EDITOR’S NOTE (Nick Stamatakis). As you can see in our main photo, Pat. Bartholomew, who is on an official visit to Greece, was received by PM Mitsotakis. He is obviously trying to revamp his image after the many failures in all his policies: The Ukraine project nears a total defeat by Russia, the fake and corrupt “Green” ideology (concealing the globalist goal of controlling humanity) is heading to a dead-end and his LGBTQ agenda along with all other “woke” ideas that he pushed are now heading – after Trump’s historic victory – to the trash can of history with accelerating speed…
Could someone explain to me what business AB Makarios had accompanying the Patriarch in visiting Mitsotakis? Yes, we all know that Makarios (Griniezakis), is a member of the Mitsotakis mafia-like “family”… We also know that he is the shame of Crete very much like Met. Emmanuel (formerly of France and now of Chalcedon) is. Was he there to promote his candidacy for Patriarch or for Archbishop of America? We are hoping that all in the photo will come to their senses. The Greek-American community will NEVER accept Makarios to replace the failed Elpidophoros. It would be like replacing a big failure with an even bigger failure!! Where to start? From Makarios’s pro-LGBTQ (which he recently tried to change – very much like Mitsotakis tried suddenly to convince us that he is anti-woke), his prosecution of faithful priests (Papa-Lefteris is the prime example) and hierarchs? His lack of faith during the pandemic? His self-serving extravagance shown in the forced purchase of a $6.5 million residence even before he arrived in Sydney? The list is too long.
The short answer is that Makarios should stay away from America. He should resign his throne and go to Athos for a few years to repent and re-think his role in the Church. He is the exact opposite of what an Orthodox leader should be!!
===================
Ecumenical Patriarch meets Greek PM Kyriakos Mitsotakis in Athens (PHOTOS)
PHOTO: TATIANA BOLARI/EUROKINISSI
On Monday, November 25, 2024, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew met with the Prime Minister of Greece, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, at the Maximos Mansion in Athens.
The Patriarch was accompanied by a distinguished delegation, including Metropolitan Theodoritos of Laodicea, Director of the Ecumenical Patriarchate’s Office in Athens; Archbishop Makarios of Australia; and the Grand Ecclesiarch Aetios, Director of the Patriarch’s Private Office.
The meeting underlined the close relationship between the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Hellenic Republic, reflecting their shared commitment to promoting faith, culture, and dialogue on critical issues affecting Orthodox Christians and the wider global community.
PHOTOS: TATIANA BOLARI/EUROKINISSI
As much as I really hate tree to say this, at this point I would take Makarios over Elpidophoros. At least Makarios (on the surface) actually acts Orthodox.
Unfortunately in this era of the Ecumenical Patriarchate there seem to be no holy leaders. Athos has plenty, the Ephraim monasteries have plenty, yet we all know that there’s a better chance that pigs fly over the moon and Hell freezes over before any of them, barring a miracle from God, would ever be picked for the EP Episcopacy or any of the Eparchies.
So unfortunately we are in a lesser of two evils situation.
Given his personal background and his choices he cannot convince anyone that he is anything but given to materialism, to the woke agenda and to vindictive practices against the parishes, the priests and the faithful. He is vindictive and aggressive regarding stealing church properties and funneling them to the Phanar gang and the Turkish overlords. He is bad news all around.
Both of these characters are bad news. The church needs to return to the practice of married bishops. Quality among clergy is not among the unmarried clergy but among the married clergy. Most of the unmarried clergy are unmarried not because they have a genuine calling to celibacy but rather for other reasons. Remember, 11 of the 12 apostles, those chosen by the Lord Himself, were married.
I agree with that comment. Being unmarried is harmful to the soul and body. Celibacy should not be a criteria for becoming a bishop.
Married bishops aren’t the answer. The problems is lack of spirituality, a dominance of corruption, and love of secularization by the “shepherds” (αρχιμανδριτες) that can’t even locate the sheep pen (μανδρι / μανδρα).
What is needed is Bishops that are not anti-traditional, that don’t “sell” their “mother” (Church) to the highest bidder (Poroshenko’s millions), that are not secular (with multi-million dollar apartments, etc), and who have actually proven themselves in monastic life (like St. Nektarios and others) vs in the Swiss and Austrian ski chalets with Roman Catholic Cardinals…Authentic bishops would produce results vs. the multiple example of “pseudo-monastic frauds” who make a mockery of the legacy our ancient Church Fathers left us, and who unfortunately we frequently observe today..
There are multiple “able men” available, (quality does in fact exist), but the corrupt Synods won’t allow their names to appear on the “eligibility lists”. Multiple examples abound (especially in Greece, but also elsewhere) where the people recommended / petition for one candidate and the Synod ignored them, only to promote “one from their own clique”..
One of the more famous recent examples was the recent election for Archbishop of Cyprus, a jurisdiction where theoretically the people’s opinion should matter and where the ancient practice of laity participating in the election of a bishop appears on the surface to actually exist…However, we all saw what happened there…the people voted for one candidate, and the Synod voted for another…
Bishops elected by popular acclaim is one solution. Having families also grounds them and exposes them to the trials and tribulations of having a family. A celibate one has only theoritical experience and certainly not practical. The self promotion of celibates for any available throne is maddening. The only worthy one that I can think of is Anastasios of Albania. A true man of God. The ones who are placed in the advanced, Western nations have an easy life and many aspire to live in luxury.
Corruption, favoritism and other ills will never disappear. You will never have a total, transparent process, that everyone approves of. You’re going to have infighting and jostling for position. By the laity demanding transparency is the only way to fight the scourge of corruption.
From a personal observation, the Metropolitan of New Jersey, every time he officiates in a liturgy, he has a personal photographer. The photographer takes 100 to 200 pictures, even behind the altar, you will see the flash go off. It is very disruptive of the liturgy. I called his office and complained to his secretary. She said she was going to get back to me. Of cours,e she did not. So I called her and she said that he looks at all the pictures taken and chooses which one he likes to post on the website. I told her that I find it unworthy of a hierarch to be concerned about his imazge, like some teenagers that post on instagram. Whwen I asked her “what if parents want to photograph their kids during thwe liturgy, sghe said “he won’t allow it”. So, what’s ok for him to do is not ok of others. I told her that if it happens again, I will get up and leave. I’m waiting to see if it happens
Apostolos is a lost case since a very early age… What he is doing now simply aggravates the perception of narcissism and the rest of his pile of problems.
Again…imposters abound and good bishops are few and far between, because the modern day corrupt “ecclesiastical establishment” simply won’t allow “able men” into the rank of bishop. And the only reason they are able to do that is, because they somehow succeeded in the last couple hundred years in removing the opinion of the laity from the election process, without the laity reacting. Complacent, luke-warm laity is fully at fault here, for the current situation…the role model of the laity that “received” the delegation of traitors from the pseudo-council of Ferrara with silver coin projectiles and jeers is what we need nowadays…(read Sylvestros Syropoulos’ eyewitness commentaries for more details)
jk, your observations regarding mandatory celibacy are worthy of consideration.
However, we don’t know how many of Jesus’ disciples were married. All we know for sure is that one (Peter) was married and one (John the Beloved) was a bachelor.
Therefore all we can say for sure is that “perhaps the other ten may have been married.”
Personally, I would find it hard to believe that eleven married men would follow Jesus throughout Judea leaving their wives and children alone to fend for themselves.
This is my supposition. I may be wrong.
Most of our saints that we know of, are monastics, including single bishops. Celibacy is not harmful if it is done for the glory of God.
It is not harmful to the soul. Having a family is a path to salvation, but monasticism is one as well, each with its own cross. Virgin Mary and St. John the Baptist, the 2 holiest people that lived on earth, were not married. And of course we have countless of other examples. I think a Bishop should be solely responsible with Church matters, not children, their education, and a wife. They have to travel which would take them away from their family. Priests don’t have to travel much so that’s different.
I do not think that the problems we have with some of the leaders has anything to do with them not being married. I think it has more to do with not picking the right leaders to begin with.
Sandy, your reasoning challenges our Lord’s judgement when he chose married men. The pool of candidates among the married priests is much larger. We are not using their talents. Again, I strongly believe the majority of unmarried clergy do have a calling to celibacy.
JK:
No, I am not challenging the Lord’s judgement. I think you don’t understand the HOLY FATHERS who dedicated their life to Christ and leaved to perfect themselves and eliminate sin from their life.
The Lord said that it is good for a man not to have relations with a woman, if he CAN, to live like HIM. Otherwise, instead of falling into temptation or sin, a man should get married. He called to holiness (apostleship) the married and the unmarried. This applies today as well. Sexual immorality is occurring in our society, and it is almost becoming the norm. Men and women should marry so they don’t fall into temptation and sin. Or they can be in a monastery if they do not get married. This is what the Church teaches, not me.
So marriage should not be a requirement. I think the majority of clergy in monasteries do have a calling for celibacy. But of course there are exceptions, and you really don’t know if those same people would be successful if they would be married. Their problems may be much deeper and to thing that marriage fixes everything when so many people including some clergy end up divorcing, is wishful thinking…
Not have a calling to celibacy
Sandy, first of all it was not our Lord who stated that it is better for a man to marry so he doesn’t fall into temptation, it was the apostle Paul writing to the Corinthians. However, St Paul speaks positively about marriage in Ephesians 5. Undoubtedly, there are many holy men/women among the unmarried. However, when our Lard chose individuals to lead the church, the apostles, he primarily chose married men. The Episcopacy should be open to married and unmarried men to honor the true apostolic tradition of the church and best follow the practice of our Lord .
JK<
I think those times may have been different. Most likely men and women were getting married much earlier back then. The culture was also very different. So picking unmarried men that were way too young to be apostles just for the sake of them being single, would have created some other problems. Would the Lord need the permission of their fathers, if the men were unmarried and young? How would the proud high priests see this? I think many Jews marry younger in general even now, especially the orthodox Jews. I did not speak negatively about marriage either, but I like the idea that bishops are chosen from monastics. I think in this time and space it is the right choice. I do follow many of them and I love many of them and the fact that they chose God first and they were chosen bishops after some trials. What I don't like is when they are in the world for a while, have jobs, then they are ordained deacons, then priests, then bishops, with the "speed of light". That is very, very strange to me. The crises we have has nothing to do with them not being married, but has more with choosing the wrong ones. Please don't tell me no one knew the views of Bartholomew before being elected because for anyone reading his "works" his stance was clear… So was some of the patriarchs before him. St. John Maximovich and Fr. Seraphim Rose wrote about the papal ambition of the Constantinople patriarch even at the time they were alive. There are plenty of holy monks in monasteries. And there are plenty of priests way too woke and too wordily to be bishops. Married or not, I think Barto and Elpi would make the same mistakes. My point is that they were clearly the wrong people for the job and even if they would be married, they would still be the wrong people for the job.
Also, I was not referring to what Apostle Paul said in Corinthians but rather, what the Lord said, see Mathew Chapter 19 on Divorce and Marriage, especially starting with verse 11. And of course, Apostle Paul will agree with what the Lord said since he spread HIS teachings.
Sandy, obviously you are confused. Jesus did say in Matthew 19 to marry so you don’t fall into temptation. Matthew refers .to marriage and divorce.
As you stated, times have changed and the return to apostolic practice is needed. Monasticism will not save the church. Only Christ saves through men, married and unmarried, who love Christ and strive to put Him first.
I am not confused. At a minimum, you are rejecting the teachings of Apostle Paul, which I believe are the same as Christ’s teaching. I am sure Apostle Paul is not wrong in his teachings because his teacher was Christ himself. Also, marriage comes with its own trials, it is not a quick fix for all, and that’s why many people end up in divorce, which you are not taking into account. IF Christ would think that married bishops would solve all our problems, He would make the appropriate changes in HIS Church. The only Bishop that was married before and had children in recent history that I can think of, is St. Luke of Crimea. He became a bishop AFTER his wife died and I believe he was chosen by God. He is an amazing saint, surgeon, miracle worker, a man of great courage that carried a very heavy cross.
I do not think that Christ’s teachings and Apostle Paul’ teachings are contradictory, but rather complementary and the same. So, no confusion here.
Obviously, you are conflating the teachings of St Paul with those of Jesus. Your shifting statements make no sense. Nevertheless, you must admit that Jesus chose married men to establish the church.
JK: Apostle Paul as all other Apostles were thought by Christ Himself or their teachings were nspired by the Holy Spirit. Not my problem if you pick and chose and not accept those teachings as a whole and being true. Those teachings are ALL from God, even if they came from the Apostles. I can’t admit that “Jesus chose married men to establish the church” because this is not true.
Jesus chose BOTH married men and unmarried men to establish the Church, since most of the men at that time were marrying young and most of them were married and not single. Apostle John and Apostle Paul were not married and there might have been others, so you are contradicting yourself since you insist he “chose married men”. Stop reading between the lines, it is not me that is not making any sense. I am done talking on this subject since you are so obsessed with half truths and you pick and chose what you want to believe from the Bible…
George, 1 Corinthians 9:5 seems to indicate that the apostles were married. Additionally, the normal custom of Jewish men was to marry;thus it is highly unlikely that we’re not married.
Sandy, I agree that the teachings of Paul and Christ are consistent but Paul was not one of the original apostles so he was not directly taught by our Lord.