Anyway, back to reality: the whole Honcharenko angle never ceases to amaze me. Once on this site, I was told that the ROC had no right to be out of its borders (i.e. Canada, lower 48) because the Golden Seal which granted Russia its patriarchate back in 1549 (I think) confined that church to the borders of Russia (however you define Russia –its borders were fluid, that’s what happens with empires).

Anyway, the same thing happened to the Church of Greece. It was begrudgingly granted autocephaly by C’pole in 1850 (over the protestations of the ROC I might add, who were on the side of the EP). Like the Golden Seal, Greece’s national church was to be confined to its borders as well.

BUT GUESS WHAT?!! OK, I’ll tell you: The EP conveniently forgot this little stricture in 1908 and “granted” the CoG the overlordship of all Greek parishes in North America. Now, this is really rich isn’t it? But it gets better: According to the EP’s earlier stricture against the CoG, Holy Trinity could not be canonical because it was “founded” by the CoG according to the “new historians.”

It’s not that they can’t have it both ways, they can’t have it ANYway. And of course, your own research really fills in the picture even better.

I once heard a sardonic criticism of some molecular biologist. His detractor said, “it’s not that he’s not right, he’s not even wrong.”

Anyway, not that any of this matters to ideologues. Certain folks (like Lambriniades, the whole GOA/Phanar axis, & the guy who does Mystagogy, thanks for the heads-up btw) are content to delude themselves that the Phanar is the Eastern Papacy.

I think we all need to re-read Bradley Nassif’s excellent esaay, that the duty of a bishop is to preach the Gospel.

Btw, since according to the EP line, the CoG has no business being in North America until 1908, according to them Honcharenko was uncanonical, not matter the state of his credentials.

Actually, the Greeks were not in the US prior to the Russians. Our claim to fame (I’m Greek and proud of it) is Holy Trinity parish in Neo Orleans. It was founded during the War Between the States in 1864 in land that was under Union martial law (Louisianna) in which the citizens of that state were disenfranchised.

Plus, the first priest was a Ukrainian (and we’re not really sure about his credentials) and the majority of the parish was Serbian. In addition, there was no Greek jurisdiction in the US operating at that time anyway. Although this parish was founded 3 yrs prior to SF, there was a Russian episcopal presence, administration and yes, diocese, in North America.

Canon 28 simply does not mean what they suggest it does. We who know this to be true then read their assertions about Churches not engaging in any missionary efforts beyond their canonical jurisdictions and are left scratching our heads: Did a council somehow negate the Great Commission? How is Orthodoxy supposed to spread if not by Churches sending missions outside their jurisdiction?

I am convinced that the Phanar’s interpretation of Canon 28, minted under Patriarch Meletios IV, is simply a bald faced lie. They know it has no basis in the text or subsequent history but they say it anyway, hoping that by saying it long enough it will gain gradual acceptance and become a Known Fact – – which it appears to have become in the Greek community, if not anywhere else. They do not think of it as a lie. They think of it as the Greek Church taking up for itself, an unfortunate political game which hierarchs (they probably believe) must engage in. This is very unfortunate.

Russia’s mission work here is only uncanonical if this territory belonged to another Orthodox Church. Since Canon 28 (contrary to the disingenuous assertions of the faculty of Holy Cross) did not give all barbarian territory everywhere to the EP (and certainly not “explicitly” so, as the HC faculty misleadingly asserted), then the America’s belonged to nobody and everybody. All things should be done in an orderly manner and so the Churches should coordinate and decide the authority structure here. They have not. Earlier, there is considerable evidence of widespread acknowledgment of Russian jurisdiction here, but the Bolshevik Revolution intervened.

In short, Constantinople is flat out lying. They know it’s a lie and they say it anyway because if it were to be accepted it would give them power. It’s that simple.

The arrogance involved here is astounding. The only time that I have ever encountered such arrogance is in reading certain assertions of Roman Catholics with regard to other Christians (including the Orthodox).

In fact, the whole thing is eerily reminiscent of Rome. The EP constantly referring to itself as the “Mother Church”, boasting that it deigned to bestow autocephaly on this or that Church, etc.

If there is a Mother Church it is Jerusalem. Constantinople was not at all notable before the capital of the Empire was moved there in the fourth century. Tell me again, which Apostles preached, lived or died there? It inherited primacy by default when Rome fell into heresy. It was Uniate for a period. It claims the sole perogative to grant autocephaly without any canonical basis whatsoever. Today there is no Constantinople, only Istanbul, run by secular and Muslim Turks, who may well not allow the Patriarchate to survive on their territory. This hardly justifies a place of preeminence as measured by the criterion of the Fathers who elevated it on the basis of its imperial status.

Those Greeks in the Phanar and in this country who defend this nonsense need to wake up and let it go before they cause a permanent rupture in relations with the other Orthodox. It makes them all look either delusional, dishonest or so tied to ethnocentric mythology that they can’t be trusted. There is no Eastern Pope and there is not going to be.

My only agenda is to defend to the best of my ability the sanctity and honor of His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew l Archbishop of Constantinople and Pope of New Rome

I get your point, Angela. I am in total disagreement with it. I find your position to be archaic nonsense without grace or love. Continuing to post with such a petulant attitude only confirms to me your unwillingness to listen or to really search for the the will of God in our mess.

I have never questioned that the EP has a significant role to play in assisting Orthodox unity in the United States. I would welcome with joy any constructive action. So far, it has either rejected that role or actively worked against any unity with a dogged obtuseness, seeking unity with Rome in the meantime.

What about Jesus Christ? What about the Church? What about salvation for all peoples? Do we worship in spirit and in truth or are we Samaritans?

If the actions of the EP are of God, they will bear Godly fruit. If not, they and the EP will wither. Just as the possibility that the AOCA may well implode because of the ungodly actions of Met. Philip; or the near destruction of the OCA by the ungodly actions of her hierarchs.

Continuing to post in the style of writing you choose means, to me, that you don’t really wish to communicate. You merely want to be bombastic and inciting. You do not appear to be concerned with ideas and their consequences, only with how you feel. Your style of writing reflects that. You appeal to and write from the passions not with a desire to acquire the Holy Spirit so that we may know the Truth together.

Your attitude and approach merely strengthens the idea that GREEKS don’t care about the Church or the people in the United States, only about the GREEKS.

The ever-memorable Father Justin Popovich characterized the WCC as “a heretical, humanistic, man-made, man-worshipping association” and regarded the position of the Orthodox towards the ecumenical movement and the WCC as “deplorably and hideously at odds with Holy Tradition, slavishly degrading the Holy Church” (Full text of the Memorandum in Koinonia, March-April 1975, pp. 95-101; also in Orthodoxos Typos, No. 235/June 1, 1975, and in Orthodoxos Enstasis kai Martyria, Nos. 18-21/January-December 1990, pp. 166-173.)

At the WCC’s 60th anniversary the Ecumenical Patriarch,

“often referred to as the spiritual leader of the world’s Orthodox, said he envisioned a future that will enable “a new generation of labourers to flourish in the ecumenical vineyard” and that retains a foundation of the “three pillars” of unity, witness, and service on which the WCC was built.”

The Orthodox World should be concerned with the ecumenical “movment”/ heresy. A systematic study of the “canonical irregularities” of the EP’s actions would better benefit Orthodoxy. This needs to be done before the “holy and great” synod.

The position of the EP gives us some sense of where they are going: a united Christianity and aiming ultimately at one universal religion, a “pan-religion.” that would fit in the model of a single united humanity (globalism). This is without doubt an utopian view, an ideology.

Re: Tower of Babel

I just happened to bump into this article, entitled “Ethnic Identity, National Identity and the Search for Unity”, presented by Archbishop Makarios of Kenya, which made the following reference. I thought to myself, “He said it ALMOST as well as Chrys!” LOL…

The unifying and transforming work of the Holy Spirit: In terms of our present discussion, concerning the search for human unity, a Byzantine kontakion which is chanted on the Orthodox Sunday of Pentecost is theologically most illuminating in terms of the post-Tower of Babel potential for a unified human condition initiated by Christ and confirmed by the Holy Spirit:

When He came down and confused all the languages the Most High split the world into nations, when the tongues of fire to them He distributed, He called the world into unity, reasons then we glorify the All Holy Spirit.

Here the Pentecost Event in the Upper Room in Jerusalem is seen as God’s reversal and undoing of the punitive measures taken at Babel. Through the “tongues of fire” and the speaking in various human tongues” the potential for the linguistic reunification of humanity is again made possible through the unifying operations of the Holy Spirit. Among other works the Holy Spirit possesses a creative force to transform and renew. The Pentecost Event transformed the disciples into bold witnesses for Christ by renewing their hearts and mind. This transforming “baptism of the Holy Spirit” is capable of transfiguring human hearts and making enemies friends and brothers. The Church needs therefore in its search for human unity to consistently experience the empowering anointing of the apostolic Pentecost and become a faithful instrument of the Holy Spirit in action, the very same Holy Spirit at work in Jesus Christ.

Read the entire article.

This article was originally posted on the website of the patriarchate of Alexandria. Not sure if it is still there.

Best Regards,
Dean