This is what Nicetas, Archbishop of Nicomedia, wrote in a 12th century about a Great Schism (1054) between Catholicism and Orthodoxy:
My beloved brother, we do not repudiate to a Roman Church a supremacy among a 5 sister Patriarchates; and we commend her right to a many fair chair during an Ecumenical Council. But she has distant herself from us by her possess deeds, when by honour she insincere a kingdom that does not go to her office… How shall we accept decrees from her that have been released though consulting us and even though a knowledge? If a Roman Pontiff, seated on a lofty bench of his glory, wishes to rumble during us and, so to speak, play his mandates during us from on high, and if he wishes to decider us and even to order us and a Churches, not by holding warn with us though during his possess capricious pleasure, what kind of brotherhood, or even what kind of parenthood can this be? We should be a slaves, not a sons, of such a Church, and a Roman See would not be a divine mom of sons though a tough and despotic mistress of slaves.
Difference between afterwards and now?
A millennium ago, a Vicar of Christ presided over a group that was about as demographically accepted within pope as a Russian Orthodox Church is within Eastern Orthodox universe today. As quasi-monarch of a European core, who could management European kings to yield to him on their knees in penance, a Pope could means to forget a “pares” partial of “primus inter pares.” In contrast, Bartholomew we – His Most Divine All-Holiness a Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome, and Ecumenical Patriarch, not to discuss haven officer in a Turkish Army – is ensconced in an heathen republic and presides over a inner group of a few hundred ageing Greeks.
Now to be sure, even one male is a infancy when God is on his side. Even so, when he is in such a unsafe position, it pays to be additional clever to make certain that’s indeed a case.
This is something that Bartholomew we has plainly abandoned with his catastrophic preference to enter communion with Ukrainian schismatics.
Its basement is a revocation of a Synodal minute of 1686, that postulated a Patriarch of Moscow a right to decree a Metropolitan of Kiev. Constantinople’s settled ultimate goal is to extend autocephaly (self-governance) to a Church of Ukraine; given a strictly famous Ukrainian Orthodox Church – Patriarchate of Moscow has conjunction asked for it nor will take it, this means it could usually request to misbeliever Ukrainian churches, such as a Ukrainian Orthodox Church – Patriarchate of Kiev and a Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church. At that point, Ukrainian nationalists will ensue to seize Ukrainian Orthodox Church – Patriarchate of Moscow churches.
This reversal is bootleg and vast on comment of a whole horde of factors.
Historically, a Ecumenical Patriarchate has consistently insisted on one church in a lands of Rus’ (amusingly, a beginning instance of ecclesiastical separatism came in a late 12th century from a segment in complicated day Russia, when Andrey Bogolyubsky attempted to take a Metropolitanate of Vladimir out of a office of Kiev – an try that was rebuffed by Constantinople). After a Mongol invasions of 1237-40, a Metropolitanate of Kiev and All-Russia – a pretension it hold until a 16th century – would gradually quit over to Vladimir and Moscow – initial in a 1250s, in response to a Uniate tendencies of Daniil Galitsky in Volhynia-Rus; and hereafter so in 1299. Constantinople did commend a Metropolitanate in partial of a modern-day western Ukraine in 1301, but clarified that “Microrussia” (της Γαλίτζες της Μικράς Ρωσίας) was a daughter church of All-Russia. The Kiev Metropolitanate was canceled and reintroduced several times on comment of nakedly domestic factors – namely, Polish and Lithuanian final on Constantinople to equivocate ordaining Orthodox hierarchies on those territories that looked to Moscow, on pain of a region’s forceful Latinization.
In a event, this eventually valid unavoidable. The latest Metropolitanate of Kiev, combined in 1458, would eventually accept pope management and transition into Uniatism in 1596 during a Union of Brest. While this church had been underneath a origin of Constantinople, that did not interpret into a splintering of a Russian church; in 1516, a Patriarch Theoleptus we of Constantinople would continue to call a Metropolitan of Moscow Varlaam a “Metropolitan of Kiev and All Russia.” Meanwhile, a acknowledgment of a Moscow Patriarchate in 1589 pragmatic a control over all a authorized domain of a Russian church. In 1620, Constantinople re-established Orthodox dioceses underneath a Metropolitan of Kiev for a Orthodox race of a Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The Metropolitan hold a pretension of “exarch”, a pretension that signified Constantinople’s acceptance that it was not behaving within a authorized domain and that a deputy was a proxy placeholder, meant to yield Orthodox services to a true while a Poles remained in control of Kiev and were not about to accept a Moscow-appointed Metropolitan. Although a Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus had full authorized rights over Kiev (the city being partial of Rus) it did enter into negotiations with Constantinople to equivocate any ill will once Kiev reverted to Moscow’s control for good in 1686. This was postulated by a Patriarch Dionysius, who wrote that a Metropolitan of Kiev would hereafter owe “submission” to a Patriarch of Moscow and done no anxiety to or spirit of a (as now claimed) proxy inlet of that decision.
KP: Kiev Metropolitanate in 1686.
In any case, even if Constantinople had a right to retreat a preference – that it doesn’t – afterwards it would usually request to a 7 eparchies underneath a office before 1686 (Kiev, Chernigov, Lutsk, Lvov, Przemyśl, Polotsk, and Mogilev), that consecrate west and executive Ukraine, and tools of Poland and Belorussia, today. It would not request to Kharkov, that was already within a Russian Empire; or to Novorossiya, that would usually be incorporated into a Russian Empire in a 18th century and to that Constantinople has no some-more rights to than Primorye.
That this is vast and rare is corroborated adult by a fact that nothing of a other Patriarchates seem to be going along with Bartholomew I’s adventurism. This apparently includes all a other ancient Patriarchates (Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem), as good as Serbia and Georgia. This is not so many since they unequivocally like Russia, or even conflict Ukrainian autocephaly as such – that is frequency trustworthy in a box of Georgia – though since of Bartholomew I’s chutzpah in fundamentally proclaiming himself to have a powers of a Pope, ignoring a wishes of authorized Churches, reassigning authorized territories, and cancelling ancient treaties during will.
What creates Bartholomew I’s actions all a some-more strange is that in a past he has also vetoed Moscow’s attempts to give autocephaly to a Orthodox churches in America, China, and Japan. This has had directly disastrous effects on a widespread of a Orthodox faith – China in sold doesn’t endure eremite institutions headed from abroad, and some Russian Orthodox missionaries have been intimidated from priesthood due to a hazard of proscription by Constantinople.
Granting autocephaly to a Ukrainian Church is usually one some-more instance of anti-Orthodox sabotage, saying as a supporters review like a who’s who of anti-Orthodox bigots.
First, this includes Ukrainian politicians, including Petro Poroshenko, who has told the Washington Post, “Shortly, we will have an eccentric Ukrainian church as partial of an eccentric Ukraine. This will emanate a devout autonomy from Russia.” They conflate a republic with a Church, and as such submit ethnophyletism, that was announced a sin in Constantinople itself in 1872.
Second, as Arkady Maler points out, while Russian liberals adore to reject Russians propounding Orthodoxy – screeching “Caesaropapism,” “imperialism,” “pan-Slavism,” “political Orthodoxy,” etc. – as shortly as there appears an anti-Russian plan such as Ukrainian autocephaly, they change their balance and polish musical about a “theology of a Maidan,” “Kiev’s special mission,” “an eccentric republic needs an eccentric church,” “Putin is a anti-Christ,” etc. Meanwhile, they have recently detected a new appreciation for a “universal Patriarch” of a “New Rome”, holding a brief mangle from their before rants about “Greek pride,” “Byzantine arrogance,” “Eastern barbarity,” etc. But this is usually a brief remit from their prevalent anti-Orthodoxy.
Third, many of a biggest supporters of Ukrainian autocephaly in a West are for all intents and functions SJWs. The website Orthodoxy in Dialogue, for instance, wants Orthodoxy to get with a times and start sanctifying happy marriage:
We urge for a day when we can accommodate a destiny partner in church, or pierce a partner to church.
We urge for a day when a lifelong, monogamous joining to a partner can be consecrated and consecrated in and by a Church.
We urge for a day when we can try as Church, though condemnation, how we Orthodox Christians can best live a life in Christ in a office of holiness, chastity, and ideal adore of God and neighbour.
We urge for a day when a priests no longer transport around a universe to reject us and ridicule us and use us as a punching bag.
We urge for a day when a one, holy, catholic, and orthodox Church of Christ ceases to be a loneliest closet.
In another recent powerful take, they suggested Kavanaugh to apologize to each lady he has harm – even if he can’t remember it.
Consider going to each lady who claims that we have assaulted or differently spoiled her in a past—or opposite whom we even think that we competence have transgressed—and say, “I’m sorry. we might not remember a incident, though clearly we harm you. Please pardon me. In each hit we have with others, and generally with women, we will try to do improved in a future.”
Apparently, fibbing is now a Christian virtue. Even Lindsey Graham is more based than this.
Finally, former US diplomat James Jatras notes that all a common Atlanticists support Ukrainian ethnophyletism for nakedly geopolitical reasons.
The Western proponents are as crassly honest about a domestic aspects as a Ukrainian politicians. The German envoy in Kiev, not famous to have any sold theological acuity, opined in July, that autocephaly would strengthen Ukrainian statehood. The hyper-establishment Atlantic Council, that hosted Denysenko on a new revisit to Washington, notes: “With a Russian Orthodox Church as a final source of Putin’s soothing energy now gone, Ukraine’s transformation out of Russia’s circuit is irreversible.”
This is a same proof – encapsulated in a expostulate to emanate West-friendly Orthodox structures – that governed Polish and Lithuanian family towards Orthodoxy in a stream Ukraine during a late Gothic and early complicated era.
Likewise a US State Department, after a brief duration of appropriately declaring that “any preference on autocephaly is an inner church matter,” final week topsy-turvy a position and released a formal statement: “The United States respects a ability of Ukraine’s Orthodox eremite leaders and supporters to pursue autocephaly according to their beliefs. We honour a Ecumenical Patriarch as a voice of eremite toleration and interfaith dialogue.”
While avoiding a approach call for autocephaly, a matter gives a observable sense of such endorsement, that is accurately how it was reported in a media, for example, “US backs Ukrainian Church bid for autocephaly.” The State Department’s regard for a Ecumenical Patriarchate reinforces that clearly dictated impression.
Quite detached from a active efforts to widespread a poz all around a world, US State Department is obliged for some-more Christian martyrs in a 21st century than any other entity detached from Islamic State. Thanks to a drop of Iraq and antithesis to Syria’s legitimate government, it has contributed exceedingly to a exceedingly accelerated annihilation of Orthodox Christianity in a Middle East. In Christian terms, it would not be an deceit to call it a menial of Satan.
So this creates a doubt of because Bartholomew we has come out opposite many of a rest of a Orthodox world, including a largest and richest Patriarchate, in preference of heretics and blasphemers such as Ukrainian ethnophyletists, God-hating Russian liberals, “Orthodox” happy matrimony activists, and virulently anti-Christian unfamiliar Powers all a some-more puzzling.
James Jatras has a plausible, if depressingly banal, explanation: Money.
There might be some-more to a State Department’s position than meets a eye, however. According to an unconfirmed report originating with a members of a Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (an unconstrained New York-based office of a Moscow Patriarchate), in Jul of this year State Department officials (possibly including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo personally) warned a Greek Orthodox archdiocese (also formed in New York though partial of a Ecumenical Patriarchate) that a US supervision is wakeful of a burglary of a vast volume of money, about $10 million, from a bill for a construction of a Orthodox Church of St. Nicholas in New York (This is explained serve below).
The warning also reportedly remarkable that sovereign prosecutors have documentary justification confirming a withdrawal of these supports abroad on a orders of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew. It was suggested that Secretary Pompeo would “close his eyes” to this burglary in sell for transformation by a Patriarchate of Constantinople in preference of Ukrainian autocephaly, that helped set Patriarch Bartholomew on his stream course.
The Orthodox Church of St. Nicholas was a usually non-World Trade Center building to be broken in a 9/11 attacks (along with a precious collection of icons and corpse donated to it by Nicholas II). After extensive authorised battles, a Port Authority concluded to a reformation in 2011; by a finish of 2017, roughly $37 million had been donated. But in Dec 2017, all that income vanished, and construction came to a halt; a formula of an review systematic by a archdiocese was inconclusive. This opens adult some possibilities:
If a State Department wanted to find a right symbol to pull to coax Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to pierce on a doubt of autocephaly, a Greek archdiocese in a US is it. Let’s keep in mind that in his home country, Turkey, Patriarch Bartholomew has virtually no inner flock – usually a few hundred mostly aged Greeks left huddled in Istanbul’s Fener district. Whatever supports a Patriarchate derives from other sources (the Greek government, a Vatican, a World Council of Churches), a financial salvation is Greeks (including this writer) in what is still quaintly called a “Diaspora” in places like America, Australia, and New Zealand. And of these, a biggest money cow is a Greek-Americans… It’s an open doubt how many a Ecumenical Patriarchate’s jolt down a Greeks in a US to compensate for impracticable boondoggles like a 2016 “Council” contributed to a financial disaster during a New York archdiocese, that in spin might have non-stop them adult to vigour from a State Department to get relocating on Ukraine.
It would be an awfully unhappy and outrageous finish to see a slow vestige of a stately sovereignty do give in to extort and unfamiliar pressure. We can usually wish that God will not retaliate them as exceedingly as for a Council of Florence.
In a meantime, a Russian Orthodox Church has motionless on a clever response, carrying already dangling Eucharistic communion with Constantinople. It is entirely within a rights to do so. By ancillary schism, Constantinople has entered discourse with anathema, and as such has depressed underneath aversion itself. Now is a ideal time for Russia to reemerge as a Third Rome and take care of Orthodox Christendom.
Article source: https://russia-insider.com/en/istanbul-patriarch-plays-pope-and-falls-under-anathema/ri25107