CONSTANTINOPLE'S HERESY AND PAPALISM

DIscussion and News concerning Orthodox Churches in communion with those who have fallen into the heresies of Ecumenism, Renovationism, Sergianism, and Modernism, or those Traditional Orthodox Churches who are now involved with Name-Worshiping, or vagante jurisdictions. All Forum Rules apply. No polemics. No heated discussions. No name-calling.


Post Reply
d9popov
Member
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri 9 June 2017 8:29 pm

CONSTANTINOPLE'S HERESY AND PAPALISM

Post by d9popov »

CONSTANTINOPLE CHANGES ITS FAITH: THE INCREASE IN PAPAL-LIKE CLAIMS

NOTE: I do not mean to imply that every exaggerated or false claim by Constantinople is “heretical” by itself. Some are simply "wrong," not "heretical." However, it is heretical to change dogma; and the acceptance of the Branch Theory is a "heresy" in the true sense of the word. The increasingly exaggerated and false papal-like claims of Constantinople are used to support Constantinople’s heretical teaching of the Sister Church Heresy.

The short quotations below document the changing claims made by Constantinople in its "Tomoi of Autocephaly" (Decrees on Church-Independence).

**

Excerpts from http://orthochristian.com/118524.html

... the issuing of the tomos on the autocephaly of the Orthodox Church of Greece (that is, the church within the borders of the Greek state) in 1850. This was followed by the tomoi on the granting of autocephaly to the Churches of Serbia (1879), Romania (1885), Poland (1924), Albania (1937), Bulgaria (1945) and Czechia and Slovakia (1998). In 1990, a tomos was likewise issued on the recognition and approbation of the autocephalous status of the Orthodox Church of Georgia....
...
The tomos from January 5 states that the OCU [Orthodox Church of Ukraine] should also receive chrism from the Patriarch of Constantinople. In the text of the tomos, it is stated that this is a symbol of the Church’s unity.
...
... attempts by patriarchs of Constantinople to retain their right to prepare holy chrism for newly-created autocephalous churches has sometimes given rise to conflicts. Young churches saw in this a restriction of their independence and and Constantinople’s aspiration to hold on to power over them. Thus, for example, in the early 1880s, the Romanian Church entered into a tough conflict with Constantinople in order to gain the right to independently prepare its own holy chrism. And it won. In the tomos on the granting of autocephaly to the Romanian Church (1885), there is no rule about the mandatory receiving of chrism in Constantinople. Neither is there such a rule in the tomos on the granting of autocephaly to the Bulgarian Church (1945).
...

In all the tomoi on the granting of autocephaly, there are requirements to refer to the Patriarch of Constantinople and the other local church on the most important dogmatic and canonical issues. Of course, this requirement has been formulated in different ways in different historical periods. In the 19th century tomoi, it sounds quite soft, almost like an optional recommendation. For example, in the tomos on the autocephaly of the Serbian Church (1879), it is stated that the Metropolitan of Serbia should, “according to ancient custom” refer to the Orthodox patriarchates and other autocephalous churches “on issues of common ecclesiastical significance which require a common voice and approval.” Here the Patriarchate of Constantinople is in no way set apart from the other local churches. But in the 20th century tomoi one can see completely different rhetoric.

Already in the tomos on the autocephaly of the Polish Orthodox Church it states that the Patriarchal See of Constantinople is entrusted with the duty “of caring for the Orthodox churches finding themselves in need.” Therefore, on issues “exceeding the jurisdictional boundaries of each autocephalous church,” the Metropolitan of Warsaw should refer to the Patriarchal See of Constantinople, “through which communion with the entire Orthodox Church is maintained.” This requirement is practically repeated verbatim in the tomos on the autocephaly of the Albanian Church, while in the tomos on the autocephaly of the Church of Czechia and Slovakia, it is quite clearly stated that the See of Constantinople is “entrusted with taking care of all the holy churches of God.” In this tomos it even states that the Church of Czechia and Slovakia can invite hierarchs of the Patriarchate of Constantinople in important cases.

All these expressions are not merely ritual phrases. Since the early 1920s, a doctrine has been formulated about the special rights of the Ecumenical Patriarch. As is well known, today this teaching is actively challenged by the Patriarchate of Moscow, wherein lies one of the sources of the profound conflict between the Sees of Constantinople and Moscow.

In the tomos on the autocephaly of the OCU, we also find unequivocal statements about the special status of the See of Constantinople. Here it is clearly stated that for resolving important issues of a ecclesiastical, dogmatic or canonical character, the Metropolitan of Kiev should refer to the Ecumenical See in order to receive an authoritative explanation about it. The tomos does not suggest appeals to other autocephalous churches for similar explanations.

Additionally, in the tomos from January 5 stipulates the Patriarch of Constantinople’s right to receive appeals from the Ukrainian bishops if they disagree with juridical decisions about them. In such cases, the verdict of the Ecumenical Patriarch will be final and not subject to revision.

**

d9popov
Member
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri 9 June 2017 8:29 pm

Re: CONSTANTINOPLE'S HERESY AND PAPALISM

Post by d9popov »

CONSTANTINOPLE'S "VIOLENCE" AGAINST ITS RUSSIAN-TRADITION EXARCHATE IN WESTERN EUROPE

I just finished reading the response of the "Paris jurisdiction" to Constantinople, https://orthodoxyindialogue.com/2019/01 ... rn-europe/

The Paris jurisdiction is modernist (not completely loyal to Orthodox tradition), yet, nevertheless, this does not justify the un-Christian and racist way that Constantinople is trying to destroy this group and their Russian traditions.

In short, the Greek metropolitans in Western Europe, encouraged by Bartholomew, are trying to confiscate all of the properties of the Russian-tradition archdiocese.

One well written section is as follows: " ... the absence of dialogue prior to a decision is not a testimony to pastoral care. The priests and deacons who have received letters and calls from Greek Metropolitans, as well as the laity who have been informed of this, have experienced this as an instance of violence. We cannot believe that this could be the vision of our Ecumenical Patriarchate which we know, which we appreciate for its openness, and to which we are grateful to have belonged—a Patriarchate so attached to the dignity of each person, to the defense of the weak, and to the protection of nature. [new paragraph] For, in fact, the direct intervention of bishops foreign to the Archdiocese with our priests and deacons, even if they come from the same Patriarchate as us, makes a mockery of the catholicity of the episcopal ministry of our ruling Archbishop, who never asked to be discharged from his functions."

Constantinople presents itself to the West as liberal and progressive, yet is is cruel and dictatorial to its flocks. The Paris jurisdiction had problems with the totalitarian-inclined Archbishop Job Getcha imposed upon them, and Constantinople overreacts by attempting to confiscate the properties of the entire jurisdiction, in several nations. This is another example of Constantinople's despotic eastern papism. It is not Orthodox Christianity.

The Paris jurisdiction, to an extent, brought this upon themselves, by supporting the heresies of Sergius Bulgakov (who was not an Orthodox trinitarian), by its Evlogy-led schism from ROCOR, and by its trust in Constantinople (huge mistake). However, Constantinople is not trying to correct these errors, but is showing once again its papal-heresy, its lack of concern for Christian dogma, and its anti-Slavic racism. Of late, Bartholomew has referred several times to the Greek "race" and its "primacy." That is not Orthodoxy, but heresy.

d9popov
Member
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri 9 June 2017 8:29 pm

Re: CONSTANTINOPLE'S HERESY AND PAPALISM

Post by d9popov »

BOTH CONSTANTINOPLE AND MOSCOW ARE SUCCUMBING TO THE PAPAL HERESY

The Constantinople Patriarchate now claims jurisdiction over every autocephalous church, the entire diaspora, and even the right to lift dogmatic anathemas (that is, change Orthodox dogma) unilaterally. This is false-papism and is heresy.

The Moscow Patriarchate is not as bad, but it is still bad, very bad. It claims "canonical jurisdiction" over all of the formerly Soviet-occupied nations, as well as China and Japan. It has imposed the Sergianist and ecumenist heresies on its people, the devout and impious alike. It attempts to bribe and control other churches with its wealth and with its skills in internet-warfare. Pro-Moscow trolls and propagandists are everywhere on the internet, including Orthodox sites. Much of what they say against Constantinople is true. But much of which they accuse Constantinople (modernizing, westernizing, secularizing, ecumenist) also applies to the Moscow Patriarchate. The conservatism of many Russian, Belarusan, and Ukrainian people means that their falling away from Orthodoxy is a little slower, but the world Orthodox under both Constantinople and Moscow have been falling away in the same direction for several decades now. Those who love Orthodoxy should leave these compromised bishops and find a true Orthodox bishop.

Madison Grant
Jr Member
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue 6 October 2015 5:32 pm

Re: CONSTANTINOPLE'S HERESY AND PAPALISM

Post by Madison Grant »

Once the National Churches of Orthodoxy ignored, and trampled if I may add, the Holy Canons against dialogue with, or fraternizing with, enemies of the sole Church of Christ, then now it is that one sees the other aspects of ecclesial heritage to be also ignored and trampled.

Image

d9popov
Member
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri 9 June 2017 8:29 pm

Re: CONSTANTINOPLE'S HERESY AND PAPALISM

Post by d9popov »

MANY IN ECUMENIST "WORLD ORTHODOXY" ARE OPENLY OPPOSING CONSTANTINOPLE'S PRETENSIONS

Constantinople is being accused of denying autocephaly, abusing other Greek-speaking hierarchies, papalism, being pro-LGBTQ+, lying about the canons and councils, joining into communion with schismatics and un-ordained bishops, simony (Ukraine government giving Constantinople metochia in Ukraine), Greek chauvinism/ethnophyletism and anti-Slavic racism, (effectively) supporting violent church seizures in Ukraine, being a stooge of U.S. foreign policy, and other sins. Many of these accusations are funded by Russian money, but some are (at least partly) true. Russian chauvinism is also strong, so it is amusing to see Russian Sergianists complain about Constantinople's and Ukraine's involvements in "politics" --- as if the Moscow Patriarchate in not similarly involved. For a while it seemed like every bloodthirsty dictator in the world had been given an award (or at least affectionate praise) by the Moscow Patriarchate.

Antioch, Russia, Cyprus, Albania, Poland, Czech Republic and Slovakia, and especially Serbia have been openly critical of Constantinople's new "daughter church" in Ukraine. Russia has broken communion with Constantinople; and Serbia allows communion with Constantinople only by "Oikonomia." One reason Serbia is so outspoken is that it fears Constantinople supporting autocephaly in Montenegro and in the Republic of North Macedonia. (The Republic of North Macedonia and the Republic of Greece are now at diplomatic peace with each other after almost three decades of diplomatic warfare; however, religious-nationalists in both countries use and abuse Orthodoxy to "justify" opposition to peace between neighbors.)

Bartholomew is pressuring three of his most powerful archbishops (Demetrios Trakatellis of America, Stylianos Harkianakis of Australia, and Gregorios of Thyatira/London) to resign. Three influential metropolitans --- Job Getcha, Emmanuel Adamakis of France, and Elpidophoros Lambriniadis (especially the later) --- all support Constantinople having papal-like powers. Bartholomew looks sickly, and the young Elpidophoros may be the next patriarch. Elpidophoros openly and proudly supports Constantinopolitan papalism. He has political ties to both the Turkish and American governments. See his horrible article, "First Without Equals": https://www.patriarchate.org/-/primus-s ... pidophorou.

In a HUGE act of hypocrisy, Archbishop Anastasios Yannoulatos of Albania recently reiterated the correct Orthodox teaching that heretics/schismatics lose efficacious Holy Mysteries. However, he has been a leading ecumenist in an environment where more and more "Eastern Orthodox" ecumenists recognize Rome's sacraments as Holy Mysteries of Christ's Church.

This heresy, that non-Orthodox sacraments are efficacious Holy Mysteries of the Church, was anathematized by Saint Philaret and all the ROCOR bishops in 1983.

For a selection of the criticism against Constantinople's papalism, see:
https://orthodoxsynaxis.org/2018/12/05/ ... er-speech/
http://orthochristian.com/117674.html

http://orthochristian.com/116702.html
http://orthochristian.com/116617.html
http://orthochristian.com/116569.html
http://orthochristian.com/116409.html

http://orthochristian.com/118372.html

https://orthodoxsynaxis.org/2019/03/09/ ... rtholomew/
http://orthochristian.com/119813.html

http://orthochristian.com/118900.html

https://orthodoxsynaxis.org/2019/03/21/ ... an-schism/

https://orthodoxsynaxis.org/2019/03/20/ ... authority/

https://orthodoxsynaxis.org/2019/03/18/ ... lesiology/

https://orthodoxsynaxis.org/2019/03/16/ ... -canon-34/

https://orthodoxsynaxis.org/2019/03/14/ ... riarchate/
http://orthochristian.com/119857.html

https://orthodoxsynaxis.org/2019/03/02/ ... a-council/

https://orthodoxsynaxis.org/2019/02/19/ ... ian-issue/

User avatar
Maria
Archon
Posts: 8428
Joined: Fri 11 June 2004 8:39 pm
Faith: True Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOC
Location: USA

Re: CONSTANTINOPLE'S HERESY AND PAPALISM

Post by Maria »

Great post. Thank you for your valuable contribution!

Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me a sinner.

Post Reply