Let me ditto Cynthia’s suggestion to read Paul Johnson and suggest another good book of his too:

Chris, they may never know. That’s why Soros’ entire career is so insidious, and why Orthodox bishops should stay clear of him and his ilk.

The problem in the “case of FYROM” isn’t that Soros is funding the pro-Macedonian cause, it is that Soros has fed Greeks the lie that Orthodox Macedonia is your enemy, and that Greek recognition of Macedonia would mean your destruction, while at the same time he promotes the sort of policies/politicians that have bankrupted your nation. Soros is the promoter of big government policies and over bloated bureaucracies.

In essence, Soros keeps natural Orthodox Christian Allies divided, uses the “Macedonian Name Issue” as cover while he economically destroys Greece as the regions’ main power to bring the region into the complete One World/One Banking scheme.

Dear Greece, How long will it take before you learn that the Orthodox Christian nation of the Republic of Macedonia isn’t your enemy. The secularists movement of Soros is?

Michael, I couldn’t have said it better myself. That is why we need an AUTOCEPHALOUS Orthodox Church OF America. The pusillanimity of the colonial bishops is the reason we won’t ever have one.

Cynthia, when all is said and done, Soros is an atheist and a follower of Nietzsche’s dictum, wsas mas nicht unbrinckt, macht mir starker
(That which does not destroy me, makes me stronger). Because he fancies himself to be The Superman, he is “beyond good and evil.” Therefore, anything he does is not subject to moral scrutiny as “good” and “evil” are moral constructs and in a non-theistic universe, there is no such thing as morality. It is for this reason that Soros can sleep nights even though he ratted out other Jews to the Gestapo.

Of course, we Christians don’t have this luxury, do we? We know that there is good because we know that God exists, and God is good. Evil has no existence on its own but is a parasite on good. From a purely psychological POV, we can say that Soros is a sociopath. He doesn’t have a conscience.

Forgive the ramble and disjointed thoughts. In any case, our bishops should stay miles away from this man and others like him (i.e. Fidel Castro). They can offer nothing to them because they want nothing of value. Any contact with them only debases Christians. (Remember, Zacchaeus wanted to meet Jesus, the harlot who washed Jesus’ feet with her hair was aware of her sinfulness, etc. Sociopaths like Castro and his ilk can’t see the error of their ways, because of their “dialectical materialism.”)

In the absence of a functioning local synod, the bishops must expect that lay people and clergy will respond when their prounoucements are felt to be out of line with Holy Tradition or simple Christianity. The lack of a functioning local synod will only increase the arcimony and divisions within the Church. The likely result without bold, concrete action is the division of the Church here in the US into an offical church and an unoffical one.

Frankly, the way things are going, I’d rather be in the unoffical Church but a schism of that kind is a terrible price to pay for the timidity, apathy and corruption of those who purport to lead us.

We need to cry out to those who will not allow us to unite: “Let my people go!” Right now I tend to think of the Bishops as a bit like the Edgar G. Robinson character in “The Ten Commandments” movie always whining and crying and finding reasons why we should go back to Egpyt and Pharoah.

I am tired of the machevellian, academic, power games.

Andrew, “constant villains”. I love it! BTW, the Doonesbury character I referenced earlier was “Rev Scott Sloan.”

We see the ground zero church unrebuilt for so long it feels to me on the track to being sold so long as everyone in black has ‘plausable deny-ability’ against being ‘the one’ ‘responsible’ for it, instead of that venue being deployed as a rallying point for the ‘Easter Sprintime’ renewal in the face of devastation message Christians are given to hear so much about otherwise.

When other people do the work of bringing this fact to light the Archbishop and the Ecumenical Patriarch are too busy touring a Greek Island to weigh in leaving a minion to speak whose primary message is ‘I wasn’t there so I don’t know’.

We see the EP coming to the Missississippi River basin to wag his finger at the people who, like me, live on a river which over the last couple of decades has improved from a foul smelling waste dumping ground to a naturally muddy body clean enough the fish taken from it are deemed fit to eat by the various bordering statedepartments of natural resources.

The mis-steps are so bad, so repeated, it becomes hard to credit those taking these decisions are merely badly advised.

Why do those who do these things deem it wise?

Don’t you just love how we AOI blog readers are the constant villains?

AOI bloggers were the villains when SVS betrayed the myriad of Orthodox Christians around the world who struggle in chastity by honoring a man who belittles such living.

AOI bloggers are now the villains when a GOA Bishop operating outside the boundaries of his own jurisdictions internet ministries calls a pro-abortion organization a good cause and lends his episcopal support to Liberation Theology.

There are no doubt other examples as well.

In both cases AOI did not cause these problems. AOI did not make SVS go cuckoo nor did AOI make Bishop Savas post on his facebook page. What the reasoned and balanced readers of AOI did was point out what are some glarring inconsistencies with Orthodox Tradition. There is nothing wrong with this. Any histrionics about this post are out of place.

In the meantime, AOI deserves nothing but praise for being an island of freedom and sanity where such issues can be discussed. Thank you!

John, this is what I meant by “Phanar enthusiasts”: Your uncritical defense of Bishop Savvas’ latest musings unwittingly put many well-meaning people in the GOA on the path towards Liberation Theology, just like the EP’s uncritical acceptance of anthropocentric global warming (AGW) put the GOA in the uncomfortable position of sounding like Bambi’s mother. (I say “unwittingly” because I honestly don’t see the critical thought behind these positions, just moddish posing to try and make the Phanar “relevant.” Kind of reminds me of the old Doonesbury character “Fr Scott, the hip, young priest who can talk to the young.”)

Seriously now. Words mean things. The Roman Catholics get this. Serious theologians do as well (even on the Left, think Jim Wallis who is on board with Leftism in all its guises; misguided though he is, he at least has the courage of his Marxist convictions). Look at Fr Hans’ posting below (note #10.1) of the photograph of the late John Paul II and the Leftist priest kneeling before him. Just like with +JP’s embrace of Solidarity, the censure of this priest had long-term positive ramifications for the world.

Noel, you’re correct. What many of us find objectionable is the silence from quarters such as Bishop Savvas when it comes to the good that Conservatives do in the secular sphere. I can’t think of one word of praise. If I’m wrong please tell me.

If I may: the first criticisms out of the traces to Savvas’ enconium were Greek-American names who are genuinely shocked, not because Soros can’t/isn’t a philanthropist and may occasionally do something right (not in this case IMHO), but these people know the very real damage that Soros has done to the Balkans, the Bank of England, etc.

As a Greek-American, I am not concerned about the FYROM/Macedonia issue, I feel that that nation has the right to call itself what it wants, but I could be wrong about this. I haven’t really given it much thought. Why are the Greeks upset about this? Clearly there are two sides to the story. Soros however has come foursquare in favor of meddling in issues that cause very real damage to very real people and which can lead to very real wars.

Peter, thank you for letting me clarify what I meant: I wasn’t talking about Bishop Savvas specifically being a “phanriote enthusiast” but the many bloggers who are vehemently pro-Phanar overlordship of North America and violently opposed to an autocephalous American Church. One of the most common arguments we American Orthodox “enthusiasts” hear is that the AOC isn’t “mature enough” for autocephaly. The irony when contrasted with the swooning and uncritical praise of our bishops for the latest Leftist fad/institution/luminary on the other hand is palpable.

Justify my charge in a court of law? No. Justify my charge in the court of political discourse? Absolutely. Different standards apply,

Bp. Savas needs to be more careful, much more careful in fact. Soros, and now Human Rights Watch it turns out, carry a lot of baggage. Ideas have consequences, and the idea that the Soros benevolence is praiseworthy (Bp. Savas’ position as hierarch amplifies his endorsements) is one that should not be accepted at face value. The consequences are too great.

As for the rest, it’s basically finger-wagging. That doesn’t get much traction here.

All absolutely accurate, Fabio. I read Boff and Gutiérrez years ago and this is exactly what they taught. I also remember Pope John Paul II repudiating the ideology with his public rebuke of a Nicaraguan priest in 1983 who taught the doctrine (the priest was the Minister of Culture under the Sandinista regime). It woke up the Catholic Church to the pernicious ideas that can hide inside the language of benevolence.

About the only people left today who still believe in the doctrine are aging radicals like Jim Wallis of Sojourners or the crew at the National Council of Churches. The later got stung when their funding to Marxist radicals was exposed by Reader’s Digest in the 1980s. Wallis, it turns out, just got caught lying about the Soros money he received.