EDITOR’S NOTE (Nick Stamatakis). Patriarch Bartholomew’s letter to Patriarch Alexei II of Moscow in 1992 – published again below – is a historically significant document referred to by many but very hard to locate. It addresses serious ecclesiastical issues between the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Russian Orthodox Church, after the problems created by Metropolitan Filaret of Kiev.
Says Pat. Bartholomew in the letter below, in essence recognizing Moscow Patriarchate’s jurisdiction over Ukraine: “…recognizing the fullness of the Russian Orthodox Church’s exclusive competence on this issue, synodally accepts the decisions regarding the one in question, not desiring to bring any trouble to Your Church…”
Later on, AFTER HE WAS BRIBED to GRANT THE “TOMOS OF AUTOCEPHALY” TO UKRAINE, Pat. Bartholomew changed his tune and went back centuries trying to find justification for his irrational decisions and actions, which led to untold violence with the destruction of churches and the death of many faithful. I remind everyone what I have repeatedly said in Helleniscope: Pat. Bartholomew was warned IN WRITING by at least one experienced Greek diplomat about the possibility of violence in Ukraine after Autocephaly. He ignored all warnings.
Regarding Bartholomew’s bribery, I refer you for one more time to the now famous 2018 article by Helleniscope’s good friend, Jim James Jatras, “Whose Money Stoked Religious Strife in Ukraine—and Who Tried to Steal It?” (link here). Jatras describes in detail the series of transactions involving 25 million.
Former CIA agent John Kiriakou recently suggested that Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, ordered the money transfer (link here). Today, I read that John Kiriakou retracted (link here). However, this retraction is insignificant because the bribery had nothing to do with the Clintons.
========================
Letter of His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to His Holiness Patriarch Alexei II of Moscow and All Russia,
August 26, 1992:
Your Beatitude and Holiness, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, greatly beloved in Christ God, much-beloved brother, and concelebrant of our mediocrity, Alexei, Your esteemed Beatitude, fraternally embracing you in the Lord, we sweetly greet you!
In response to the corresponding telegram and letter of Your greatly beloved and honorable Beatitude on the problem that has arisen in Your Holy Russian sister Church that led her Holy Synod, for reasons known to her, to the deposition of the until-recently leading member of her Synod, Metropolitan Philaret of Kiev, we desire to fraternally inform Your love, that our Holy Great Church of Christ, recognizing the fullness of the Russian Orthodox Church’s exclusive competence on this issue, synodally accepts the decisions regarding the one in question, not desiring to bring any trouble to Your Church. It is precisely in this spirit that we sent two brothers, His Eminence Metropolitan John of Pergamon and His Grace Bishop Vsevolod of Skopelos, after a visit to us by the one in question who has been deprived of his office, that we could be directly notified firsthand of what had occurred and avoid a misinterpretation in the given case. Consequently, we should note that we were grieved when we learned that there was not a full understanding of the purpose of their mission.
In this, embracing Your Beatitude with a holy kiss, we remain with unfailing brotherly love in the Lord for Your esteemed Beatitude, your beloved brother in Christ,
The 1992 letter was the first. There was at least one more similar one that was sent in 1997, and it also names Philaret specifically, as well as a couple of his “buddies” (see below). Bartholomew accepted that Philaret was legitimately deposed, and the 1992 documents stress that the “exclusive jurisdiction” of the matter was with Moscow.
Whatever happened to “let your yes mean yes”? Perhaps scripture doesn’t apply to Patriarchs of Constantinople?
1997 letter in Greek
https://www.romfea.gr/oikoumeniko-patriarxeio/24616-otan-o-oikoumenikos-patriarxis-to-1997-apodexthike-to-anathema-tou-filaretou
1992 letter in Greek
https://www.romfea.gr/oikoumeniko-patriarxeio/24406-apokleistiko-otan-o-oikoumenikos-patriarxis-anagnorize-tin-kathairesi-tou-filaretou
And for those who want to read about a “deep history” of things that prove Moscow’s consistent jurisdiction over ecclesiastical matters in Kiev over the centuries, as well as some “proper academic explanations” of the 1686 “document”, feel free to dig into this article too:
https://www.romfea.gr/katigories/10-apopseis/47049-apofainetai-ina-i-agiotati-eparxia-kiovou-eii-ypokeimeni-ypo-tou-agiotatou-patriarxikoy-thronou-tis-poleos-mosxovias
It’s amazing what political pressure and b-r-i-b-e-r-y will do to an individual’s original position on something!
What is the value of a Patriarch’s decree & signature at the end of the day?
What is the definition of Patriarchal or even Synodal “integrity”?
What are the definitions of “Axios” vs. “Anaxios”?
Why doesn’t the Synod exercise its responsibility to the Church and do what it is supposed to do in order to prevent and repair any Schism? (This last answer is easy…they have “succeeded” in incrementally and illegally in blocking the involvement the laity in the election of bishops over the last couple hundred years, so Synodal cronyism and corruption are now able to thrive, transforming the Synods into a “subservient puppet show” run by a “Papal-like” figure that pompously struts around with the title of Patriarch or Archbishop [in the case of Greece/Cyprus, etc]). This modern-day observed subservience is contrary to the original intent and role of Orthodox bishops and synods, but on the other hand plays perfectly well into the framework and long-term strategy of the Uniate-Western vision. Unless we resurrect the historic right of the laity to be involved in order to “filter out” the bad bishops by yelling “Anaxios” in a meaningful way, this situation will not improve, and the “unity of the faith” will continue to deteriorate at the hands of corrupt hierarchs.
He should not be patriarch. He doesn’t have what it takes. Instead of a problems solver, he is a problem creator. His word means nothing, so no one can trust him.
Θρησκευτικά διαιρεμένος ο Ουκρανικός λαός αδυνατεί να νικήσει τον όποιονδήποτε πόλεμον. Δεν το ήξεραν αυτό Ο Πατριάρχης & ο Ζελένσκι ;
Nick. I was hoping that you had given up lying for Lent. Unfortunately, your lies are like the sewer effluent springing out of a pig pen . You admitted that KyriaKou retracted his lies and apologized. But not you. Your source is Jatras. A liar that competes with you, of who would cast more shame on things Greek. That’s treason Nick. If it was true, you should expose it. I wouldn’t care. But its a lie. You,. as the coward that you are won’t back down and admit that you are wrong.. You just keep piling up and make yourself look more of an ass
Wow, your response is not a very good example of humility or love, especially during Lent. Please calm yourself brother.
The flip-flopping by Bartholomew on the Ukrainian Schismatic (Philaret & his followers) issue is not a lie. That was the main point of this article. The Patriarch reversed a long-standing position on Moscow’s jurisdiction over Kiev without any convincing explanation. By extension, the flip-flop raises a new question: Does Patriarch’s signature and word not worth much these days?
And whether or not there is disagreement that the underlying incentive was a monetary bribe, or “leverage” by overlords that control him, or plain old secular politics, or any other “non-spiritual” reason, the resultant destructive Schism that the “tomos” has brought about is definitely not a lie, and any hierarch who brings Schism to the Orthodox Church instead of “unity of the Faith” is unworthy. The shame and disgrace is just as visible in the result (Schism) as it is in the underlying reason that caused the result. That’s not a lie either.
Neither is the documented fact a lie, that overwhelmingly the leaders of all Autocephalous Churches initially had asked him in writing not to issue the “tomos”, even traveling to the Ukraine to show support for Ounoufry in the months / weeks prior to the “tomos” being issued. And yet, soon after the “tomos” was issued, both Chrysostomos of Cyprus and Theodoros of Alexandria also flip-flopped to support their Phanariot “buddy” by giving the semblance of “legitimization” of the “Bartholomaic Schism”…Even Hieronymos of Athens “played diplomat” until well after the “tomos” was issued…these published facts and observations are not lies. The history is well documented.
If anyone disagree with specific publications and public statements that have leaked in the media since 2018, they should feel free to provide THE root cause explanation for “what” exactly incentivized the Patriarch to “flip flop”, to cause Schism in Orthodoxy by meddling with the “tomos” in a jurisdiction that he previously signed his name to and agreed was Moscow’s. Try to convince everyone what that “incentive” was, [and it wasn’t just a personal vendetta to “stick it” to the Russians…even though that type of vindictiveness would not be becoming of a Patriarch]. We are all curious about getting to the bottom of “the truth” here, but simply ranting and calling something a “lie” without solving the mystery by providing “the convincing truth” provides no usefulness to this goal.
“His Holiness Orthodox Metropolitan of Belgrade Patriarch of the Serbian and Coastal Lands Irenaeus comments the schism, accusing Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople for siding with the powers of this world, and that the Belgrade Patriarchate will take sides according to the canonical order of the Church.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5qYS2dKsN8
May the Lord have mercy on the orthodox Christians of Estonia.
“Patriarchate of Constantinople’s Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church (EAOC) came out in support of a ban on the larger Estonian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, calling it a move to “strengthen national security.” The statement is entitled, “Estonia is on the Path Towards a Unified Orthodox Church.”
Since when is Barto in charge of strengthening national security? I thought he was an orthodox patriarch serving God, not the state. How much candy did he get paid for the destruction of the canonical Estonian orthodox church and did he not learn anything from the disaster he caused in Ukraine?
https://orthochristian.com/168226.html