ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΗ ΜΕΤΑΦΡΑΣΗ ΑΚΟΛΟΥΘΕΙ

By Nick Stamatakis

We never expected AB Elpidophoros to be an effective spiritual leader and it was common knowledge that he was never a decent theologian. But the fact that he chose to write an essay on “Ukraine and Geopolitics” just a few months before he was enthroned, provided ample proof that he chose to become a cynical political actor: he had the gall, having little or no experience in geopolitics, to intervene in a very heated subject, Ukraine, to curry favor with his new “handlers” at the State Department, as they were attempting to push Russia out of its natural “sphere of influence” and its historical birthplace in Ukraine.

He kept on the same slippery path a few days ago when he spoke at the International Religious Freedom Summit, 2021, “The Rising Tide of Religious Nationalism” (text of this speech at the bottom of this post), in Washington DC amidst a bunch of “deep state” operatives who are living in a cloud of fallacies, mostly dreaming that they will “overcome” in Ukraine (chief among them Sam Brownback).  Ignoring the realities on the ground, they keep pressing on their goals in Ukraine as if they were not slapped by reality quite a few times recently. Let’s enumerate them: 1) Putin won a big victory in Syria.  2) Crimea has already been a non-issue since the summit of Putin with President Trump. 3) Nordstream-2 pipeline was granted legitimacy by Biden and is a non-issue since the recent Putin-Biden summit.  4) Russia is several years ahead in radar and missile technology, which makes any military confrontation a losing proposition – not to mention the always “forgotten” fact that they own advanced and completely modernized nuclear weapons.  Even before they modernized their nuclear weapons any confrontation in Ukraine would be a non-starter unless some maniac in Washington DC or Moscow wanted to destroy the planet. Need I say more?

Despite this harsh reality, AB Elpidophoros decided to address the audience with a speech that would not convince even 3rd graders.  On the face of it, he peddles pure heresy: “… When you elevate one religion above all others, it is as if you decide there is only one path leading to the top of the mountain. But the truth is you simply cannot see the myriads of paths that lead to the same destination, because you are surrounded by boulders of prejudice that obscure your view…” 

Here is how our friend George Michalopulos of Monomakhos.com answered: Does he have his kalimavkion on straight?  (Actually, it looks like it’s not.)  This is flat-out heresy.  “Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life, no one comes to the Father but through me’ (John 14:6).”  Not Mohammed.  Not Buddha.  Not Brahma, Vishnu, or Shiva.  Not even Pope Francis or Patriarch Bartholomew, who have been setting their own paths for a few years now.  Michalopulos points out the “syncretism” that AB Elpidophoros is attempting, obviously part of the “Ecumenist” movement… As I have noted many times, Orthodoxy had many heretics as Patriarchs and Archbishops in its long history. The body of the Church always found a way to excrete these sick cells and to move on to the next phase.

But the main part of his speech attacks an old enemy, “Caesaropapism” and “Papocaesarism,” or in other words the assumption of dual political and religious roles from the same political or religious leader.  And he goes on to attack the Russian Orthodox Church of such “crimes”… The only problem is that he – and the Constantinople Patriarchate – should be the last ones to accuse anyone, let alone the Russians, for “Caesaropapism” and for using religion for political goals. Historians have clearly documented that the Constantinople Patriarchate has been an extension of the State Department since the times of President Truman.

Especially in the last few years, since Pat. Bartholomew saw it fit to transform himself from a religious leader to a CIA operative, he and his underlings, such as AB Elpidophoros, have no right to accuse others of their own sins. First of all, they should have the intellectual honesty and decency to recognize that, after 70 harsh years of communism, President Putin made an excellent choice for the benefit of his own people by emphasizing the traditional role of the Orthodox faith in Russia. Doesn’t AB Elpidophoros know that the Russian people rejected all those “foreign bodies”, the Evangelical preachers (including Billy Graham) sent to Russia by the West? Doesn’t he understand that these “foreign bodies” attempted to play a very sinister game in Russia – and a failing one by definition? Or maybe he wants to forget one thousand years of Byzantine Empire’s history where the Patriarch was always in cahoots with the Emperor, protected and in many ways manipulated? It was the Byzantine Emperors who perfected the use of religion for political gain by proselytizing to Christianity their enemies.  The list of these proselytized people is too long and includes most people of Slavic origins today… Who is Elpidophoros kidding?

Those of us who have even a minimal knowledge of Russian history and literature would recognize that Russia without Orthodoxy is not feasible, understandable, functional.  Russia without Orthodoxy cannot exist for the very same reasons that Greece without the Orthodox faith would soon go on the road to peril.  For goodness sake, Orthodoxy is still declared as the official state religion by the Constitution of Greece! AB Elpidophoros should have the decency to recognize these simple facts and qualify his bold statements to reflect them. He does not – and so he appears as an illiterate peasant.

Not only he appears as an illiterate peasant but his true goals become even more transparent. What are his true goals? To demonstrate obedience to his handlers who are in the audience and show them that he will serve their wishes from any post.  Unfortunately, as I noted above, this game is already lost in Ukraine and elsewhere and the only thing remaining is their landing in the harsh reality, which is bound to be painful.

July 18, 2021, n.stamatakis@aol.com   www.helleniscope.com

======================

O Αρχ.Ελπιδοφόρος, ανεπαρκής Θεολόγος, διολισθαίνει από την υποκρισία στην αίρεση

Του Νίκου Σταματάκη

Ποτέ δεν περιμέναμε ότι ο Αρχ. Ελπιδοφόρος θα ήταν ένας αποτελεσματικός πνευματικός ηγέτης και ήταν κοινή γνώση ότι δεν ήταν ποτέ αξιοπρεπής θεολόγος. Αλλά το γεγονός ότι επέλεξε να γράψει ένα δοκίμιο για την “Ουκρανία και Γεωπολιτική” μόλις λίγους μήνες πριν από την ενθρόνισή του παρείχε επαρκείς αποδείξεις ότι επέλεξε να γίνει κυνικός πολιτικός: είχε το θράσος, έχοντας λίγη ή καθόλου εμπειρία στη γεωπολιτική, να παρέμβει σε ένα πολύ θερμό θέμα, την Ουκρανία, για να αποκτήσει την εύνοια των νέων «χειριστών» του στο Στέιτ Ντιπάρτμεντ, καθώς προσπαθούσαν να απομακρύνουν τη Ρωσία από τη φυσική «σφαίρα επιρροής» της και την ιστορική γενέτειρά της, την Ουκρανία.

Συνέχισε στον ίδιο ολισθηρό δρόμο πριν από λίγες μέρες όταν μίλησε στη Διάσκεψη Κορυφής περί Διεθνούς Θρησκευτικής Ελευθερίας, το 2021, «Η ανοδος του θρησκευτικού εθνικισμού», στην Ουάσιγκτον, μέσα σε μια ομάδα από πράκτορες του “βαθέος κράτους”  που ζουν σε ένα σύννεφο πλάνης, και ως επί το πλείστον ονειρεύονται ότι θα “νικήσουν” στην Ουκρανία (με πρώτο τον Sam Brownback). Παραβλέποντας τις πραγματικές συνθήκες, συνεχίζουν να επιμένουν στους στόχους τους στην Ουκρανία σαν να μην χτυπήθηκαν από την πραγματικότητα αρκετές φορές πρόσφατα. Ας τις απαριθμήσουμε: 1) Ο Πούτιν κέρδισε μια μεγάλη νίκη στη Συρία. 2) Η Κριμαία υπήρξε ήδη ανύπαρκτο ζήτημα από τη σύνοδο κορυφής του Πούτιν με τον Πρόεδρο Τραμπ. 3) Ο αγωγός Nordstream-2 εγκρίθηκε πλέον από τον Μπάιντεν και δεν αποτελεί ζήτημα όπως είδαμε στην πρόσφατη σύνοδο κορυφής Πούτιν-Μπάιντεν. 4) Η Ρωσία είναι αρκετά χρόνια μπροστά στην τεχνολογία ραντάρ και πυραύλων, γεγονός που καθιστά κάθε στρατιωτική αντιπαράθεση μια χαμένη υπόθεση – για να μην αναφέρουμε το πάντα “ξεχασμένο” γεγονός ότι οι Ρώσοι κατέχουν προηγμένα και πλήρως εκσυγχρονισμένα πυρηνικά όπλα. Ακόμη και πριν εκσυγχρονίσουν τα πυρηνικά τους όπλα, οποιαδήποτε αντιπαράθεση στην Ουκρανία θα ήταν ανόητη, εκτός αν κάποιος μανιακός στην Ουάσιγκτον ή τη Μόσχα ήθελε να καταστρέψει τον πλανήτη. Χρειάζεται να πω περισσότερα;

Παρά αυτήν τη σκληρή πραγματικότητα, ο Αρχ. Ελπιδοφόρος αποφάσισε να απευθυνθεί στο κοινό με μια ομιλία (παρακάτω) που δεν θα έπειθε ακόμη και τους μαθητές τη τρίτης Δημοτικού. Εκ πρώτης όψεως, προτείνει μια καθαρή αίρεση: “… Όταν ανυψώνετε μια θρησκεία πάνω από όλες τις άλλες, είναι σαν να αποφασίσετε ότι υπάρχει μόνο ένα μονοπάτι που οδηγεί στην κορυφή του βουνού. Αλλά η αλήθεια είναι ότι απλά δεν μπορείτε να δείτε τις μυριάδες μονοπάτια που οδηγούν στον ίδιο προορισμό, γιατί περιβάλλεται από πέτρες προκατάληψης που κρύβουν την οπτική σας … ”

Εδώ είναι που απάντησε ο φίλος μας Γιώργος Μιχαλόπουλος του Monomakhos.com: “Εχει το καλιμαύχι του ίσια; (Στην πραγματικότητα, φαίνεται ότι δεν είναι.) Αυτή είναι μια απλή αίρεση. Ο Ιησούς του είπε « Εγώ είμαι ο δρόμος, και η αλήθεια, και η ζωή, κανείς δεν έρχεται στον Πατέρα εκτός από μένα »(Ιωάννης 14: 6).” Όχι Μωάμεθ. Όχι ο Βούδας. Όχι Brahma, Vishnu ή Shiva. Ούτε ο Πάπας Φραγκίσκος ή ο Πατριάρχης Βαρθολομαίος, που έχουν κάνει τα δικά τους μονοπάτια εδώ και μερικά χρόνια”. Ο Μιχαλόπουλος επισημαίνει τον «συγκρητισμό» που επιχειρεί ο ΑΒ Ελπιδόφορος, προφανώς στα πλαίσια του κινήματος του «Οικουμενισμού» … Όπως έχω παρατηρήσει πολλές φορές, η Ορθοδοξία είχε πολλούς αιρετικούς ως Πατριάρχες και Αρχιεπίσκοπους στη μακρά ιστορία της. Το σώμα της Εκκλησίας βρήκε πάντα έναν τρόπο να εκκρίνει αυτά τα άρρωστα κύτταρα και να προχωρήσει στην επόμενη φάση.

Αλλά στο κύριο μέρος της ομιλίας του επιτίθεται σε έναν παλιό εχθρό, τον «Καισαροπαπισμό» και τον «Παποκαισαρισμό», ή με άλλα λόγια την υπόθεση διπλών πολιτικών και θρησκευτικών ρόλων από τον ίδιο πολιτικό ή θρησκευτικό ηγέτη. Και συνεχίζει να επιτίθεται στη Ρωσική Ορθόδοξη Εκκλησία στη βάση τέτοιων «εγκλημάτων» … Το μόνο πρόβλημα είναι ότι αυτός – και το Πατριαρχείο της Κωνσταντινούπολης – θα έπρεπε να είναι οι τελευταίοι που δικαιούνται να κατηγόρησουν κανέναν, πόσο μάλλον τους Ρώσους, για “Καισαροπαπισμό” και για χρήση της θρησκείας για πολιτικούς στόχους. Οι ιστορικοί έχουν τεκμηριώσει σαφώς ότι το Πατριαρχείο της Κωνσταντινούπολης αποτελεί επέκταση του Στέιτ Ντιπάρτμεντ από την εποχή του Προέδρου Τρούμαν.

Αλλά τα τελευταία χρόνια, από τότε που ο Πατ. Βαρθολομαίος θεώρησε σκόπιμο να μετατραπεί από έναν θρησκευτικό ηγέτη σε έναν πράκτορα της CIA, αυτός και οι υποτακτικοί του, όπως ο Aρχ. Ελπιδοφόρος, δεν έχουν κανένα δικαίωμα να προσάψουν σε άλλους τις δικές τους αμαρτίες. Πρώτα απ ‘όλα, θα πρέπει να έχουν την πνευματική εντιμότητα και ευπρέπεια να αναγνωρίσουν ότι, μετά από 70 σκληρά χρόνια κομμουνισμού, ο Πρόεδρος Πούτιν έκανε μια εξαιρετική επιλογή προς όφελος του λαού του, τονίζοντας τον παραδοσιακό ρόλο της Ορθόδοξης πίστης στη Ρωσία. Δεν γνωρίζει ο Aρχ. Ελπιδοφόρος ότι ο ρωσικός λαός απέρριψε όλα αυτά τα “ξένα σώματα”, τους ευαγγελικούς ιεροκήρυκες (συμπεριλαμβανομένου του Billy Graham) που στάλθηκαν στη Ρωσία από τη Δύση; Δεν καταλαβαίνει ότι αυτά τα “ξένα σώματα” επιχείρησαν να παίξουν ένα πολύ βρώμικο παιχνίδι στη Ρωσία – και ένα παιχνίδι αποτυχημένο εξ ορισμού; Ή μήπως θέλει να ξεχάσει τα χίλια χρόνια της βυζαντινής αυτοκρατορίας, όπου ο Πατριάρχης ήταν πάντα σε συνεργασία με τον αυτοκράτορα, προστατευμένος και με πολλούς τρόπους χειραγωγημένος; Ήταν οι Βυζαντινοί Αυτοκράτορες που τελειοποίησαν τη χρήση της θρησκείας για πολιτικό κέρδος προσηλυτίζοντας στον Χριστιανισμό τους εχθρούς τους. Ο κατάλογος αυτών των προσηλυτισμένων λαών είναι πολύ μακρύς και περιλαμβάνει τους περισσότερους λαούς σλαβικής καταγωγής σήμερα … Αστειεύεται ο Ελπιδοφόρος;

Όσοι από εμάς έχουμε έστω και ελάχιστη γνώση της ρωσικής ιστορίας και λογοτεχνίας αναγνωρίζουμε ότι η Ρωσία χωρίς Ορθοδοξία δεν είναι εφικτή, κατανοητή και λειτουργική. Η Ρωσία χωρίς την Ορθοδοξία δεν μπορεί να υπάρξει για τους ίδιους λόγους που η Ελλάδα χωρίς την Ορθόδοξη πίστη θα πήγαινε σύντομα στο δρόμο για την καταστροφή. Ξεχνά ο Αρχ.Ελπιδοφόρος ότι η Ορθοδοξία εξακολουθεί να δηλώνεται ως επίσημη κρατική θρησκεία από το Σύνταγμα της Ελλάδας! Ο Aρχ. Ελπιδοφόρος πρέπει να έχει την ευγένεια να αναγνωρίζει αυτά τα απλά γεγονότα και να μετριάζει τις τολμηρές δηλώσεις του για να αντανακλούν την αλήθεια. Δεν το κάνει – και έτσι εμφανίζεται ως αναλφάβητος χωριάτης.

Όχι μόνο εμφανίζεται ως αναλφάβητος χωριάτης, αλλά οι πραγματικοί του στόχοι γίνονται ακόμη πιο διαφανείς. Ποιοι είναι οι πραγματικοί του στόχοι; Να δείξει υπακοή στους χειριστές του που βρίσκονταν στο ακροατήριο και να τους δείξει ότι θα εξυπηρετήσει τις επιθυμίες τους από οποιαδήποτε θέση. Δυστυχώς, όπως ανέφερα παραπάνω, αυτό το παιχνίδι έχει ήδη χαθεί στην Ουκρανία και αλλού και το μόνο που απομένει είναι η προσγείωση τους στη σκληρή πραγματικότητα, η οποία θα είναι σίγουρα επώδυνη.

July 18, 2021, n.stamatakis@aol.com   www.helleniscope.com

============================

SOURCE: ORTHODOX TIMES

Archbishop of America: Moscow Patriarchate maintains much of the contours of the old Soviet Union

The International Religious Freedom Summit, 2021, “The Rising Tide of Religious Nationalism”, was attended by Archbishop Elpidophoros of America, whose references to the relations of the Russian Church with the Russian state, but also to the transformation of the Hagia Sophia into a mosque in Constantinople impressed the crowd.

In his speech, he referred to “religious nationalism”, which, as he said, is only one side of the coin. There is also “Nationalistic Religion”.

Archbishop Elpidophoros underlined the case of the Russian Federation and the post-Soviet Russian Orthodox Church.

As the Archbishop explained, “even as the Russian Federation morphed into its present form, the newly freed Russian Orthodox Church struggled to rebuild its place in society. Its cooperation and support of the State have been a way to regain its former glories.

Yet, it is the state itself that has benefited from the “Religious Nationalism” created by the reborn Orthodox Church within its borders. Precisely because the Moscow Patriarchate maintains much of the contours of the old Soviet Union.

The close relationship between the state Foreign Ministry and the Church Department of External Relations is well known.

Through the networks of the Moscow Patriarchate, the Russian Federation is able to exert influence in the new nation-states that emerged after the fall of the Iron Curtain.

Ukraine is a case in point, where a local Orthodox Church was established, legally and canonically, by the Ecumenical Patriarchate, yet the Moscow Patriarchate continues to maintain its own entity.

This is clearly in the interests of the Russian Federation which benefits as much, if not more, from its “Religious Nationalism” as the Church does from its “Nationalistic Religion.”

It should be noted that Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk, head of the Moscow Patriarchate department for external church relations, also participated in the same conference.

Read below the speech of Archbishop Elpidophoros of America:

“The Rising Tide of Religious Nationalism”

July 15, 2021
Omni Shoreham Hotel
Washington, DC

Ambassador Brownback and President Swett:
Co-chairs for the 2021 IRF Summit,
Honorary Senate Co-Chairs, Senators Coons and Lankford,
Honorary House Co-Chairs, Congressmen Cuellar and Smith,
Esteemed Presenters, Fellow Participants, Dear Friends,

It is a great privilege to be with you today, and I want to express the appreciation of the Greek Orthodox Church of America – a province of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the Mother Church of Eastern Christianity – for the exceptional work of the International Religious Freedom Summits. The partner and supporting entities bear witness to the inclusive and comprehensive nature of the vision for human liberty and freedom of conscience we seek to enhance around the globe.

I shall commence the subject of my remarks, with the following observation. “Religious Nationalism” is only one side of the coin. There is also “Nationalistic Religion.”

Much like the terms “Caesaropapism” and “Papocaesarism,” that described the tensions between political and ecclesial autocracies of centuries past, the interests of the State and those who desire some form of “theocracy” are seldom aligned.

The shoreline where these rising tides appear is a very long one, with diverse landscapes. Here in the United States, we have witnessed – especially in recent years – how independent religious bodies with charismatic leaders are using the public, political sphere to advance their own agendas. This is a clear case of “Nationalistic Religion,” where identity politics are incorporated into a religious entity in order to advance a religious agenda. Should such a tide rise to an undue influence – either in the legislative, judicial, or executive branches of government, it would challenge the very idea of the First Amendment, and the non-establishment clause concerning religion.

On the other hand, we could look at some aspects of modern Iran, and find a distinct brand of “Religious Nationalism,” a full-blown attempt at theocracy by a seeming majority. But to see a spiritual basis for the State is to create a stratification of society along religious lines, a spiritual apartheid, if you will. The result is a monolithic society unyielding to diversity.

When you elevate one religion above all others, it is as if you decide there is only one path leading to the top of the mountain. But the truth is you simply cannot see the myriads of paths that lead to the same destination, because you are surrounded by boulders of prejudice that obscure your view.

Finally, there is a hybrid of the two, as in the case of the Russian Federation and the post-Soviet Russian Orthodox Church. The painful history of the Church under the communist regime came to a sudden and stunning halt with the fall of the Iron Curtain.

However, even as the Russian Federation morphed into its present form, the newly freed Russian Orthodox Church struggled to rebuild its place in society. Its cooperation and support of the State has been a way to regain its former glories. Yet, it is the state itself that has benefited from the “Religious Nationalism” created by the reborn Orthodox Church within its borders. Precisely because the Moscow Patriarchate maintains much of the contours of the old Soviet Union. The close relationship between the state Foreign Ministry and the Church Department of External Relations is well known.

Through the networks of the Moscow Patriarchate, the Russian Federation is able to exert influence in the new nation-states that emerged after the fall of the Iron Curtain. Ukraine is a case in point, where a local Orthodox Church was established, legally and canonically, by the Ecumenical Patriarchate, yet the Moscow Patriarchate continues to maintain its own entity. This is clearly in the interests of the Russian Federation which benefits as much, if not more, from its “Religious Nationalism” as the Church does from its “Nationalistic Religion.”
These few examples – painted in broad strokes – highlight the kinds of exigencies that we are facing. By promoting one religion above others, states create an oversized monolith in the public square that de facto (and sometimes de jure) excludes the citizenry who do not conform to that religious point of view.

For the religious entity, the material advantages of state-sponsorship should be far-outweighed by the cost to the ethical, moral, and spiritual core of the faith tradition – any faith tradition. To put it in specifically Christian terms: “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” Throughout history, every religious body has had to face the choice of ‘rendering unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.’

So how do we overcome these tides that seem to inexorably rise over time?

First, we must confess that such monoliths are not consistent with a modern, pluralistic, and emergent world. Democracy still finds a way in the imagination of peoples who yearn for liberty. That is why the cultivation of indigenous democratic forms of government – not the imposition from without – is an answer for both the state and the religious culture. Because even a homogenous religious culture is dependent on the individual’s freedom, in order for faith to be genuine and not coercive.

Second, we can accept that the historical journeys of any people possess complex and complicated markers that, if respected, create seawalls that hold back the troubling and troublesome tides. Allow me to close with a recent and very relevant example from the nation of my birth.

Last year, in this very month of July, the most iconic edifice of Orthodox Christianity – the Hagia Sophia in modern Istanbul, had its status withdrawn and was re-converted into a mosque. This Church was the largest Church in the world in the first millennium of Christianity. The end of the Roman Empire in 1453 changed its use, as has happened throughout history to many religious edifices.

But when the Turkish state emerged a century ago, it was deemed that such a unique and potent symbol should emanate an inclusive message, one that served the interests of all the citizens. Thus, the Hagia Sophia became a museum. For the Orthodox Christian world, this was not the best solution, but it was a vision for a future that included the incredible historical journey of Anatolia, not just one phase of that journey. We see in this re-conversion how the tide rose. And we see in those that called this crisis out, the effort to stem the tide.

My fellow laborers in the field of human freedom and inclusivity, I have outlined only some of the shores against which the tides of “Religious Nationalism” and “Nationalistic Religion” are crashing. Our best seawalls are going to be built out of cooperative efforts to instill democracy and freedom of conscience around the globe. This Summit is a most significant building block in that wall, and I thank you for your attention today and for your service to this mission.