EDITOR’S NOTE (Nick Stamatakis). For one more time, Bartholomew, acting like the evil snake he truly is, tried intervening in Ukraine, supposedly “to bring peace”. So he sent a delegation to meet Ukrainian Orthodox leaders, without ANY specific proposals – just a generic concern that “it is not good for the Orthodox to be divided”. Met. Onufriy, on the other side, had very specific measures to be taken before a sincere dialogue begins: “The Phanar has to condemn the violent seizures of churches and the clashes instigated by supporters of Metropolitan Epiphanius.” The Phanar delegation had no answers, of course, because their true goal is not to unite but to grab and use for themselves the Ukrainian Orthodox churches, very much like they do with us in America.
If you need any extra proof of the truth, you should consider who fully supported the recent law signed by Zelensky banning the UOC. It was actively supported by Metropolitan Epiphanius (made “cacocephalous” by Bartholomew and followed by practically nobody), the head of the Unitarians of Ukraine, Sviatoslav Shevchuk, and the Chief Rabbi of Ukraine, Yakov Dov Bleich. The schismatics, the Unitarians (supporters of the Nazis during WWII) and the Jews support banning the UOC!! (link here for the news).
BELOW IS THE NEWS IN ENGLISH AND IN GREEK FROM ROMFEA.GR
======================
A Fruitless Meeting Between Met. Onufriy and A Delegation Of the Constantinople Patriarchate
By Emilios Polygenis
After Metropolitan Epiphanius and the so-called “Patriarch of Kiev” Filaret, the delegation of the Ecumenical Patriarchate visited the headquarters of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
It should be noted that the Delegation of the Ecumenical Patriarchate was warmly welcomed by the representatives of the Ukrainian Church.
According to Romfea.gr information, on behalf of the Ukrainian Church, the meeting was attended by the head of the Church of Ukraine Metropolitan Onuphry, as well as Metropolitan Meletios of Bukovina, Metropolitan Clement of Nezhin and Metropolitan Antonios of Borispol.
Romfea.gr reports that Metropolitan Onoufrios reportedly said during the meeting that he wanted dialogue, and not a monologue under the dictation of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
Moreover, Mr. Onoufrios reportedly set some conditions for dialogue, such as the Phanar to condemn the violent seizures of churches and the clashes instigated by supporters of Metropolitan Epiphanius.
Also, Metropolitan Onoufrios, as quoted by Romfea.gr sources, also stated that without these conditions, any discussion is pointless and useless.
During the meeting, the delegation of the Ecumenical Patriarchate said that it is bad to divide Christians, while adding that the issue of unity must be solved somehow.
For their part, the Ukrainian hierarchs agreed that it is not good to divide Christians and did not deny that unity is necessary.
Romfea.gr sources say that at the end of the meeting, the Ukrainian Church side wondered why the delegation of the Ecumenical Patriarchate did not put forward any proposals, but only said that the issue of unity should be resolved.
“Yes, nice to solve the issue of unity, but we are not told how! They themselves said they gave Autocephaly and the schism was solved, now as if we are in kindergarten they tell us to have unity…” – a source told Romfea.gr.
Also, the same sources speaking to Romfea.gr stressed that the Delegation of the Ecumenical Patriarchate was not so happy with the composition of the Delegation of the Ukrainian Church.
“In the Church of Ukraine there are different views among hierarchs, and this must be taken seriously. Therefore, the Phanar seems not ready for dialogue, from the fact that they are annoyed with the presence of a hierarch in the talks that they do not like,” a source on the Ukrainian Church side told Romfea.gr.
Finally, Romfea.gr sources report that the Delegation of the Ecumenical Patriarchate promised to raise the issue of forcible seizures of churches during their meeting with President Zelensky.
========================
Άκαρπη η συνάντηση Ονουφρίου με Αντιπροσωπεία του Οικουμενικού Πατριαρχείου
Του Αιμίλιου Πολυγένη
Μετά τον Μητροπολίτη Επιφάνιο και τον λεγόμενο “Πατριάρχη Κιέβου” κ. Φιλάρετο, η Αντιπροσωπεία του Οικουμενικού Πατριαρχείου επισκέφθηκε την έδρα της Ορθοδόξου Εκκλησίας της Ουκρανίας.
Να σημειωθεί ότι η Αντιπροσωπεία του Οικουμενικού Πατριαρχείου έτυχε θερμής υποδοχής, από τους Εκπροσώπους της Ουκρανικής Εκκλησίας.
Σύμφωνα με πληροφορίες της Romfea.gr, από την πλευρά της Ουκρανικής Εκκλησίας, στη συνάντηση συμμετείχε ο επικεφαλής της Εκκλησίας της Ουκρανίας Μητροπολίτης Ονούφριος, καθώς και ο Μητροπολίτης Μπουκοβίνας Μελέτιος, ο Μητροπολίτης Νεζίν Κλήμης και ο Μητροπολίτης Μπορισπόλ κ. Αντώνιος.
Πληροφορίες της Romfea.gr δηλώνουν ότι ο Μητροπολίτης Ονούφριος κατά την συνάντηση φέρεται να ανάφερε οτι επιθυμεί διάλογο, και όχι μονόλογο υπό την υπαγόρευση του Οικουμενικού Πατριαρχείου.
Ακόμη, ο κ. Ονούφριος φέρεται να έθεσε κάποιες προυποθέσεις για να γίνει διάλογος, όπως το Φανάρι να καταδικάσει τις βίαιες αρπαγές των Ιερών Ναών και τις συγκρούσεις που υποκινούνται από υποστηρικτές του Μητροπολίτη Επιφανίου.
Επισης, ο Μητροπολίτης Ονούφριος όπως αναφέρουν πηγές της Romfea.gr δήλωσε ακόμη ότι χωρίς αυτές τις προϋποθέσεις, οποιαδήποτε συζήτηση είναι άσκοπη και ανώφελη.
Κατά τη διάρκεια της συνάντησης η Αντιπροσωπεία του Οικουμενικού Πατριαρχείου ανέφερε ότι είναι κακό να διχάζονται οι χριστιανοί, ενώ πρόσθεσαν ότι πρέπει με κάποιο τρόπο να λυθεί το ζήτημα της ενότητας.
Από την πλευρά τους οι Ουκρανοί Ιεράρχες συμφώνησαν ότι δεν είναι καλό να διχάζονται οι Χριστιανοί, ενώ δεν αρνήθηκαν ότι είναι απαραίτητη η ενότητα.
Πηγές της Romfea.gr αναφέρουν ότι μετά το πέρας της συνάντησης η πλευρά της Εκκλησίας της Ουκρανίας, απόρησε γιατί η Αντιπροσωπεία του Οικουμενικού Πατριαρχείου δεν έθεσε κάποιες προτάσεις, παρά μόνο έλεγαν ότι πρέπει να λυθεί το θέμα της ενότητας.
“Ναι, ωραία να λυθεί το θέμα της ενότητας, αλλά δεν μας λένε πως! Οι ίδιοι έλεγαν ότι έδωσαν την Αυτοκεφαλία και λύθηκε το σχίσμα, τώρα λες και είμαστε στο νηπιαγωγείο μας λένε να υπάρξει ενότητα…” – ανέφερε πηγή στην Romfea.gr .
Επίσης, οι ίδιες πηγές μιλώντας στην Romfea.gr τόνισαν ότι η Αντιπροσωπεία του Οικουμενικού Πατριαρχείου, δεν ήταν τόσο ευχαριστημένη με την σύνθεση της Αντιπροσωπείας της Ουκρανικής Εκκλησίας.
“Στην Εκκλησία της Ουκρανίας υπάρχουν διαφορετικές απόψεις ανάμεσα στους Ιεράρχες, και αυτό πρέπει να ληφθεί σοβαρά υπόψη. Επομένως, το Φανάρι φαίνεται ότι δεν είναι έτοιμο για διάλογο, από το γεγονός ότι ενοχλούνται με την παρουσία κάποιου Ιεράρχη στις συνομιλίες που δεν τους αρέσει” – ανέφερε πηγή από την πλευρά της Ουκρανικής Εκκλησίας μιλώντας στην Romfea.gr.
Τέλος, οι πηγές της Romfea.gr αναφέρουν ότι η Αντιπροσωπεία του Οικουμενικού Πατριαρχείου υποσχέθηκε ότι θα θέσει το θέμα των βίαιων κατασχέσεων των Ιερών Ναών, κατά τη διάρκεια της συνάντησης που θα έχουν με τον Πρόεδρο Ζελένσκι.
Of course, it was. Did anyone expect otherwise. Why would anyone waste their time having a conversation with demons or those whom they possess. It would have been productive to have a mass of exorcism.
Met. Onufriy and his bishops could have better dialogue with mannequins than he could with the stooges of Constantinople. What a joke! (Me thinks that the West and Constantinople are starting to get worried as Russia moves in closer and closer westward.)
Reading the comments here, plus Nick’s characterization of the patriarch as an “evil snake” I wonder why such enmity towards one of our own? Like it or not, Bartholomew is the head of the G.O. church. He holds the patriarchate that has survived for two thousand years, while he’s in the midst of an adversarial faith, like a tiny speck in the wide ocean. Sure, criticize his actions or non actions. But calling him “evil snake’ or “demon” that needs to be exorcised, in a public forum, is against our faith’s teachings and our patriotic duty.
Our ultimate duty – above religion and ethnic origins – is to the truth. This duty makes it obligatory to call him what he is – an evil snake. He was the one who, instead of punishing or at least publicly chastising homosexuality (case of Emmanuel / Maximos and the Bulgarian gay escorts in the Paris Metropolis) he promoted them, thereby reducing our faith to trash. Moreover in the case of Ukraine he was bribed with over $20 million to give “Autocephaly/Cacocephaly” to Ukraine causing the Schism in Orthodoxy, causing violence and deepening the war conflict. And I am not even going to repeat here the rest of his least significant trespasses with which I could write a book. And the other ones which are known to Turkish intelligence (and the American one) rendering him easy to blackmail. the term evil snake is not enough to describe the most failed, corrupt, degenerate patriarch of the last few hundred years. We should come up with stronger terms to characterize his satanic character.
Nick
I have never seen anywhere that Bartholomeu requested or accepted $20 million. Moreover, if someone finds himself with $20 million, they would be wearing Rolex watches, such as Moscow’;s Kyril was, they would be wearing expensive cloths, live in a mansion and have nightly parties, plus limos and private jets. I have not seen any evidence of that in the patriarch.
So, money was not the reason for the autocephaly. The
Time to open your eyes to see the light: Read this carefully
https://ocl.org/whose-money-stoked-religious-strife-in-ukraine-and-who-tried-to-steal-it/
Then ask yourself why would he want a $10 million villa overlooking Bosporus… Etc Etc. Please search Helleiscope for more and do not waste everybody’s time.
Nick
While it is documented that millions went missing from the St Nicholas building fund. this is the first time that I see the patriarch being accused of accepting part of it. There are no credible sources that have made such a charge.
Jim Jatras’s article, which I read from the link that you sent me, keeps referring to “sources”, but is not naming names. However, I wouldn’t call Jim Jatras a credible source.
I am not sticking up for Bartholomew. I have agreed with you many times on many occasions that you took on the archbishop. While what Jatras says could be true, it gives me pause the fact that he is not naming any of his sources. This is not serious journalism.
Please do your own research or go back to Helleniscope and read. Focus on the visit of Ukraine’s President Poroshenko to Istanbul around the time Old Bart was supposed to sign the Tomos of Cacocephsly. Old, corrupt Bart wouldn’t sign until Poroshenko would deliver the full amount.
Sorry Bob, if you want to find the truth you have to spent some of your time and stop wasting mine. I gave you the resources – educate yourself.
Bob,
Please re-read Silvestros Syropoulos’ eyewitness account on how exactly the Patriarch was “received” by the people of Constantinople at the docks when he returned from the 1439 council of Florence (as well as what they called him) before making statements about “patriotic duty”…our tradition remains steadfast for many centuries that the people are permitted to say “anaxios” at any time, and even bring up clergy on spiritual charges …furthermore, our faith clearly teaches us to “beware of wolves in sheepskins”…if one happens identified, what’s really the difference in calling him a wolf vs. a serpent, when we read that our own Lord called the Pharisees “γεννηματα εχιδνων”, in a public setting?
As for the statement “head of the G.O. church”, did you just dismiss all the canons that say he is technically merely the bishop of Constantinople, with certain additional administrative privileges that were added, but that he STILL has no right to sit upon the “ανω καθεδρα” of any “συνθρονον” outside of his jurisdiction, because ONLY the local bishop is permitted to sit there? Can you stop for a second and ask yourself what that means, really? Or, did you forget how Eirinaios of Jerusalem was deposed in recent history by decree of his own Synod, when he was accused of administrative wrongdoing? You see, there is a Canonical process here to deal with “naughty Patriarchs” but you need Synods and people willing and not corrupt to do something about it.
And a Patriarch certainly doesn’t have the authority that the Pope of Rome has consolidated for himself during the more recent centuries following Pope Leo III, even though the bishop of Constantinople has been trying real hard in recent years to achieve just that, and “puppet bishops” around him in various “GO jurisdictions” seem to be eagerly following suit, debasing themselves in the process.
You see, the ancient Fathers knew about “checks and balances”, and established rules preventing corruption, but when the people don’t read enough, or when they don’t read certain things, they are “blinded by the raso”, and they are easily led astray…as for corruption and gradual abandonment of our traditions by clergy and the episcopal ranks, that speaks for itself.
The arguments in the statement above are built on a foundation of “quicksand”, and they don’t stand up well under the prism of Orthodox Church history.
Markos this is brilliant and well said! Black Bart is even more guilty than the Patriarch of false union in 1439. He did it wrongfully and misguidedly thinking it would save the lives of many people. This current patriarch does it out of pure greed and evil. I am sure he hopes he lives a long life as he has much to answer for. ANAXIOS!
Markos
You are falling into the same trap again. of looking at certain periods of history, and extrapolating it into today’s events. What happened to the patriarch in 1439, is totally irrelevant to what’s occurring today. The patriarch then signed away Orthodoxy. Bartholomew did no such thing. Its apples and oranges. Moreover, they used to bun people at the stake then. Should we do that today also?
I am aware that lay people have the right to call out as anaxios, a hierarch. But there better be concrete evidence. Not what someone read on a website. And of course we need to be aware of “wolves in sheep’s clothing”. Again, we need to make sure that whom we call as a “wolf” is actually one that deserves it. Saint Nektarios was accused of impregnating a nun. We need to be vigilant that we don’t fall into that kind of a trap.
A patriarch is a bishop, but also has administrative powers that a bishop doesn’t have. When you say that Bartholomew is the bishop of Konstantinople, that aligns with what the Turks say. He is certainly no Pope. And he is not the “head of 300 million Orthodox” as you hear many American news sites call him. He has jurisdiction over all the diaspora G.O churches, plus the “new lands” of Greece.
Irrelevant eh? Thanks for that chuckle…it’s difficult to find good jokes these days. :)
So based on your logic, blatant public violations of Church Canons (calling for defrockment) by Bartholomew recorded on audio and video are not equivalent to “signing Orthodoxy away”, ignoring Tradition, ignoring the positions of St. Mark of Ephesos, but instead proceeding to do whatever he pleases (just like a Pope of the East, yes) is just fine?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqKCPU3QN0Y
Is this video above not “concrete evidence” of a violation of the Canon concerning an Orthodox bishop engaging in common prayer with a heretic? Is it not a violation of who is treated like a bishop during an Orthodox liturgy? Is it not a violation to chant the Pope’s φημη, like was done in the 2006 Benedict appearance in Phanar?
If Bartholomew (and his proxies) already behaves as if the Union has already occurred, and incrementally escalates the visible participation of Roman Catholic clergy in Orthodox services in order to reduce the level of “popular resistance”, who cares if they “sign the paperwork” at a later date (although the Tomos in the Ukraine with “bishops” that are on video concelebrating with Uniates in the past was definitely a first signature in that direction)? That’s just a technicality at that point. You have already started “slowly boiling the frog” in that pot… And what about that one bishop a couple years ago that recited the Filioque during his ordination at the Phanar? Why was that acceptable to Bartholomew, who allowed the ordination to proceed? Isn’t that “evidence” that we should at least question his (and his proxies’) opinion on whether the Filioque is considered a problem or not?
Have you heard of the scriptural phrase Τί ἔτι χρείαν ἔχομεν μαρτύρων; If you are still seeking “evidence” after so many years of blatant examples, you have much bigger challenges to overcome…
Yo Bob Karp:
Bartholomew is a degenerate snake!
Because its a fact that he is an evil snake who has blood on his hands.
Bob your head must truly be stuck in your behind. Black Bart has shown himself to be a schismatic and a heretic as well as a greedy petty tyrant. And he has surrounded himself by the same in the Phanar and foisted the same on us in America.
I am third generation Greek American. My great grandparents were poor people who have from their need to build our Church. Even so I will no longer have anything to do with the corrupt GOA. Being an Orthodox Christian is more important to me than being Greek. And I want my family in a Church that has grace and does not commune with heretics or persecute to canonical church in Ukraine.
Black Bart claims to be the leader of 250M Orthodox Christians. Even those of us fleeing the GOA have not considered him our leader for at least a decade. He is a viper in gold vestments.
Thank God for the OCA which has welcomed us with open arms. They will continue to grow as the GOA sinks further into the toilet.
“..Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will scatter…”
There are still some good, honest priests in GOA…but they are being sabotaged by their own hierarchy…sad to see.
Because he is an evil snake and will go down in infamy in the history of the Orthodox Church. Don’t be so shocked. If your read church history you will see how many Ecumenical Patriarchs in Constantinople betrayed the faith and sided with heresy. They are cited in the anathemas that used to be read on Sunday of Orthodoxy—-a tradition that has faded away because many bishops don’t feel comfortable reading them.
“….During the meeting, the delegation of the Ecumenical Patriarchate said that it is bad to divide Christians, while adding that the issue of unity must be solved somehow….”
Very simple…rescind the Tomos, remove the commemoration of Epiphanios from the diptychs, stop concelebrating with Uniates and “dubiously ordained clergy” (including ordained or legitimized via simony – “generous donations from Poroshenko”), agree that all the statements signed by Bartholomew prior to 2018 concerning Russia’s jurisdiction of the Ukraine are still valid, and that will be a first sincere step towards unity within Orthodoxy…
Unless…..unless they were referring to “the issue of unity must be solved somehow” as a subliminal justification of pending plans to unite with the Vatican…the Tomos and concelebration with Uniates was certainly a step in that direction…
The Catholic pope has condemned the outlawing and persecution of the Ukrainian Church. Not one peep out of the Greek Orthodox.
Yes – I will post later.
True, but technically the Pope has controlled the ecclesiastical narrative “on the ground” in Kiev (within the Uniate and pro-Vatican factions) for several centuries now, and certainly his Vatican predecessors have longed for the day that Orthodoxy would cease in those regions. It is either that suddenly Francis has gone “rogue” and departed from 800 years (since the 4th Crusade) of Vatican strategy, or, knowing that the optics are going to be quite ugly, he simply wants to “distance himself” in front of the cameras, and wash his hands like Pontius Pilate…
Don’t be deceived by this apparent “Papal condemnation”, and recall the moment when the Pope “prayed for peace in the Ukraine”, back in 2014, as the 2 doves that were released were immediately attacked by a crow and a seagull…it appears God may not have accepted his “prayers of peace” for the Ukraine…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQ_JnOi4q7w
Nick are you aware that this Onufriy back in 1990, signed the document requesting Autocephaly of the Church in Ukraine from Russia and that Moscow declined?
Then when the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople invited all the Orthodox groups in Ukraine to unite in 2018, Onufriy declined?
He would be the legitimate Primate of the Church in Ukraine had he done so and would have had everyone’s respect.
Then ridiculously, announced the separation of his Church structure from Ukraine in 2022, which Moscow has rejected!!!
What a mess!
I am not sure what happened in 1990 – a very transitional time at the fall of communism. But by 2018 it was very clear for all to see that Bartholomew has abandoned his previous promises, took $25 million as a bribery from the US and he was following step-by-step the game the Deep State dictating to him. Again read this:
https://ocl.org/whose-money-stoked-religious-strife-in-ukraine-and-who-tried-to-steal-it/
Autocephaly with Ounufry at the helm, yes, not Philaret or his “spiritual offspring” (Epiphanios)…that’s the key, my friend… :)
Either way, he requested it from Moscow, not Constantinople, because at that time Constantinople still acknowledged Moscow as having jurisdiction over Kiev and the Ukrainian lands…
oh, and a small point about the comment “all the Orthodox groups in the Ukraine”….there’s a bit of a debate about that, my friend…were they Orthodox, or Uniate, or an “illegal congregation” (παρασυναγωγη per St. Basil’s definition) of defrocked celibate clergy that happened to have children with illegitimate concubines during their “episcopal tenure” with the KGB (Philaret)?
Certainly not a clear answer, is it? But yes, the “mess” you refer to more accurately began when circles in Constantinople started confusing the historically Uniate & defrocked “non-Orthodox” as being “Orthodox” :)