently under Constantinople, but now at last come home. The two parts need each other and hopefully their bishops will meet regularly in order to help each other in their own joint Synod.

However, in this Year of the Lord, 2019, there is the last mystical battle (last for me) in the series of mystical battles in this Hundred Years’ War, which for a century has so deformed Church structures in the Diaspora. This battle is also against spiritual impurity, against masonic ecumenist and modernist intrigues. However, this last battle is the battle inside the Russian Lands, inside historic Rus’; it is therefore not a local battle for English, French and American Rus’ in London, Paris and New York, for part of the small Russian Diaspora, it is a general battle which concerns the whole Church. This is taking place today in the Ukraine, but it affects all. For the Church is the mystical centre of the world and it is the Ukraine which is now the mystical centre of the Church. And this is why we have come here now, sent to fight from the Western Front to the Eastern Front. All will stand or fall by their attitude to what is happening in the Ukraine today, to this battle between Christ and Satan. Whose side are you on?

The Fourth Battle

The internal administrative centre of the false Orthodoxy against which I fought in all our four battles, was formed in Istanbul a century ago. It came into being only because of the long-planned overthrow of the restraining protection of Imperial Tsardom. However, the Western disease which had overthrown the Christian Emperor and so the Christian Empire and then brought that centre into being had already infected Russia and elsewhere before that. For the disease contaminated all nationalities, including many in the Russian Lands and from there in the Diaspora. The disease came to be called renovationism and the renovationists were keenly supported from Istanbul. Today it has become crystal clear that the whole of the supposed Orthodox world has now to side either with real Orthodoxy or else against real Orthodoxy. The time of reckoning has come; the time of compromise is over. No-one can stand by any longer with the indifference and conceit of Pilate. Even though this battle is of exactly the same nature as the series of three battles which we fought in the Diaspora before this one, now it is not the Diaspora, but the Ukraine which is the sword that divides. The battlefield has changed to the Ukraine, but the battle is the same one; it is the battle for spiritual purity, for canonicity, for real Orthodoxy.

Gradually, over the last two months, one Local Church after another has decided to side with spiritual purity, canonicity and real Orthodoxy and so support Metr Onufry and the Church of God of the Ukraine. The rest of the Russian Church with ROCOR was the first to support him wholeheartedly. The Local Churches of Serbia, Bulgaria, Antioch, Poland, the Czech Lands and Slovakia, Cyprus, and unofficial but spiritually free (= non-political) voices in the Churches of Greece, Jerusalem, Alexandria and Georgia, followed. So far, thirteen out of eighteen Athonite monasteries have joined us. And a few days ago the episcopate of the basically Carpatho-Russian OCA (Orthodox Church in America), which had dithered for several weeks and where some had for years even been threatening to desert the Church for Istanbul, decided the same. This is their spiritual victory and our very great comfort after decades of spiritual slumber, of wandering far from the Church with American phyletist delusions. It means that the little OCA is maturing, at last deciding to accept its destiny, abandoning its eccentric spiritual isolation and so finding its positive identity by returning to its roots under St Tikhon. Inspired by the breath of new life, it can at last begin to play a significant and fulfilling role as one of the component parts of the future, united, much larger, multinational Russian Orthodox Churches of the three continents of the New World, of the Americas and Oceania.

This leaves the episcopates of only two Local Churches, the large Romanian and the tiny Albanian, not politically free and sitting on the fence, paralysed like Pontius Pilate ‘for fear of the Jews’. They are silent, neither supporting nor rejecting, awaiting instructions from above on whether to support the petty nationalism of the phyletist schism of Constantinople or not. The false church in the Ukraine, founded by the US-backed separatists in Kiev, is officially under a certain Sergei Dumenko. He is actually a Vatican- and US-approved puppet-layman, therefore both pro-Uniat and pro-LGBT, and not a metropolitan, His false church has been seen to be without grace, without sacraments, without the Holy Spirit. His church is that of ‘the Ukrainian god’, as one Ukrainian minister has put it. His enthronement in Kiev six days ago was ignored by all the Local Churches. His so-called ‘Church’ is only a regime-manipulated charade of empty rituals, just another small ultra-nationalist organization – an absurd anachronism in this global world. It is supported by teams of police-backed Nazi bandits who intimidate and beat up Christians, because Nazis have no concept of the meaning of the word ‘Christian’. And these anti-Christian men of violence are directly supported by an alien and corrupt political regime in Kiev, supported by alien and corrupt regimes elsewhere, and, to their eternal shame, by Greek ‘bishops’ in Istanbul.

Afterword: The Victory

The decadent, self-appointed, Paris-School ‘theologians’ from the past slip away one by one. With them their secularizing ideologies from the past, Ecumenism (anti-Orthodoxy; against the Father), Modernism (anti-Sovereignty; against the Son) and Liberalism (anti-People; against the Holy Spirit), slip away into spiritual irrelevance. Their books of intellectual fantasy-philosophy are ready for the dust of forgotten library shelves. Those who frustrated, wasted, impeded and persecuted us for so many decades are leaving the stage and we are beginning to see the future clearly now. For the New Orthodox World (N.O.W.) is taking shape. The New Orthodox World (NOW) is led not by anachronisms, relics from the past in cities of empires which have not existed for centuries, but by vibrant and missionary multinational Local Churches, Autonomous Churches and Exarchates worldwide. These are not narrow and corrupted nationalist museums for State rituals, flag-waving and cultural nostalgia or the playthings of disincarnate but very aggressive, politicized and politically correct, liberal intellectuals, but living organisms, cleansed to prepare us all to meet the King before He returns in all His glory. And in the New Orthodox World, NOW, there is the Heavenly Jerusalem of the Church of Christ, awaiting Him and resisting the Enemy of Mankind, who comes before Christ in order to create disunity, disorder and distress among us.

The death-threat which I received three years ago, sent me because the pen is indeed mightier than the sword, did not stop me or deter me for a single second. In a dream, come to me after receiving that death-threat, I opened my front door and saw an agent on my doorstep. He at once fired his revolver at me, but the bullet rebounded off my priest’s cross, killing him instead of me. He fell to the ground and his corpse was dragged away to a waiting car by his colleague, who in fear and astonishment uttered powerless curses. I left and hid in a secret and remote place where I could not be found. I was rescued by the prayers of one who long, long ago had also taken refuge in such a place and I was taken to a faraway land. I have never paid any attention to dreams, especially such dramatic ones, but I remembered this one. However, I only really understood its meaning and symbolism on my first day here. It means that, like all of us, I will die when God decides, not when men decide, for though man proposes, God disposes. It means that the bullet rebounds, for if men want to kill the truth, they kill only themselves (exactly as they have done for the last one hundred and five years, with their atheist wars, one after another). And those who try to kill the Church in the Ukraine are committing spiritual suicide; indeed, their death-bearing bullet has already lethally rebounded onto themselves.

Victory has been ours in the Diaspora, because we have been willing to die for the Church of God and our enemies have not – because they are inherently attached to this world and so fear death which is of this world. Victory is ours in the Ukraine, because we are willing to die for the Church of God and our enemies are not – because they are inherently attached to this world and so fear death which is of this world. This is why we shall win this last battle now – because we do not fear death, for we believe and we know that Christ is the Life-Giving God, Who rose from the dead and freed the captives in hell. They, however, have only heard of the Risen Christ as a theory and symbolic myth for their heads. They believe it not in their hearts. Therefore their heads, like their lives, are full of the philosophies and works of death. But we do believe and we know and we tremble in awe before the Living God, Who is the Great God, Who works wonders and Who is with us, so that none is against us. Let the dead bury the dead. As for us, we shall not die, but live, and we shall declare the works of the Lord. The Lord is our Enlightenment and our Saviour, whom then shall we fear?

Archpriest Andrew Phillips

Kiev, 1-8 February 2019

 

 

 

 

Why is it Happening? On the West, Russia, the Phanar and the Ukraine

Since the collapse of the Soviet Empire, the Western Empire, centred in Washington, has been possessed by its ‘New World Order’ hubris. There are actually people there who are so deluded that they believe that history has already ended, with the triumph of ‘the West against the Rest’! Such atheist and Non-Christian ‘neocons’ have clearly never read or understood the Bible. In reality, history will end very differently – with the Apocalypse, caused by Western technology with its idolatrous, Babel-like conviction that it is greater than God. Thus, since 1990, the Western Empire has been trying to subjugate not just parts of the world through invasion and colonization, a process that began 900 years before with the Papist invasion of England in 1066, but the whole world, to its total control.

This Trotskyite control obsession began by trying to take over the Muslim world, first in Iraq and Afghanistan and then in the CIA-mounted ‘Arab Spring’, which has led to widespread torture, humanitarian disasters and millions of deaths and refugees. These disasters spread from Iraq to Egypt, from Libya to Syria, from Tunisia to the Yemen, blood-soaked by British bombs, and led to the immigration crisis in Western Europe. The latter, to the consternation of the extraordinarily stupid globalists (e.g. locally, Cameron and the British Establishment), cut off from the real world of ‘the plebs’ in their elitist bubble, has backfired. Quite predictably, but unpredictably for their stupidity, it led to Brexit and other similar anti-globalist liberation movements all over the EU, and in the USA led to Trump.

The globalists’ attempted takeover of the Islamic world has thus failed in bankruptcy, both financial and moral. However, it has also resulted in reinforcing Iran, the centre of Shia Islamic resistance to the Western Empire and its military and economic terrorism, and alienating ordinary Europeans and Americans. Moreover, since the 1980s now heavily polluted China has undercut the Capitalist West to become the world’s workshop and the world’s Black Country, as once England’s heavily polluted Black Country was in the 19th century the world’s workshop. So it has become powerful. And, since 2000, the Russian Federation has slowly been restoring itself as the pre-1917 centre of Christian Civilization and so becoming powerful once more, growing in spiritual and so moral authority.

Thus, through its own greed, incompetence and control freakery, the now bankrupt Western world today faces three centres of resistance to itself. Today, it is fighting against reality and rivals on three fronts: against the uncorrupted Islamic world, the Chinese world and the Christian (Orthodox) world. Having lost its wars against the Islamic world, where it has reached stalemate and uncontrollable chaos, and too weak to take on China directly, despite its attempts to create dissidence among China’s Muslim Uyghur minority and in Tibet, to mount provocations by aggressively sailing its warships off the coast of China and to use the soft power of Hollywood and consumerism, it has decided to take on the revived Christianity of the Russian Federation as the softest of the three targets.

Thus, two Civilizations, the Christian (Orthodox, centred in Russia), and the Anti-Christian (Atheist, centred in the West) face each other. As usual, the Anti-Christian Empire, like the pagan Roman Empire of old which it imitates from its Capitol, White House and Senate, has adopted the policy of divide and rule and used the relentless lies of its propaganda machine of fake news. This has ranged from using the particularly stupid and amateur underpaid British Secret Services, with their Litvinenko and Skripals (sic!), trying to invade Russia from Georgia and murdering 2,000, and mounting a $5 billion coup d’etat in the Ukraine, barefacedly stating that the Russian Crimea, which by an internationally observed referendum massively and rejoicingly voted to return to Russia, has been annexed (sic!).

It has also used the new regime in Kiev to shoot down a civilian airliner and accused Russia of doing the dirty deed (sic!), stealing the gold reserves of the Ukraine and sending it arms, spies and mercenaries instead (sic!), accusing Russia of threatening to invade the Baltics, Poland and even Sweden and Norway (sic!). Generally, it has relied on the State-controlled Western media and the incredible ignorance of brainwashed Western peoples about reality to tell lies like Goebbels. ‘If you tell the lie often enough, they will believe it’. Of course this anti-Christian world has found enough ‘useful idiots’, whether stupid, ignorant, deluded, naive or simply evil, to believe their shameless lies. For the West the Christian world has to be destroyed from inside. Over the last century the West has done this in two ways.

Firstly, it overthrew the legitimate government in Russia through its local traitors (Milyukov, Rodzianko, Alekseev, several Romanovs et al in 1917, Gorbachov and Yeltsin in the 1980s and 1990s, and today any naïve Westernized dreamer and intellectual or any corrupt oligarch (= thief) (like Navalny and the host of others it keeps in luxury in London, New York and Tel Aviv). Secondly, it dispatched there genocidal maniacs it had long harboured in its bosom in order to dismantle the Christian Empire. However, a third technique has been to undermine the much weaker other Christian countries outside the Christian Empire, attacking the Empire through the soft underbelly by diluting their Orthodoxy, imposing their anti-Orthodox calendar and recruiting their traitors to its ecumenist syncretism.

The centre of the traitors, external to the former Empire, has always been in Istanbul. The centres of the traitors, internal to the former Empire, has always been on its various peripheries, in the Paris emigration and in Crestwood in New York, in the Polish western Ukraine, in the Baltic States and also in the much secularized cities of Saint Petersburg and Moscow, where one can find intellectual traitors like Hovorun, Drabinko, Kochetkov, Kurayev and Mitrofanov, to name but a few. Through its spies, the West has always sought out and found the weaknesses of such individuals and ruthlessly exploited them, especially through flattery and money. (‘Every man has his price’). We can this see today in the apostasy of Phanariot Istanbul and in the other small Local Churches, where today silence reigns in shameful cowardice.

Incredibly to anyone with a grasp of reality, the Phanariots actually believe in their Greek megalomania that they are at the centre (sic!) of the Christian world and should rule over it by Divine right. Flattering its delusions of grandeur and thirst for money, all the while mocking its fantasy behind its back, the Western evil Empire uses the Phanariots for its evil ends. Thus, today the Phanariots have staked everything in a very high risk game in the Ukraine, where their long history will end in ignominy and bloodshed. All Christians (Orthodox) must now choose. A century of compromise through weakness is over. We have to decide whose side we are on. With the faithful or with the traitors? With the Saints of the Russian Orthodox Church or against them? 2019 promises to be a year filled with events.

 

On the Lesson We Must Draw from the Heresy and Fall of Constantinople

For exactly 100 years the divisive heresy of phyletism (racist nationalism), introduced into the Orthodox Diaspora in 1918 by the Greek nationalist Patriarchate of Constantinople, has been a scourge of the Church. Now that same Patriarchate has spread its heresy into the Ukraine. Everywhere it is present and active, whether in the USA, France, Canada, Estonia, England and now in the Ukraine, it has spread this heresy of nationalism, whereby ‘our local customs and culture’ are put above the Body of Christ, the Universal Orthodox Church.

Sadly, the Local Churches of Antioch, Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria and Georgia have followed this bad example, dividing the Diaspora according to nationality. All this destroyed the old unity of the Orthodox Diaspora which had been united under the Russian Orthodox Church until 1918. However, by its actions in the Ukraine the Patriarchate of Constantinople has now altogether fallen away from the Orthodox Church. All this is a self-evident truth and indeed it is now history. 1054 was followed by 2018. Old Rome was followed by New Rome.

The flag-waving heresy of phyletism, that is, putting your race above Christ, your national flag above the Church of God, is an ancient one. This sin of nationalism is that of the Jews, who preferred Caesar to Christ and called down the blood of Christ on themselves and their children. This sin of nationalism is that of the pagan Romans and the Germanic barbarians who in the 11th century invented Roman Catholicism. This sin of nationalism is that of the Germanic peoples in the 16th century, who put their national States above Christ and invented ‘National Churches’, obviously in England.

Today it is the sin of the ‘racially superior’ Greek Patriarch Bartholomew and the half-Jewish President Poroshenko-Walzman, both appointees of the US State Department. For together they have invented a State Church for Ukrainian nationalists, who worship the Ukraine first and perhaps Christ later. The only other result of the Greek-organized farce in Kiev on Saturday 15 December has been the suspension of two renegade bishops of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, Metropolitans Symeon and Alexander, who have long been thorns in the side of the Church.

The other 83 bishops of the Ukrainian Church have remained faithful, despite pressure from the dreaded CIA-trained Kiev regime Secret Police, the SBU. And so two more bishops have been nominated, bringing the total to 85 again. This faithfulness is a lesson for all Orthodox, not least for any in Moscow who put Russia above Christ. If you compromise the Faith with nationalism and its modernistic consequences, like the once venerable Patriarchate of Rome and now that of Constantinople, this is the heresy and fate that await you.

Today, the whole world, apart from parts of Eastern Europe, the Balkans, the Middle East and Africa, which are the canonical territories of other Local Churches, is waiting for the Russian Orthodox Church to spread the Word of God. Mission on most of five continents, in most of Europe, most of Asia, in Oceania and in North and South America, lies before us. And this mission can only be carried out by a Church, which is uncompromised and untainted by State interference, by racist nationalism, by secularist ecumenism and modernism. Those who have ears, let them hear.

 

The Long-Awaited European and Orthodox Spring?

Anti-globalist (and therefore anti-EU) riots are spreading in France. It may be that the young and inexperienced Rothschild banker Macron will have to abandon power, humiliated after the series of catastrophic mistakes he has made in his 18 months as President. His arrogance and lust for absolute power, giving himself a godlike status in the old, centralizing French tradition, have been extraordinary. He has never realized that nobody in France actually voted for him, they simply voted against the others. Now he is hated. Now there is talk of the French revolt spreading to Belgium, Holland and Germany, of a ‘European Spring’, as the European peasantry (‘plebs’ in the language of the British Establishment) revolt against the wealthy EU elite. Of course, this may all be exaggerated and the whole affair in France may yet fizzle out in a few days time. Or perhaps not. A European Spring is long overdue.

After all, the French revolt has been long expected. It was already preceded by the UK revolt two years ago, which led to Brexit. (One of the demands of the ‘peasants’ in France is Frexit). Instead of negotiating before the British EU referendum or after it, the EU authorities in Brussels simply denied that there was a problem and decided to punish the UK for leaving their clique. This denial is what they have been doing for decades and still continue to do, despite the revolt of the people of Europe (which they so contemptuously call ‘populism’): ‘The people are too stupid to know what is good for them’. In the 1960s and 1970s Europeans more or less went along with ‘The Common Market’, but the 1992 invention of the EU by the elite and then the forced introduction of the euro, all against popular sentiment, were all too much. It is clear that the EU will not survive. The question has never been if it will collapse, only when.

The anti-EU revolt has been hastened by the disastrous New World Order US invasion of Iraq, the US-backed Franco-British destruction of Libya and then the Western-sponsored terrorist war against Syria. This has upset the delicate balance in the Middle East and North Africa, exactly as experts predicted before the 2003 invasion, unleashing millions of wretched immigrants and also waves of Islamist terrorism (many of these fanatics were trained in CIA camps in Afghanistan, like Bin Laden himself). This new immigration came on top of the EU destruction of Eastern Europe and the millions of immigrants from those countries forced to flee their ancestral homes in order not to starve and die of preventable illnesses because they could not afford medical treatment (as had happened in the ex-Soviet Union in the 1990s, after the collapse of Soviet protection against the onslaught of globalist capitalism).

As if it has not caused enough problems already, Western meddling continues. The ‘successful’ coup d’etat that the EU mounted in the Ukraine nearly five years ago against its democratically-elected government has bought its bitter fruit there too. The latest attempt by the Kiev clique to set up its own State Church (on the Protestant model), bribing the discredited (and anti-Brexit, because elitist-supporting) Patriarchate of Constantinople, would be laughable if it were not so tragic. In a week’s time the Kiev junta will hold a Phanariot-organized ‘Council of Unity’. Some of those who will not be attending (90% of the Orthodox population, their 90 bishops and 10,000 priests) have already been arrested and had their homes searched by the dreaded CIA-trained Ukrainian Secret Police. In its blustering folly the ‘racially superior’ Greek Patriarchate of Constantinople has threatened to defrock them all!!

This is the action of a wounded animal that has been cornered and knows that it is about to die. We can expect this to happen more and more often as the old generation, with its US-hegemony and EU, NATO, IMF, World Bank, Poroshenko regime and Patriarchate of Constantinople vassals, die out. However, we look to the future and freedom. We look to an Orthodox Council that will reassert the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and so condemn and anathematize the opposing movements: Ecumenism (which, ironically, destroys the Oneness of the Church); Erastianist obedience to the State, whether Soviet or Western (which is against the Holiness of the Church); Phyletism, like the Roman Catholic or Phanariot (against the unity in diversity Catholicity of the Church); modernism (against the Apostolic Tradition of the Church). The past is dead or dying: let us go forward together!

 

The Great Opportunity

Put not your trust in princes, nor in the sons of men.

With the dissolution of the Rue Daru Exarchate in Paris behind the back of its ruling archbishop, the daydreams of autonomy of the ecumenist Fraternite Orthodoxe have been dashed. Now the way is at last free for the Russian Orthodox Church to establish its Local Metropolia of Western Europe. Called for by ourselves in 1988 and, much more importantly, promised by Patriarch Alexey II in 2003, it is time to move forward. With the Patriarchate of Constantinople having officially removed itself from the equation through the phyletism of ‘the superior Greek race’ which has swallowed the Paris Jurisdiction, all eyes are now looking to the Russian Orthodox Church.

The two parts of the Russian Orthodox Church in Western Europe, one attached to Moscow, the other to New York, joined by any Churchly remnants of the Rue Daru group, together can build the long-awaited multinational Church of Western Europe, which ceased to exist in 1054. Surely 964 years of patience is enough! Unlike the Phanar and others, the Russian Orthodox Church is free from the meddling US State Department. Just as in the Ukraine, it is for our free Church to take responsibility for the future of the flock, putting the Truth of God over the enfeebling diplomacy and petty nationalism of men: it has long been apparent that nobody except the Russian Church will.

The End of an Era

The Rue Daru Exarchate, composed of a few largely Moldovan parishes in Paris and a few dozen tiny communities of converts by and large without their own properties scattered mainly through France, Benelux and England, has today been dissolved by the Phanar. Over ninety years of history since Rue Daru broke away from the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia have thus cruelly ended.

Founded largely by aristocratic and intellectual traitors to the Tsar from Saint Petersburg, the surprise is that this anti-Russian and anti-monastic group has survived so long. Nearly four generations on, with its last Russian bishop dying in 1981 and without monasteries, it was clear that it would come to depend on widowers and celibates from Roman Catholicism, such as its present Archbishop from Bordeaux. Rue Daru’s failure to return to the Russian Church, when freedom gradually came in the two decades after the collapse of atheist rule in the former Russian Empire in 1991 was lamentable.

However, as long ago as 1966, the then rector of the St Sergius Institute, Fr Alexey Knyazev, went to the Phanar and asked if the Patriarch was really the ‘Oecumenical’ Patriarch or ‘just a petty Balkan bishop’. Today he has received his answer. Fr Alexey and other real Orthodox, worthies like Bishop Methodius (Kulmann) and Fr Igor Vernik, had already understood in the 1960s and 1970s that the Rue Daru group could only survive spiritually if it returned to the Russian Mother Church, becoming the basis of a new Local Metropolia in Western Europe.

I understood it thirty years ago in 1988, when Rue Daru’s then ex-Catholic German Archbishop George (Wagner) categorically and suicidally rejected any plan to establish the foundation for a new Local Church of Western Europe faithful to the Russian Orthodox Tradition, and even invited the Papal Cardinal of Paris to celebrations of a millennium of Russian Orthodoxy at Rue Daru instead of Russian bishops! This was of course the last straw. As late as 2003, even the naive Archbishop Sergey (Konovalov) understood this, but it was all tragically too late.

Thus, the end had long been inevitable. For Rue Daru and its tiny group that inevitably broke away from the Russian Church in England in 2006 in the notorious Sourozh Schism, going against history and faithfulness, there is now only one choice: Die out under ‘the superior Greek race’ or else return to the Russian Tradition (which the latter has never had, despite its illusions to the contrary) and also return to the Orthodox calendar by returning to obedience to the Russian Orthodox Church. As we said 12 years ago, you cannot be of the Russian Orthodox Tradition, or even know it, even less understand it, when you refuse to be part of the Russian Orthodox Church. This is not theology, this is common sense! To think otherwise is spiritual delusion – prelest.

In Paris all now depends on whom properties belong to. Elsewhere, there is freedom to return to communion with the canonical Orthodox Church from the Phanariot schismatics, their ecumenism and phyletism and liturgical deviations.

The end of Rue Daru is a warning to all its imitators, not only in the USA, but also to those liberals in Moscow who fell to the Paris School of Philosophy (there never was any Theology here). You follow them and this is how you too will die out.

Told you so.

 

The Opportunity of the Century: A Future Free of the Disease of Phanariotism?

Introduction: 1918

11 November 2018, the centenary of the end of the First World War, has passed. And still there has been no repentance for and no renunciation of the imperialism which caused that needless European bloodbath with its greed for land, resources and power, for Lebensraum, as the Germans call it. Instead, the centenary turned out to be a sentimental, if regretful, ‘celebration’ by hypocritical politicians of the slaughter of the youth of Europe and of its colonies, dragged into their anti-national imperialism. Repentance would have meant that there would at last have been justice in Europe for 100 years of Western aggression, exploitation and materialism (whether Capitalist or Communist). For this aggression continues in the current Western-armed and Western-financed bloodbaths in Syria, the Yemen, the Congo and the Ukraine: the same disease as 100 years ago continues.

1918 also marks the beginning of the end of the Patriarchate of Constantinople after it was contaminated by exactly the same imperialism and its lust for power, summed up by the word ‘Phanariotism’. This has culminated in the notorious meeting in Crete in 2016 and now in its latest US-sponsored adventure in the Ukraine. Phanariotism is essentially the loss of faith which reduces the Church of God to a mere religious institution with its corporate lust for power and money, swimming with the tide of the world. It is this that has characterized the recent life of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, ever since the restraining power of Tsar Nicholas II was removed 100 years ago (2 Thess 2, 7). However, in fairness, all the other Local Churches have been infected by the same disease of Phanariotism, not least the Patriarchate of Moscow. What are the three symptoms of this disease?

  1. Modernism

Called variously Sergianism, renovationism, erastianism or caesaropapism, modernism is simply the internal movement to conform the Church to the (secularist, Western) world, giving up the struggle to conform that world to the Church. Modernism stems from the loss of faith, which has seen the appearance of atheist bishops (the former Metropolitan of Kiev, Denisenko) and masonic patriarchs (the former Patriarchs of Constantinople Meletios and Athenagoras). It means introducing the heterodox calendar, shortening the services and the fasts, changing the dress of the clergy, putting seating and organs into churches etc.

It also means imposing such secularism by threat, as the Phanariots tried to do at their US-style meeting in Crete, (‘The Orthodox Second Vatican Council’) two years ago. Today, in the Ukraine, it means enforcing the heterodox calendar, making 25 December a State holiday, as Poroshenko’s US, Canadian and EU patrons demanded and as has been done. It means ‘divide and rule’, following the policy of the Nazis in the Ukraine 75 years ago, which was also the policy of the pagan Romans and is the policy of today’s neo-pagan Romans in Washington, as it sends its NATO legions to bully and enslave the still free world.

  1. Phyletism

Phyletism is simply the Greek word for racism. It means putting one’s nation above Christ. Greek racism, centred in Constantinople, is the standard here, but other Local Churches have also adopted this poisonous heresy. Phyletism has no interest in baptising all nations into the Church, as Christ in St Matthew’s Gospel commands us (Matt 28, 19), for it considers that only one’s own race is worthy of salvation – indeed that perhaps it has, Jewish-style and therefore Protestant-style, already been saved.

Thus, phyletism is inherently anti-missionary, for why bother with missionary work if only one’s own race is worthy of salvation? And phyletism is also inherently ecumenistic, for it asserts that since one’s own Greek race has been saved by the Greek religion, then we may talk to other religions. Since the others are not Greeks, we may as well talk to them – after all they may give us a lot of money. Thus, the opposite of phyletism is missionary work, which is held back precisely by phyletism and ecumenism, as we saw in Crete.

  1. Ecumenism

Ecumenism is therefore the result of phyletism and the external extension of this swimming with the tide modernism, reducing the Church to a mere religion, like all the other manmade religions. We saw how the Phanariot gerontocrats tried to impose this heresy of ecumenism in Crete, deliberately confusing the Church with so-called ‘churches’. However, in this field of ecumenism, there have been and are traitors in all the Local Churches, who are also intent on destroying the chance of the faithful to obtain salvation.

Conclusion: 2018

Certain Russian Patriarchal bureaucrats have also long been involved in modernism, phyletism and ecumenism, making them too into Phanariots. They can be recognized because they promote the same policies of the Phanariots, the policies of Crete. If the Patriarchate of Moscow wants to separate itself from this pernicious disease, which we see is not only a Greek one, then it can purge itself, perhaps in the following three ways:

– Abandon any creeping modernism, make sure that all its parishes follow the Orthodox calendar and keep the Tradition.

– Rename itself ‘The Patriarchate of New Jerusalem and all Rus’, divorcing itself from any Soviet-style imperialistic tendencies and take up the multinational call and challenge of missionary work all around the world.

– Leave the WCC and all other such alien ‘dialogues’, such as those with the Vatican machine.

Only by separating itself from the disease of Phanariotism will the Russian Orthodox Church regain the trust of the whole practising Orthodox world, its own and all those in the other Twelve Local Churches. Only then will it sit down at table at a new Mysterious Supper, ready to greet the Returning Christ. Here then is the Opportunity of the Century.

 

PATRIARCH BARTHOLOMEW USES THE LANGUAGE OF ETHNOPHYLETISM

Posted by Fr Peter Heers:
“THE SLAVS REFUSE TO ACCEPT THE PRECEDENCE OF THE ECUMENICAL PATRIARCHATE AND ‘OUR RACE’.”
What is very interesting and apparent in this article is that the Patriarch is clearly using the language of ethnophyletism to support his case. He speaks against “the Slavs” and talks about the rights of the Patriarchate and therefore of the Greek race:
<< δεν ανέχονται οι αδελφοί μας οι Σλάβοι, το προβάδισμα που έχει το Οικουμενικό Πατριαρχείο και κατά συνέπεια το γένος μας, μέσα στη παγκόσμια Ορθοδοξία >>
Trans.: Our brothers the Slavs do not tolerate the precedence which the Ecumenical Patriarchate possesses, and consequently our race, within Worldwide Orthodoxy.”
See the video for the full speech:
Later on, in the video, the Patriarch seems to confirm the impression that he is identifying Romiosini with Hellenism, thus denying that it is multi-ethnic with only Orthodoxy being a non-negotiable, when he uses the term φυλή as synonymous with γένος (see: the 4:45 marker and thereafter).
Someone needs to write an article about the truth of Romiosini: that it was mult-ethnic, that there were Patriarchs and emperors who were not from the Tribe of the “Greeks”. . .
In this context, it is interesting to note that as late as 1802 and thereabouts writers like St. Nikodemos the Hagiorite and St. Arsenios of Paros are still using the term “Greek” to mean . . .idol worshipper/pagan. Certainly they did not identify “Hellenism” with Romiosini.
Greek Text:
Πατριάρχης Βαρθολομαίος: Μαύρη καλοπληρωμένη προπαγάνδα των Ρώσων για το Ουκρανικό
Σκληρή απάντηση στο Πατριαρχείο Ρωσίας έδωσε ο Οικουμενικός Πατριάρχης Βαρθολομαίος, σε συνεστίαση στη Κωνσταντινούπολη για την συμπλήρωση 27 ετών από την άνοδο του στον Οικουμενικό θρόνο.
Ο Πατριάρχης Βαρθολομαίος είπε μεταξύ άλλων: «Το οικουμενικό Πατριαρχείο για να επιλύσει το ουκρανικό εκκλησιαστικό θέμα, προβάλλει τα προνόμια και τα δικαιώματα που έχει από τους κανόνες των Οικουμενικών Συνόδων. Αυτοί οι κανόνες των Οικουμενικών συνόδων και μάλιστα της 4ης Οικουμενικής Συνόδου της Χαλκηδόνος, που δίνει τα συγκεκριμένα προνόμια στο Οικουμενικό Πατριαρχείο, είναι δεσμευτικοί για όλη την Ορθοδοξία. Είτε αρέσει στους φίλους μας τους Ρώσους είτε δεν αρέσει, αργά ή γρήγορα θα ακολουθήσουν την λύση που θα δώσει το Οικουμενικό Πατριαρχείο, διότι δεν έχουν άλλη επιλογή».
Ο Πατριάρχης Βαρθολομαίος, αναφέρθηκε σε άρθρο του συγγραφέα Αλεξάνδρου Μασσαβέτα, στο διαδικτυακό περιοδικό inside story, ο οποίος είχε σημειώσει πως το εκκλησιαστικό Brexit της Μόσχας θα αποβεί μπούμεραγκ για τη Ρωσία.
Ο Πατριάρχης δήλωσε συγκινημένος από την επισήμανση και την υιοθέτησε πλήρως λέγοντας πως «όλες οι εξελίξεις του θέματος είναι υπέρ υμών». Σημείωσε πως υπάρχουν και άρθρα τα οποία βεβαίως «θα είναι και καλοπληρωμένα από τους Ρώσους». Όπως είπε: «η μαύρη προπαγάνδα των Ρώσων έχει ως αντικείμενο – θέμα κατ΄ αυτούς, γιατί εμείς δεν είμαστε θύμα ποτέ – το Οικουμενικό Πατριαρχείο, διότι δεν ανέχονται οι αδελφοί μας οι Σλάβοι, το προβάδισμα που έχει το Οικουμενικό Πατριαρχείο και κατά συνέπεια το γένος μας, μέσα στη παγκόσμια Ορθοδοξία». Ο πατριάρχης Βαρθολομαίος είπε ότι «προσπαθούμε με καθημερινό αγώνα να κρατήσουμε αυτά τα προνόμια και αυτά τα δίκαια, με τα οποία στεφάνωσε η πρόνοια του Θεού, δια των αποφάσεων των Οικουμενικών Συνόδων, τον πάνσεπτο Οικουμενικό Θρόνο, την πρωτόθρονη Οικουμενική Εκκλησία της Ορθοδοξίας».
Σε σχέση με κάποια επικριτικά δημοσιεύματα για τον χειρισμό του ουκρανικού ζητήματος, ο Πατριάρχης Βαρθολομαίος είπε πως «ο Θεός μας έδωσε δύο αυτιά, το ένα από δω και το άλλο από εκεί», από το ένα να βάζουμε και από το άλλο να βγάζουμε.