By Markos (Helleniscope’s Religion Commentator)
Today, Pat. Bartholomew addressed the Parliament of Greece. Before embarking on the long debate about “why” this visit was arranged, we should consider the following:
There was a lot of fanfare in the Greek media, and the government greeted him as a “head of state”, with full honors…The head of the Greek Parliament also awarded him a special medal of honor.
It was quite interesting that only about 2/3 of the members of parliament even bothered to attend. Even more interestingly (we can always understand why Communists wouldn’t be interested in showing up), most of the Cabinet of Ministers was absent, too.
It was also interesting that the Greek TV reporters covering the live event “toed the line of propaganda”, referring to him as the “προκαθημενος της Ορθοδοξιας” (the “chairman”/leader of Orthodoxy)…as if they were legitimizing a “Pope of the East”…
Patriarch Bartholomew’s speech itself can only be characterized as a biased (and perhaps hypocritical) “self-promotion” opportunity, focusing ad nauseum on a self-described “legacy” of his tenure:
- Promoter of world peace
- Promoter of environmentalism
- Defender of Orthodox Tradition
- etc (he even tried to quote something from that Council of Crete 10 years ago, as if it were an “authoritative” enough Orthodox Council without Russians, Georgians, etc…)
And while some of the above are not necessarily negative things from a philosophical and theoretical standpoint, it is curious why he selectively forgot to mention the following facts that more accurately “highlight” his actual legacy:
- Introduced Schism within Orthodoxy (Ukrainian tomos, removal of Archbishop Christodoulos from the dyptichs, etc.)
- Promoted the notion of a “Pope of the East”, with false narratives of “spiritual leader of 300 million Orthodox” (first appeared in the late 1990s), “first without equals” (Elpidophoros’ famous manifesto), etc…
- Aggressively promoted the Uniate agenda under his tenure (similarities to 1439, with approaching the Vatican, violating multiple Canons when he allowed Popes Benedict and then Francis to participate in Orthodox Liturgies (recitation of the Lord’s prayer, the Creed, etc), as well as in the diaspora terrible statements by Elpidophoros and others concerning the desire to offer Holy Communion to non-Orthodox (first reported after the Leadership 100 meeting in 2020), etc..
- Etc, etc, etc
We can go on, and on, and on, but at some point, there is actually no point to do so…
It’s literally a “tale of two Patriarchs” when you compare what the Phanar “promotes” vs. what the Patriarch has actually achieved…
All in all, this was “more of the same” (familiar) propaganda by a Patriarch who should have long ago resigned but who continues to do terrible damage to the Church he should have been strengthening, not dividing, with his actions and policies…
================
First Among Equals
By Markos (Helleniscope’s Religion Commentator)
The first reaction to this article is “nice try, but…”
Citing a Canon from the Council of Calcedon is great, but we quickly forget how that Canon collapses both in theory and according to historical precedent if we ask the simple question, “What happens if the Patriarch in Constantinople is a heretic, or at least willingly violates Canons for which he should be deposed according to other Canons”?
In this sense, logic will tell even the least educated of the faithful that a “corrupt judge loses his moral right to judge others”…(nobody will believe that it was the intent of the Fathers at Calcedon to allow a heretical or grossly corrupt Patriarch to solve disputes…the Tychikos fiasco in Cyprus most likely wouldn’t have the same result if the same Church Fathers were alive today)
There is no point in repeating the specific multitude of Canons that Patriarch Bartholomew (and other bishops in the Synod of Constantinople) has violated, which, if applied in strictness according to the Church Fathers, he should have been deposed/removed long ago…the violations have been documented and published time and time again.
And whether the faithful have “all the king’s horses, and all the king’s men” trying to spew propaganda like this “Archon’s article” at them, the fact remains that the Orthodox Church is a Synodic Church, capable of removing Patriarchs that overstep their bounds (as occurred with Eirinaios of Jerusalem in recent history)…the problem becomes when the Synod as a whole becomes corrupt…that’s when Schism and Apostasy occur, as did in 1439 when the entire Synod of Constantinople (minus St. Mark of Ephesos) signed off on subjugation to the Pope of Rome….thank God the laity didn’t agree to this “agreement”, and they rejected the “corrupt leaders”….
Hey, Archons, read up on that story of the role of the laity in rejecting the pseudo-council of Ferrara…that’s how checks and balances historically work in the Orthodox Church…and not by whoever has the monetary ability to publish a twisted narrative in the “biggest media outlets” they can afford…If you all want to make better use of your time, why don’t you focus on citing other Canons…Perhaps start asking yourselves, whatever happened to the Canons regarding the election of bishops by the people? Wasn’t that the wisest “checks and balances” tradition established by our ancient Fathers, to reduce the risk of corruption and heresy (e.g. Papism of the East)?
It’s the Greek parliament that is promoting Patriarch Bartholomew and his viewpoints, not the other way around.
“Only” two-thirds of the parliament showed up?
By the way, this is the same parliament that made same-sex marriage legal in Greece by 176 votes out of 300.
Given the EP’s condemnation of “gay marriage” before that vote in 2024, perhaps that is why “only” two-thirds showed up:
https://orthodoxtimes.com/ecumenical-patriarchate-we-do-not-recognize-any-other-form-of-union-apart-from-marriage-between-man-and-woman/
Read the statement Joseph. First of all I remind you that the EP waited until the last possible minute to issue it – after all the Greek Metropolitans had issued their rejections of the gay marriage. If the EP did not issue this statement they would have to drop any jurisdiction they have in Greece – period. Second, this was the most lukewarm statement in history!… They certainly did NOT do it out of faith and conviction!! If they did they should first deal with the Bulgarian gay escort scandal of Emmanuella and Maximos in Paris. We are still waiting for Bartholomew to call the French Police and demand the report for this scandal.. why don’t you ask your beloved Patriarch to tell you why he doesn’t call the French police?
Joseph,
Do you remember how Patriarch Bartholomew met with Kasselakis, and the words that Kasselakis said about the Patriarch?
https://www.kathimerini.gr/politics/563923717/synantisi-toy-stefanoy-kasselaki-me-ton-oikoymeniko-patriarchi-vartholomaio-sto-fanari/
Why would Kasselakis (the co-architect of that Greek gay marriage law) go visit the Patriarch after the Patriarch supposedly “condemns” gay marriage” (which is not technically what he did in that statement you supplied), but the majority of his party and other leftists decided to be absent from an address to Parliament?
You should try a better theory, next time…
Glory be to God, Fr. Seraphim Rose will hopefully be canonized soon. He was critical of any kind of idea of superiority of the ecumenical patriarch. He is not the only one that was critical of the last turkish patriarchs that call themselves ecumenical. There was nothing ecumenical about the apostles, so why put so much weight on Constantinople, which is no more? What did he actually accomplish besides a schism of giant proportions that shook the canonical OC? Thank God he is not the “head” of the OC. Only an empty head would have such title, putting himshelf above Christ, just like the proud pope.
Excellent article, Helleniscope. Five star reporting!
1991, ο Οικουμενικός Πατριάρχης Βαρθολομαίος είχε προβεί στη δήλωση πως «δυστυχώς οι δυο λαοί [ενν. Έλληνες και Τούρκοι] διέκοψαν την υπέροχη συμβίωση των 400 χρόνων, όταν ξεσηκώθηκαν κάτι ξεβράκωτοι το 1821 και δημιούργησαν τις γνωστές προστριβές». Πολλοί από τη Μικρά Ασία δεν αναγνωρίζουν την 25η Μαρτίου του 1821 επειδή πίστευαν ότι η Οθωμανική Αυτοκρατορία συνέχιζε τη Βυζαντινή και τη Ρωμαϊκή Αυτοκρατορία, τις ενώσεις όλων. Οι Ορθόδοξοι προσεύχονται για μια παγκόσμια κυβέρνηση στη Μεγάλη Λιτανεία στην αρχή της Θείας Λειτουργίας, η οποία βασίζεται στην Αρχιερατική Προσευχή του Χριστού «για να είναι όλοι ένα» (Ιωάννης 17:21). Αυτό είναι το όραμα του Δαβίδ, του Καίσαρα και του Κωνσταντίνου. Αλλά οι Τεκτονιστές Εθνικιστές Συντηρητικοί (NatCons) αντ’ αυτού λαμβάνουν υπόψη την ιδιαιτεριστική εντολή μετά τον Πύργο της Βαβέλ, δηλαδή τον Γεδεών, τον Περικλή και τον Κάτωνα. Η «ιδιαιτεριστική» άποψη υποστηρίζει ότι ο Θεός σκόπιμα χώρισε την ανθρωπότητα στον Πύργο της Βαβέλ για να αποτρέψει την τυραννία μιας ενιαίας παγκόσμιας δύναμης. Αυτή η σχολή σκέψης βρίσκει τους ήρωές της σε εκείνους που υπερασπίστηκαν το «ιδιαίτερο» έναντι του «καθολικού», τον Γεδεών, τον Περικλή και τον Κάτωνα, οι οποίοι εκπροσωπούν τον ρεπουμπλικάνο που αντιστέκεται στην ενοποίηση της απόλυτης, αυτοκρατορικής εξουσίας υπέρ της τοπικής κυριαρχίας και του παραδοσιακού δικαίου. Ο Σουλτάνος Μωάμεθ Β΄ διεκδίκησε τον τίτλο «Καίσαρ της Ρώμης» (Kayser-i Rûm) και στο Οικουμενικό Πατριαρχείο της Κωνσταντινούπολης παραχωρήθηκε σημαντική πολιτική εξουσία επί όλων των Ορθόδοξων Χριστιανών εντός της αυτοκρατορίας. Η Ελληνική Επανάσταση της 25ης Μαρτίου 1821 θεωρήθηκε από ορισμένους παραδοσιακούς ως «προδοσία» αυτής της παγκόσμιας ρωμαϊκής ενότητας υπέρ ενός εθνοτικού έθνους-κράτους δυτικού τύπου. Προσωπικότητες όπως ο Πατριάρχης Γρηγόριος Ε΄ καταδίκασαν αρχικά την εξέγερση, φοβούμενοι ότι θα διέλυε την οικουμένη (τον πολιτισμένο, ενιαίο κόσμο) και θα την αντικαθιστούσε με διασπασμένες, κοσμικές αξίες.
Sainted martyr Patriarch Gregory V condemned the revolt against the Sultan because it endangered the lives of Christians in the Ottoman Empire. He himself was offered to go into exile, but instead he chose to remain.
He served Paschal Divine Liturgy in his cathedral on April 10th, 1821, but was dragged out of church in full vestments by the Sultan’s men and brutally hanged at the main gate of the Phanar. Ever since,.that gate has never been opened. This was the price of the Greek revolution.
Joseph,
You are out of touch with reality…something may be wrong with the water in your zip code (like it was in Flint, MI)…”the price of the revolution” is a hung Patriarch? Really?
The Turks also hung St. Kosmas Aitolos 42 years before 1821…”others they sawed, others they stoned, others they burned, etc…” (sound familiar?)…Ottomans were always Ottomans…what does that have to do with the price of beans?
The Greek revolution was about achieving an end to the cultural, religious, and financial oppression and systematic kidnappings, enslavements, and slaughters conducted by blood-thirsty Ottomans…whether or not there were (and still are) a handful of Greek-DNA folks who didn’t care, or profited more in some way from being loyal to the Ottoman overlords does not historically reflect the opinion of the majority who weren’t exactly happy experiencing “Ottoman Justice” on a daily basis….
Ο Κοραής, ηγέτης του Ελληνικού Διαφωτισμού, έθεσε τις ιδεολογικές βάσεις Ελληνικής Ανεξαρτησίας και αναβίωσε την κλασική ελληνική παιδεία. Ο Κοραής υποστήριξε τη δημιουργία μιας μεταρρυθμισμένης, εθνικής Εκκλησίας, ανεξάρτητης από Κωνσταντινούπολη, ευθυγραμμισμένης με τις αξίες του Διαφωτισμού και τη θρησκευτική ελευθερία. Αντιπαρέβαλε έντονα αυτό που θεωρούσε ως τον διεφθαρμένο, παράλογο, δεσποτικό, παρακμιακό μυστικιστικό Οριενταλισμό, που περιλάμβανε τη βυζαντινή παράδοση, με τον ορθολογικό, επηρεασμένο από τον Διαφωτισμό «δυτικό».
https://grandlodge.gr/en/who-we-are/freemasonry/history-of-greek-freemasonry/