ΕΑΝ ΠΡΟΤΙΜΑΤΕ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΑ ΠΑΤΗΣΤΕ ΤΗ ΣΗΜΑΙΑ ΣΤΟ ΚΑΤΩ ΜΕΡΟΣ ΤΗΣ ΟΘΟΝΗΣ
By Helleniscope’s Editorial Team
The recent visit of the Pope to Constantinople — combined with the heavily staged events in Nicaea — has left many Orthodox faithful disturbed, disappointed, and alarmed. What was marketed as a moment of “unity” looked instead like a choreographed campaign to normalize Roman Catholic influence within the heart of the Orthodox world. The Phanar, under Patriarch Bartholomew, appeared more than willing to play host to an agenda that many see as corrosive to Orthodox identity and integrity.
From the opening ceremonies to the carefully-designed photo-ops, the entire visit felt less like a spiritual encounter and more like an orchestrated public relations tour. The joint recitation of the Creed without the Filioque was presented as a moment of shared faith, yet it came across as a symbolic concession — an attempt to soften resistance and test how far the Orthodox world might be pushed toward accepting “full communion.” Instead of addressing the profound theological and ecclesiological divisions that have persisted for centuries, the event relied on scripted gestures and smiling diplomacy.
The signing of the joint declaration only deepened the sense of unease. Its language of shared heritage and mutual aspiration created the illusion of consensus where none truly exists. By endorsing such statements, the Phanar risks speaking on behalf of an entire Orthodox world that does not share its enthusiasm for unionist theatrics. The broader Orthodox body — monasteries, clergy, theologians, and the faithful themselves — have long insisted that unity cannot be imposed from above through political maneuvering or gestures tailored for international audiences.
Equally troubling was the unmistakable imbalance of power on display. The Pope arrived not as an equal participant in dialogue but as the global figurehead of a centralized institution accustomed to projecting authority. By embracing the Pope’s overtures, the Phanar inadvertently signaled a willingness to accept Rome’s terms, or at least to entertain the illusion of parity where none exists. This sets a dangerous precedent: once the boundaries begin to blur, they rarely remain intact.
The visit also exposed a growing disconnect between Patriarch Bartholomew and the faithful he claims to represent. Many Orthodox Christians — particularly those rooted in traditional ecclesiology — see these unionist gestures as betrayals, executed without consultation and with little regard for their spiritual implications. Instead of strengthening Orthodoxy’s witness, the Phanar’s participation in this spectacle risks sowing division and confusion among believers who rightly expect their leaders to safeguard the faith, not negotiate it.
In the end, the Papal visit may be remembered not as a milestone of reconciliation but as a pivot point toward deeper mistrust. By prioritizing symbolic unity over doctrinal clarity, and by treating the centuries-old boundaries of the Church as political obstacles rather than spiritual safeguards, the Phanar has opened the door to further erosion of Orthodox distinctiveness. For many, this trip was not a gesture of goodwill but a warning — a sign that the future of Orthodoxy may depend less on international declarations and more on the resolve of the faithful to protect the Church from within.
December 1, 2025, n.stamatakis@aol.com www.helleniscope.com
DISCLAIMER: The views and statements expressed in this article constitute constitutionally protected opinions of this author.
Nick, God has given you analytical and rhetorical talents. You are using these talents to defend His teachings and His Church. I wish you good health to continue in this work and many years!
I literally got chills when I read about this on UOJ. Not that I didn’t expect it or it’s surprising. I never felt more betrayed by someone because it hits me right into my heart. And yet, I still do not understand why people are silent about it! Did we forget history? Many OCs died defending our faith. And we are just going to let barto sell us out? I think another schism is imminent. As much as I am against schisms, in order to keep our faith, we need to depart from Barto. Let him be “the one without equals”, the traitor. We do not recognize the pope as a church figure. They are in schism and unless they give up ALL their heretical teachings, including infallibility, we can’t talk about a future union between orthodox and catholics.
What is Athos going to say?
What are the other Patriarchs in the local Churches going to say?
Will they remain silent? Will they do like they have done in Ukraine and support Onuphry but refuse to break communion with Bartholomew.
By not taking a firm stand on many, many errors that Bartholomew has made they have embolden him to get to this point.
Breaking communion is a serious deal and shouldn’t be done lightly but In my opinion THIS is exactly where a break in communion should occur.
I’m usually an optimist but Church affairs have made me a pessimist in this particular topic and I don’t expect any of the patriarchs to do or say anything. Athos on the other hand might, but it will probably just be a letter.
Bartholomew doesn’t care about letters. He cares about optics and until Athos and other Churches break communion with him he will keep running down the primrose path to Hell and dragging the rest of the Churches with him with their silence.
This is all already leading to confusion from Orthodox people i know, they have been sending me articles or asking if we are now in union with Rome or what’s happening. The bishops NEED to speak because this event is already confusing the faithful and probably scandalizing those who are looking into Orthodoxy.
Athos is suffering from a Schism. 7 of the 20 monasteries had voted in favor of sending a delegation to the “enthronment” of Epiphanios. 3 or 4 of those 7 recently hosted Epiphanios himself, with open arms. The sketes and “cells” have long been critical of Bartholomew. As a result, about 6 years ago the “friends of Bartholomew” in Athens issued an encyclical in August, with only 3 bishops out of the 80 “presiding over the Synod”, forbidding any Mt. Athos monk from preaching outside of Mt. Athos without prior permission from the Synod of Athens. Prior to that, Bartholomew had issued an decree stating that any monk who criticizes Constantinople will be thrown out of the mountain…
So when you say “what is Athos going to say”, I think the question back is “which portion of the split personality of an Athos rife with schism” are you referring to?
Wow, I didn’t know that Laurel & Hardy were making a comeback!
What will it take for the GOA to cease commemoration? The Apostolic Canons… out the window! Laodicea tossed in the trash can! Joint prayer with Heretics, joint confession with them and joint declarations of unity. They are prepping for the outward display of such words. And who knows, they may have already done more out of sight than what has been on display.
The whole thing was absolutely plastic or wooden… lifeless and rotten!
All of this in a time when Orthodxy is on the rise. The enemy of our souls wishes to throw bigger stumbling blocks into the paths of those seeking the Truth.
May God help! Lord have mercy on all of us for our complacency. Thank you Nick and team for not remaining silent and using this platform for good!
I agree with all of the above comments. My wife (Gail) has expressed concerns for many years about Bart and his antics, when was he going to be called to account.
I’m afraid that I cannot counsel “patience” any more. It is now clear that Bart cares more about “greetings in the market place” than Holy Orthodoxy.
It’s high time for Athos and the other patriarchs to convene a council NOW and bring Bart to account for the immeasurable harm he’s doing to Christ’s Church (to say nothing about his own soul).
Amin! Well said brother George! It feels like we have been very patient op to this point. The Church never wishes to deal harshly very quickly. But the time for accountability seems quite necessary now.
How is this different from the joint declaration signed by Patriarch Kirill and Pope Francis in 2016?
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/33401/full-text-of-joint-declaration-signed-by-pope-francis-and-patriarch-kirill
Joseph,
The difference is Francis and his Uniate subordinates backstabbed Kyrill 2 years later on the tomos fiasco, desecrating and pillaging the Kiev caves in the process, just like the 4th Crusade, but Leo still being too new hasn’t yet backstabbed Bart…at some point it will happen…nothing good has ever come from any “discussions” with the Vatican after 1054 AD…
And the similarity is that history repeats itself when you ignore it…the Papacy has still not rejected false Papal dogmas, just like during the “dialogues in 1439 Ferrara … Kyrill made a criticsl mistake in 2016 signing those words, thinking Francis was a “decent guy”, (and ignoring the fate of those famous doves released at the Vatican) and so did Bartholomew in 2025, as well as with the tomos that has caused schism in Orthodoxy…
Quite the opposite occurred from what your article suggests. The Pope’s visit strengthened Orthodoxy. The joint chanting of the Nicene Creed in Nicaea without the Filioque was not a concession by the Orthodox Church, but a step by the Pope toward the original, unaltered Creed. If anything, this moment signaled a movement toward Orthodoxy, not away from it.
Since the beginning of Uniatism, Rome has accepted the Creed without the Filioque. This is not so momentous an occasion as many would have us think. It is an empty gesture to tickle the ears of Orthodox ecumenists.
If Leo wants to actually make a substantial move in the direction of Orthodoxy, he would require the Latin Church to drop the Filioque entirely and return to the Creed of his predecessor Leo III. That would be an actual change. It is in his power to do. It won’t happen.
Steve,
That’s not a true assessment. The Papists have been officially reciting the Orthodox Creed in their “Eastern rite / Uniate mass” for centuries now. Therefore It is NOT a surprise or a “step forward” for the Pope to recite the Nicene creed without the Filioque. What WOULD HAVE BEEN a step forward would be for the Pope to recite the proper Nicene Creed, and simultaneously declare that the Filioque will NEVER be used again by the Papists going forward…
Don’t be deceived, sir…they’ve got you exactly where they want you…
Steve, let’s hope you are correct. However, we must be very cautious. We cannot accept any of the other Papal heresies just because they may be willing to get rid of the filioque. Marcus Eugenicus was right. They are not only schismatics but also heretics – Papal supremacy and infallibility, the Indulgences, the Treasury of Merits, the inherited guilt of Original Sin, Purgatory, the Immaculate Conception of the Theotokos, and so many others, not to mention their past violence against Orthodoxy and her churches. We are going to be in communion with all these heresies and a papacy we don’t trust because the Pope conceded on the filioque? I don’t think so. Nevertheless, Elder Ephraim used to say “be patient.” A schism can only happen if there is holy communion without conversion. For true union, there has to be repentance and the Pope has to go away, which will likely never happen, because someone else will likely fill his place. Union will occur from the grass roots, one soul at a time, through conversion.
Steve, you are wrong. For the past 20 years I have been discussing with others how the pope one day will renounce the Filioque and even his infallibility or some of the other heresies they have, to move towards union. But this is not enough! Many things were promised in the past to us like change of calendar, and then they did not deliver what they promised. Union is only possible through repentance and renouncing of fake doctrines. Otherwise, we might as well go confess ONE sin, when everyone is watching, and then continue our life without repentance. Nicaea was not a point to meet in the past for anyone else but people of the SAME faith. Why should we smear that meeting by inviting people of different faith, and pretend we are the same? Catholics promised many things before but broke many promises. I did not see the pope renouncing the other heresies, only one. Did they actually change their creed (all catholic churches) or he just missed a word for the show? Of course not! It is not sincere! He may renounce 1 or 2 more false teachings, but that does not make him orthodox. Let’s be serious! This is dishonest.
prayer with the heretics is forbidden this is a act of apostasy.
Ο ΠΑΤΡΙΑΡΧΗΣ ΒΑΡΘΟΛΟΜΑΙΟΣ ΚΑΤΑΦΕΡΕ ΑΥΤΟ ΠΟΥ ΜΟΝΟ Ο ΜΕΓΑΣ ΦΩΤΙΟΣ ΕΙΧΕ ΕΚΤΕΛΕΣΕΙ ΝΑ ΑΦΑΙΡΕΣΟΥΝ ΟΙ ΛΑΤΙΝΟΙ ΤΟ FILIOQUE ΑΠΟ ΤΟ ΠΙΣΤΕΥΩ,,,,ΤΟΥΤΟ ΕΠΙΒΕΒΑΙΩΝΕΙ ΑΠΟ ΤΟΥ ΝΥΝ ΟΤΙ ΟΙ ΛΑΤΙΝΟΙ ΚΑΙ ΟΙ ΟΡΘΟΔΟΞΟΙ ΕΧΟΥΜΕ ΑΚΡΙΒΩΣ ΤΗΝ ΙΔΙΑ ΘΕΟΛΟΓΙΑ ΠΕΡΙ ΤΗΣ ΑΓΙΑΣ ΤΡΙΑΔΟΣ ΤΟΝ ΙΔΙΟ ΘΕΟ,…DE FACTO ΕΙΣΕΡΧΟΜΕΘΑ ΣΕ ΝΟΜΙΜΗ ΚΟΙΝΗ ΠΡΟΣΕΥΧΗ ΜΕ ΤΟΥΣ ΔΥΤΙΚΟΥΣ ΧΡΙΣΤΙΑΝΟΥΣ ΑΛΛΑ ΟΧΙ ΑΚΟΜΑ ΣΕ ΚΟΙΝΟ ΠΟΤΗΡΙΟΝ,,,ΟΙ ΔΙΑΦΩΝΟΥΝΤΕΣ ΕΧΟΥΣΙ ΓΑΡ ΜΩΥΣΕΑ ΚΑΙ ΠΡΟΦΗΤΑΣ ΠΑΤΕΡΕΣ ΚΑΙ ΠΗΔΑΛΙΟΝ ,,ΚΑΝΩΝ 15 ΤΗΣ 1 2 ΣΥΝΟΔΟΥ ΕΝ ΚΩΝΣΤΑΝΤΙΝΟΠΟΛΕΙ ΤΟΥ ΕΤΟΥΣ 861,
ΕΙΣ ΠΟΛΛΑ ΕΤΗ ΤΩ ΝΕΩ ΦΩΤΙΩ ΑΡΧΙΕΠΙΣΚΟΠΟΥ ΝΕΑΣ ΡΩΜΗΣ ΒΑΡΘΟΛΟΜΑΙΩ,,,,