He had his flaws, but he fervently stood his ground against hostile government efforts to secularize the “flock” (especially the youth), which is the exact opposite image of the “passive successor” that the government was so elated to see elected in Christodoulos’ place…A lot of things would have been different if the successor had been like him, including likely a referendum blocking the Kasselakis/Mitsotakis “marriage law”…
Among the things that would have been different is no communion with the pseudo church in Ukraine. Archbishop Christodoulos sided with Moscow when Constantinople intruded into the territory of Estonia.
No US officials would have told Christodoulos what to do. His only real mistake was backing down when the Patriarch intruded into the affairs of the Church of Greece.
He had his flaws, but he fervently stood his ground against hostile government efforts to secularize the “flock” (especially the youth), which is the exact opposite image of the “passive successor” that the government was so elated to see elected in Christodoulos’ place…A lot of things would have been different if the successor had been like him, including likely a referendum blocking the Kasselakis/Mitsotakis “marriage law”…
Among the things that would have been different is no communion with the pseudo church in Ukraine. Archbishop Christodoulos sided with Moscow when Constantinople intruded into the territory of Estonia.
No US officials would have told Christodoulos what to do. His only real mistake was backing down when the Patriarch intruded into the affairs of the Church of Greece.