Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople blasts Moscow Patriarchate

A recent backlog item; as reported by Russian Faith, August 13, 2020:

Patriarch Bartholomew is a citizen of Turkey. He leads all Greek Orthodox churches in the United States of America, as well as the handful of Christians remaining in Istanbul, Turkey.

As reported by Tatyana Chaika of the Union of Orthodox Journalists, February 6, 2020 (links in original):

The Patriarchate of Constantinople is revered by spiritual children across the world, still there are the ungrateful who do not value its gifts, said Pat. Bartholomew.

On February 5, 2020, Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople met with a group of clergy, professors, and students from Armenia, Romfea reports.

In his speech, Patriarch Bartholomew noted, “Constantinople is the spiritual womb of our nation, the ark in which everything that is sacred to our nation is preserved.”

He emphasized, “We consider this a special blessing and privilege from God, because we were granted this spirituality, this blessing to continue the tradition of many centuries, according to which our patriarchy is founded and worshiped not only by our own spiritual children but also by others, by the entire Orthodoxy, by the Christian world, by the whole mankind.”

According to him, the Patriarchate of Constantinople "is of particular value to us, the Greek Orthodox, as well as to all Orthodox faithful", while "the new Orthodox Autocephalous Churches, which were born from here, found healing. Unfortunately, there are unborn children and there are ungrateful ones who do not appreciate what they received from Constantinople – their Baptism, culture, the Cyrillic alphabet or otherwise.”

“The Church of Constantinople sacrificed itself, gave itself to others and, as grateful people tell us, the Mother Church, because She is the mother and still loves them all,” added the Phanar leader.

As reported by the UOJ, earlier Metropolitan Maxim (Vgenopoulos) of Silivria assured the head of Phanar that the Holy Theotokos is on his side “in the struggle of the Ecumenical Throne with its opponents, including the ungrateful Moscow Church.”

As reported by Yekaterina Filatova of the Union of Orthodox Journalists, August 11, 2020 (links in original):

Pat. Bartholomew spoke explicitly of visible and invisible enemies of the Mother Church, stressing that "we have ungrateful children, but we embrace them all with love."

The Head of the Phanar, Patriarch Bartholomew, called the Moscow Patriarchate, which broke off Eucharistic communion with Constantinople after the latter had granted autocephaly to Ukrainian schismatics, enemies and "ungrateful children." It was reported by the Orthodox Times.

Thus, according to the resource, Patriarch Bartholomew made a direct reference to both the visible and invisible enemies of the Mother Church of Constantinople and about the ungrateful children who benefited from the Church of Constantinople and yet “lifted heels of contempt against their benefactor.”

“We have enemies, it is not that we do not have, and in fact many,” the publication cites the patriarch. The enemies are not only who are declared, whom we know to be our enemies, but they are also the beneficiaries of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, its descendants, its spiritual descendants. So, we also have ungrateful children, but we embrace them all with love.”

The Phanar head recalled that on the occasion of the granting of Autocephaly to Ukraine, the Church of Russia “interrupted the Eucharistic communion and ceased to commemorate the Ecumenical Patriarchate.”

“However, the Ecumenical Patriarchate did not interrupt communion with the Church of Russia. Even this morning, while officiating at St. Panteleimon in Galatas, we commemorated Patriarch Cyril of Moscow,” the Ecumenical Patriarch stressed.

“We continue to embrace everyone, enemies and friends, with our love and our prayer and our understanding,” Patriarch Bartholomew upheld.

He made special mention of the continuous interest of the Mother Church for her direct flock in Constantinople, and for her care for every believer, “regardless of his/her national origin, as she takes care of the worship needs and the spiritual support of the Romanian, Ukrainian, Russian, Moldavian, Gagauz and, more recently, of the Georgian Orthodox Christians, who came as immigrants and now live permanently in Constantinople, being a flock of the Mother Church.”

As reported by the UOJ, earlier Patriarch Bartholomew claimed that the Patriarchate of Constantinople "is of particular value to us, the Greek Orthodox, as well as to all Orthodox faithful", while "the new Orthodox Autocephalous Churches, which were born from here, found healing. Unfortunately, there are unborn children and there are ungrateful ones, who do not appreciate what they received from Constantinople – their Baptism, culture, the Cyrillic alphabet or otherwise.”

As reported by the Union of Orthodox Journalists, August 11, 2020:

The Ecumenical Patriarch made another direct reference to both the visible and invisible enemies of the Mother Church. Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew spoke about ungrateful children who benefited from the Church of Constantinople and yet, as he stressed, “lifted heels of contempt against their benefactor.”

“We have enemies, it is not that we do not have, and in fact many…. The enemies are not only who are declare, whom we know to be our enemies, but they are also the beneficiaries of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, its descendants, its spiritual descendants. “So, we also have ungrateful children, but we embrace them all with love.”

This direct shot, of course, was aimed at the Church of Russia, which on the occasion of the granting of Autocephaly to Ukraine, interrupted the Eucharistic communion and ceased to commemorate the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

“You know that on the occasion of the Autocephaly of the Church of Ukraine the Moscow Patriarchate interrupted the communion with the Ecumenical Patriarchate, that is, with its Mother Church. However, the Ecumenical Patriarchate did not interrupted communion with the Church of Russia. “Even this morning, while officiating at St. Panteleimon in Galatas, we commemorated Patriarch Cyril of Moscow,” the Ecumenical Patriarch stressed, adding that “We continue to embrace everyone, enemies and friends, with our love and our prayer and our understanding.”

Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew made special mention of the continuous interest of the Mother Church for her direct flock in Constantinople, and for her care for every believer, regardless of his/her national origin, as she takes care of the worship needs and the spiritual support of the Romanian, Ukrainian, Russian, Moldavian, Gagauz and, more recently, of the Georgian Orthodox Christians, who came as immigrants and now live permanently in Constantinople, being a flock of the Mother Church.

Russian Orthodox Church commission proposes an end to priestly blessing of weapons of mass destruction

The latest in Russian Orthodox churchianity, as reported by Tom Balmforth of Reuters, February 4, 2020:

MOSCOW - Russian priests should refrain from the practice of blessing nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction that can inflict indiscriminate loss of life, according to new guidelines being discussed by the Russian Orthodox Church.

During two decades in power, President Vladimir Putin has aligned himself with the Orthodox Church, which has also developed closer ties with the ministry of defense.

Russian priests have long appeared in images sprinkling holy water on submarines, ballistic missiles, Soyuz space rockets and other pieces of hardware as part of rituals to bless them.

But some of that is set to stop if the church approves a document drawn up by an Orthodox Church commission.

“The blessing of military weapons is not reflected in the tradition of the Orthodox Church and does not correspond to the content of the Rite,” the document, on the Moscow patriarchate’s website, says.

Blessing or sanctifying weapons that can kill an “indefinite number of people” must be excluded from pastoral practice, it says.

The proposals will be discussed until June 1 and the public should also take part in the debate, the church’s Moscow branch said.

In a striking symbol of close defense-church ties in Russia, the armed forces are building their own sprawling cathedral at a military themed park outside Moscow. It is set to be one of the tallest Orthodox churches in the world.

Greek Orthodox Church protests Palestinian Authority's attempt to expropriate church property in Bethlehem

As reported by Baruch Yedid in the Jewish Press, December 15, 2019:

The Christian Greek Orthodox community in Bethlehem has been in a tumult in recent days following the Palestinian Authority’s (PA) intention to expropriate the lands of the Church of Nativity which belong to the Church.

A few days ago, 11 institutions associated with the Greek-Orthodox Church published a statement protesting the ongoing attempt by the PA to take control of the plaza in front of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem.

The proclamation, which was initiated by the Patriarch of Jerusalem Theophilos III, protests the harming of the Christian presence in Bethlehem, the forfeiting of their rights, the harm to the Church’s assets and the violation of their right to light Christmas trees on the plaza.

The protest was also joined by Michelle Freij, the son of former Bethlehem mayor Elias Freij.

The leaders of the Greek Orthodox community have accused the PA of working in recent years to put its hand on the area near the Church of the Nativity, property of the Orthodox Church and turn it over to the municipality of Bethlehem and the PA’s local government office.

The protest has spread through social media networks, prompting the Bethlehem City Council to announce that it does not intend to harm the various sectors and will maintain the status quo in the city.

A church official told TPS that for three years, one of the Catholic Church’s leaders, Ibrahim Faltas, has been working with Bethlehem’s Mayor Anton Salman, a Catholic as well, to take over the Greek Orthodox Church’s lands.

He said the two became good friends while participating in negotiations during the 2002 crisis that took place in the Church of the Nativity in which terrorists barricaded themselves there and left only after extensive negotiations. The two are considered in Bethlehem to be PA operatives and close to the Fatah.

The official added that while the PA has recently announced through the municipality that it does not intend to discriminate against any of the communities or take over the land, the Greek Orthodox Church leaders are aware of the authority’s efforts to gain control of their property.

Speaking off record, sources involved in the affair said that one of the Greek Orthodox Church’s leaders is suspected by the PA of dealing in land with Jews and, therefore, the PA is working to counteract his actions by taking over the land. The tension is mounting between Salman and his deputy, Hanna Hananya, who supports the Greek Orthodox Church’s claims.

A Bethlehem official told TPS that since the PA arrived in the city in 1994, the number of Christians in the city has significantly diminished and currently accounts for less than 22 percent of the city’s residents.

He further said that Christmas ceremonies are gradually turning from a religious Christian event to a national event sponsored by the PA, even though in recent years it has acted to deprive Christians of their properties.

Meanwhile, further tensions are rising among Greek Orthodox Christians after the municipality of al-Azzariya near Bethlehem released a tender to operate the Tomb of Lazarus. Christians are angry because they say the land does not belong to the municipality and therefore it does not have the authority to issue tenders to operate the tourism site.

A Bethlehem resident told TPS that tourists who have recently visited the Tomb of Lazarus testified that a number of young people and thugs are demanding entry fees.

Several months ago, a violent incident occurred in the Christian village of Jifna, near Ramallah, when Fatah activists, operating under a senior official close to PA head Mahmoud Abbas, rioted in the village and ordered the Christian to pay the Jizyah tax “so that they could enjoy the PA’s protection.”

The Jizyah is an annual per capita tax levied by Islamic law on non-Muslim subjects residing in Muslim lands. The tax is a fee for protection provided by the Muslim ruler to non-Muslims, for the permission to practice a non-Muslim religion with some communal autonomy in a Muslim state, and as proof of the non-Muslims’ submission to the Muslim state and its laws.

Jizyah has also been understood by some as a ritual humiliation of non-Muslims in a Muslim state for not converting to Islam.

Russian Orthodox priest in Nova Scotia fired for praying for the peace of Israel

If anyone wants to know what the position of Russian Orthodoxy is regarding Israel, this might offer a clue; as reported by Joel Jacobson of Canadian Jewish News, September 5, 2019:

HALIFAX – A Christian Orthodox priest in Nova Scotia was forcibly retired for delivering a sermon that honoured Judaism and Israel.

The head priest of St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Church in Halifax, Father Vladimir Tobin, received a letter from Orthodox Church in America Archbishop Irénée, the archbishop of Ottawa and Canada, on Aug. 12, informing him that he is being forcibly retired due to the alleged “Jewish twist in your ministry.”

The phrase likely alludes to a sermon Father Tobin delivered that mentioned Israel and Judaism in favourable terms, asked for congregants to pray for Israel and reminding the congregation that Jesus was a Jew.

“I’ve always been straightforward, have always spoken my mind,” said Father Tobin from his home in New Germany, about 120 kilometres south of Halifax.

He admits that his sermons over the last several years have tied together Christianity’s roots and the Old Testament’s Jewish background.

The 77-year-old cleric said he travelled to Israel in May for the first time in 30 years. In the late 1960s, he visited for two weeks, and returned in 1985 to earn a doctorate in Egyptology at Hebrew University.

Born in Halifax, Father Tobin said his grandmother was Jewish, but he was baptized a Christian. When studying the early Christian period at Dalhousie University, he said he realized that early Christians were Jewish and their scripture was the Old Testament.

Ordained as an Anglican priest, with a part-time pulpit while also teaching at St. Mary’s University in Halifax, Father Tobin felt something was lacking in that denomination and was urged to go to the Orthodox side.

“I was happy in Orthodoxy, but felt there was some anti-Jewishness there. I wrote a piece for publication, but was told by my superiors that it was ‘too Jewish.’ That increased my determination that Christianity grew from Judaism. My own theology recognized a faith that started with Abraham and grew through the centuries through Christ,” he said.

He was first sent a letter from Archbishop Irénée in April, following a written complaint by the assistant priest, Father Alexander Treiger, who alleged that Father Tobin was, among other things, including prayers for Israel in his services.

“After much thought and consideration, I have decided that effective this date, April 8th, 2019, you are officially retired as Rector of St. Vladimir Orthodox Church, Halifax, NS,” wrote the archbishop.

Father Tobin responded by writing: “It is true that I regularly pray for both Israel and United States, its armies and its president, and for ‘the land of Israel and the armies which protect her.’ What is to prevent us for praying for other countries that need it? The U.S. and Israel are our allies and need our support for peace in the Middle East. There are precedents of praying for other nations within our tradition. My prayers are mainly intended to advance peace in the Middle East .”

The Parish Council, unhappily shocked by the dismissal, wrote a letter urging Father Tobin’s reinstatement, to which Archbishop Irénée agreed, only to renege on last month.

On Aug. 12, the archbishop wrote to Father Tobin: “Now, I place you once more on retirement as of Monday, August 26, 2019. This will permit you to say your farewells to the Faithful of Saint Vladimir Parish and remove your personal possessions from the church premises.”

Father Tobin, while obviously upset, said he has plenty to do in retirement, things he couldn’t do while preaching and teaching.

“I have many CDs to hear and books to read, a dog to walk and a grand piano that wants to be played,” he said with a chuckle in his voice.

“But I don’t feel right deserting the congregation like this. I had planned to retire in a year or so, by my 78th birthday, but obviously wanted to retire on my own terms. I would have been sad. The congregation would have been sad, but everyone would have understood. This way is not the best thing.”

Superstition on display at Greek Orthodox Church in Chicago

It isn't just the Roman Catholic Church that's characterized by superstition; so are the various Orthodox churches. As reported by Javonte Anderson of the Chicago Tribune, September 9, 2019 (links in original):

The Rev. Nicholas Jonas says he was in disbelief when he saw tears streaming down the face of a painting of Mary holding the child Jesus in his chapel.

“When these things happen, I feel like a little kid when first going into a candy factory, and you’re just in awe,” said Jonas, the presiding priest at Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Church, 6041 W. Diversey Ave. in the Belmont Central neighborhood.

Jonas said he was sitting in his office Sunday morning when a church employee burst into his office and informed him of the “weeping Virgin.”

Jonas hurried to the altar in the church sanctuary where the painting stands amid other holy paintings.

“It’s common throughout the Orthodox church to see a phenomena like that … but to have it personally was very overwhelming,” Jonas said.

After examining the tears, Jonas placed cotton balls at the bottom of the picture to absorb the streaks of moisture and posted a photo of the weeping Virgin on Facebook Sunday evening.

By Monday morning, the word had spread. Parishioners and visitors came out in large numbers to see what many of them are calling a miracle.

The Rev. Dobrivoje Milunovic, the presiding priest of Holy Resurrection Serbian Orthodox Cathedral in the O’Hare neighborhood, was one of the first priests to visit to venerate the icon.

Dressed in a black cassock, Milunovic said the weeping icon was a miracle, but also a warning from the mother of God.

“This is a calling on all of us to change our lives,” he said. “We need to turn to her in prayer and humility. And cleanse our hearts and souls of inequities so we may find salvation.

His Eminence Metropolitan Nathanael inspected and confirmed the legitimacy of the tears Sunday, Jonas said.

Others also view the phenomenon as a possible sign as the Greek Orthodox Church has worked to keep from losing the church after it experienced financial troubles, with a bankruptcy hearing scheduled for Tuesday.

Monday morning, Greek prayers and hymns played softly in the sanctuary. The aroma from more than a hundred lit candles filled the air as visitors sat in the wooden pews. Other snapped pictures with their smartphones.

The icon was no longer weeping Monday morning, but the residue from the liquid was still visible on her cheek.

“Mary weeping is a sign, and the miracle is actually in our hearts,” said Laura Tovar, who was visiting with her sister, who was married at the church.

Many parishioners were hoping that the Virgin Mary’s tears forecast a potential miracle that would save the church from closing its doors.

Jonas, however, has a different interpretation of the weeping icon.

“Some people say this is a sign,” he said. “I stop short of that. I would just rather say that the Virgin Mary is talking to us; I would just let her finish her conversation. And, let’s see what happens.”

(video)

What John Nelson Darby said in the 19th century about Roman Catholicism is also true of Orthodoxy: "Superstition is not faith."

60 years ago: Upcoming talks on Roman Catholic-Eastern Orthodox reunification announced

On September 3, 1959, Vatican radio announced that representatives of the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches would meet in Venice for unofficial talks on possible reunification.

I haven't been able to find if such talks have taken place, but formal reunification has yet to take place. There will eventually be a union of false Christianity, however, centred in Rome, during the Great Tribulation when the Antichrist and False Prophet deceive the world. God is making sure that biblical prophecy is fulfilled according to His schedule, which isn't necessarily in accord with the plans of men.

Pope Francis gives relics of St. Peter to Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople

The ecumenical movement of the last days proceeds apace, as reported by Cindy Wooden of Catholic News Service, July 2, 2019:

VATICAN CITY — In what Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople described as a “brave and bold” gesture, Pope Francis gave the patriarch a famous reliquary containing bone fragments believed to belong to St. Peter.

The only time the bronze reliquary has been displayed publicly was in November 2013, when Pope Francis had it present for public veneration as he celebrated the closing Mass for the Year of Faith, opened by Pope Benedict XVI.

The bronze case contains nine of the bone fragments discovered during excavations of the necropolis under St. Peter’s Basilica that began in the 1940s.

In the 1960s, archaeologist Margherita Guarducci published a paper asserting that she had found St. Peter’s bones near the site identified as his tomb.

While no pope has ever declared the bones to be authentic, St. Paul VI announced in 1968 that the “relics” of St. Peter had been “identified in a way which we can hold to be convincing.”

Pope Paul took nine of the bone fragments, commissioned the bronze reliquary, and kept the relics in his private chapel in the papal apartments.

Pope Francis removed them from the chapel June 29, the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul.

Patriarch Bartholomew had sent a delegation led by Archbishop Job of Telmessos to the Vatican for the feast day celebrations. After the solemn Mass, Pope Francis and Archbishop Job went down to St. Peter’s tomb under the high altar to pray.

Then, the archbishop recounted, Pope Francis asked him to wait for him because he had a gift for his “brother” Patriarch Bartholomew. The pope came back and led the archbishop to his little blue Ford Focus and they were driven to the Apostolic Palace.

They entered the chapel of the old papal apartment, where Pope Francis chose not to live, and “the pope took the reliquary that his predecessor Paul VI had placed in the little chapel and offered it to his guest,” according to Vatican News.

“For us, this was an extraordinary and unexpected event that we could not have hoped for,” Vatican News quoted the archbishop as saying.

He phoned Patriarch Bartholomew as soon as he could to tell him the news.

Arrangements quickly were made for Msgr. Andrea Palmieri, undersecretary of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, to accompany the relics to the Phanar, the Orthodox patriarchate’s headquarters in Istanbul.

It was “another gigantic step toward concrete unity,” Archbishop Job said.

At a ceremony June 30 to receive the relics and venerate them, Patriarch Bartholomew said, “Pope Francis made this grand, fraternal and historic gesture” of giving the Orthodox fragments of the relics of St. Peter.

“I was deeply moved,” the patriarch said, according to the news published on the patriarchate’s Facebook page along with 15 photos. “It was a brave and bold initiative of Pope Francis.”

Universalist Orthodox Church in Toledo certainly isn't biblically orthodox

The red flags that identify the church mentioned in the following article as being unbiblical are so glaring and numerous that I'll leave it to the reader to notice and count them. As reported by Nicki Gorny of the Toledo Blade, July 1, 2019:

With its chanted antiphons and sweet-smelling incense, a divine liturgy at Toledo’s Joy of All Who Sorrow Parish is in some ways like any other in Eastern Orthodoxy.

In other ways, it’s decidedly not.

A commitment to full social, structural and sacramental inclusion of all people – regardless of their gender and sexuality – positions the parish outside the mainstream church hierarchy. While they remain true to what their founding bishop sees as an authentic expression of Eastern Orthodoxy, they’re carving out their own space in the ancient faith tradition.

“What do you do when such an integral part of your identity is in direct conflict with your values?” the Rev. Mother Maeve Leroux asked in a recent interview. “I definitely think the only option for me was to make the space.”

Mother Maeve, who established Joy of All Who Sorrow Universalist Orthodox Church in 2016, celebrates the first anniversary of her consecration as a bishop on Sunday. She described a winding path to that moment, one that gives her great familiarity with the struggle of loving and identifying with a faith tradition that – in one way or another – is also a source of conflict.

She said she was never eager to pursue ordination in the way that she has, which runs against a restriction in her tradition that only men enter the priesthood. Mother Maeve is transgender; her ordination is not recognized by the mainstream church. She said she felt called to the role as a way to create the inclusive Orthodox space she and others did not find anywhere else.

“It became pressingly apparent to me that, unfortunately, if we wanted any kind of inclusive Orthodox space, I would kind of have to do it,” she said. “Which was not a comforting thought. I don’t particularly like talking publicly. I don’t particularly like being in the front of any room.”

“But that was kind of the only way forward,” she said.

Mother Maeve came to Eastern Orthodoxy as a child, recalling a wind-knocked-out-of-her moment during a liturgy at a local church when she first she first felt the presence of God. By the time she was 18, she was essentially set on becoming a priest or a monk, options that were open to her in the mainstream structure of the tradition because she had not yet come out as female.

Once she made it to the monastery, though, she described an increasing disillusionment, much of it related to the hypocrisy she saw in her church in regard to issues of inclusion. Some of it was related to sexuality, she said; Eastern Orthodoxy is theologically opposed to homosexual acts. She said she also struggled with the restriction on women serving in the altar.

Even with a thorough reading of church canon, it just didn’t make sense to her, she said. In her understanding of the tradition then and in the understanding that she brings to her ministry now, she looks to the inclusiveness that she sees in the early church, if not necessarily in some of its canons. Orthodoxy is not as unchanging as it’s perceived to be, she said, describing historical pushes for women in ministry, even an early rite believed to be for a same-sex marriage.

“Inclusion is not innovative within ancient Christianity,” she said. “Inclusion is usually more authentic.”

It wasn’t that she hadn’t thought about what would become these internal conflicts before she entered the monastery. But “it’s kind of like any relationship where you fall in love,” she explained. “You fall in love and you think, ‘There are some issues … but this is what I want. Maybe it’s not that big a deal. These people seem good. Maybe it’ll work out.’ And you kind of put it away from your mind for a while, because you’re enamored.”

When she finally reached the point where she couldn’t justify wearing the monastic robe anymore, she left the monastery. Adrift without the faith tradition that had been such a firm anchor for so long in her life, she said she spent some time looking for a spiritual fit in others, first in Christianity, then in other traditions altogether. None of them felt like hers.

Then came a turning point. At a local interfaith service, she came across the Rev. Beverly Bingle, a Roman Catholic Womanpriest who pastors Holy Spirit Catholic Community in Toledo.

Roman Catholicism, like Eastern Orthodoxy, does not allow for the ordination of women. The Rev. Bingle describes her ordination as “valid, but not legal,” meaning that she is ordained in a valid line of apostolic succession, but her ordination is not recognized by the Catholic Church.

For Mother Maeve, the encounter sparked an idea.

“It really kind of inspired me to think: Orthodoxy doesn’t have to be confined into the boxes that history has put it in over and over,” she said. “I had always assumed that I had to accept Orthodoxy on its own terms, and that’s it,” she continued. “So I started thinking about it. I started looking: If there’s a Roman Catholic Womanpriest movement in Catholicism, does Orthodoxy have something like this? Have people gotten fed up?”

“The answer is no,” she said with a laugh. “Not really.”

It would fall to her, then, she decided. She sought a bishop to ordain her in the Independent Sacramental Movement, a network of self-sustaining faith communities that operate outside the structures of mainstream churches, but that retain the same apostolic succession of these same mainstream churches. As with the Rev. Bingle, the mainstream church hierarchies generally do not recognize the ordinations of clergy in the Independent Sacramental Movement, even though the lineages of these clergy – who ordained whom ordained whom ordained whom – can be traced back to the same foundational ministers.

Mother Maeve admits she herself had initial qualms about tying herself to the Independent Sacramental Movement. But when individuals began reaching out after her ordination as a priest, sharing their own stories of excommunication or their denial of the priesthood – stories, like hers, of those who felt marginalized by their own faith tradition – she found herself leaning further into it.

She began to pursue ordination as a bishop, believing she would hold a greater capacity to address these types of situations in this role.

“You have people coming to you. You have people who want to learn the liturgy from you, learn the tradition from you, they just want to take communion again after a decade of not being able to take communion anywhere,” she said. “So you kind of say, Who cares what I think? Or who cares what other people think? If it’s needful, you should do it.”

A year into her consecration as a bishop and three into the establishment of her parish, she today ministers to a modest community at Joy of All Who Sorrow. She and her partner, Jess Bernal, who as an ordained priest is known as Presbyter Theophan, said they typically hold services for only a handful of parishioners on Sunday.

Some are local, some drive hours for a divine liturgy. Sometimes it’s just the two of them.

Presbyter Theophan typically leads the service, her voice blending with Mother Maeve’s in the litanies and antiphons. When it comes time to consecrate the Eucharist, it’s her at the altar, behind the icons that are a standard in any Orthodox worship space – even one that’s a temporary setup each Sunday. They meet in the chapel of St. Paul’s Lutheran Church.

Their reach and ministry stretches beyond Toledo, though, in several satellite parishes in other cities and in those with whom they connect through their website or social media. Their stories of feeling drawn to the faith tradition or desiring to remain in it despite the roadblocks they see in gender, sexuality and other issues keep coming.

“There are definitely out there,” Mother Maeve said. “And a lot of them experienced what I experienced, where you look and you look and you look [for an inclusive community] and there is nothing. Then suddenly, you look, and there is one thing that pops up. … So it’s been rewarding for people to kind of be for people what I had wanted in the first place.”

Gigantic statue of Jesus to be erected in Vladivostok--on a site originally intended for a statue of Lenin

As idolatrous as a statue of Jesus is, it's amusing to think that Vladimir Lenin must be spinning in his tomb at the thought that Jesus is once again an object of veneration in Russia, while Mr. Lenin is passe. As reported by Marc Bennetts of Religion News Service, March 15, 2019 (link in original):

An artistic rendering of the statue of Christ planned for Vladivostok in eastern Russia.

Moscow • Authorities in Vladivostok, the largest city in far eastern Russia, plan to erect a gigantic statue of Jesus Christ on a site once designated for a monument of Vladimir Lenin.

The statue, which has not yet been approved by the Russian Orthodox Church, is to be 125 feet high — the same height as the Christ the Redeemer monument in Rio de Janeiro, according to blueprints made public by Vyatsky Posad, a Russian Orthodox Christian center. The statue will stand on top of a hill looking east over the Pacific Ocean.

Soviet authorities issued orders for the construction of a 98-foot-high bronze statue of Lenin at the site in 1972. Another statue, of Soviet dictator Josef Stalin, was planned to be built on a neighboring hill. But construction hitches meant the plans repeatedly were postponed, before eventually being scrapped altogether in 1990.

Supporters of the Jesus statue are enthusiastic, despite the lack of details about the project. Descriptions of the statue as a “symbol of the unity of the Russian people” that would “bless” ships leaving and arriving in the port city were later deleted from the Vyatsky Posad’s website, for reasons that remain unclear. Attempts by Religion News Service to contact the Vyatsky Center for comment were unsuccessful.

Other Russian media outlets, however, have published blueprints for the project, and plans for the statue were discussed openly at a meeting at the proposed site in late February attended by Oleg Kozhemyako, the regional governor; Ali Uzdenov, a vice president of the Russian business conglomerate Sistema; and Gennady Tsurkov, the head of the Vyatsky Posad center, which is connected to Iliy, an influential monk who is spiritual adviser to Patriarch Kirill, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Tsurkov, in an interview with Russia’s Govorit Moskva radio station, said the statue project had been inspired by Iliy.

“He really wants to put up a statue of Jesus Christ as a protector of our Russia from the east,” Tsurkov said. “He says, ‘we need to make it higher [than the statue in Rio].’” Tsurkov clarified that while the statue itself would be the same height as the Christ the Redeemer monument, it would also stand atop a 98-foot-high pedestal. “Altogether, it will be 68 meters [223 feet].”

Tsurkov said that private investors would fund the construction of the statue but that total costs had yet to be finalized.

Kozhemyako said a small chapel that could hold up to 30 people would also be built close to the statue. “Delegations will just arrive, go in, and light a candle,” the regional governor said, according to online footage of the on-site discussion.

Online opinion has been almost entirely negative. “Is there nothing else for us to spend our money on?” wrote Svetlana, on a forum for residents of Vladivostok. “We’d be better off spending the money on hospitals, schools, roads … ”

Others on the same forum suggested the project could be part of “a money-laundering scheme.”

Roman Lunkin, a religion analyst at the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow, told RNS that it was not certain that the Russian Orthodox Church would approve the project, because the proposed design was more in keeping with Roman Catholic statues and monuments. “There is a tradition in Orthodoxy of putting up crosses,” he said, “but not statues.”

With the Russian Orthodox Church closely aligned with the Kremlin, Lunkin explained, the project contained a “political-patriotic” element that apparently underlines what President Vladimir Putin has described as the religious values that bind modern Russia.

“This huge statue of Christ is proposed to act as a kind of border post in Russia’s far east to guard our motherland,” Lunkin said. He also criticized comments attributed to Ilya, the patriarch’s spiritual adviser, about making the statue larger than its counterpart in Brazil as an ill-considered attempt to “demonstrate Russian greatness” to the entire world.

The construction of a massive statue of Christ in Vladivostok would also neatly symbolize Russia’s startling transformation from an officially atheist state in the Soviet era, which ended in 1991, to today’s Christian-majority country. Around 80 percent of Russians currently identify as Orthodox Christians, including Putin, a former KGB agent. Few, however, attend church services or observe religious fasts.

The Vladivostok statue wouldn’t be the first time that a Christian structure has been built on the site of a monument to Lenin. In 2000, Moscow’s Christ the Saviour Cathedral was consecrated at a location within sight of the Kremlin towers, replacing a previous cathedral building that was demolished on Stalin’s orders in 1931 to make way for a planned 1,000-foot-high Palace of Soviets.

The palace, which would have been the world’s tallest building at the time, was to have been topped by a colossal statue of Lenin. Construction was postponed and then later scrapped with the outbreak of World War II.

It’s not only in grandiose architecture that Lenin and Jesus compete in today’s Russia. Gennady Zyuganov, the leader of the modern-day Communist Party, frequently compares Lenin to Jesus Christ and has claimed the Soviet Union was an attempt to establish “God’s kingdom on earth.”

Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople recognizes the independence of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine

As indicated in the following articles, Eastern Orthodox Churches are not biblical Christian churches, but serve as religious guardians of their national cultures. Although there are disputes and splits between the various churches, the stage is being set for some sort of unity under the Antichrist.

As reported by Carl Bunderson of Catholic News Agency, January 8, 2019 (links in original):

The Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople on Saturday signed a tomos of autocephaly for the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, formally recognizing the Church’s independence.

The tomos was signed on January 5 at St. George’s Cathedral in Istanbul, after Bartholomew I concelebrated a Divine Liturgy with Epiphanius I, Metropolitan of Kyiv and primate of the newly-created Orthodox Church of Ukraine.

Among those present at the signing were Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko and several other Ukrainian government officials.

The tomos, or decree, has been delivered to Kyiv, where Epiphanius put it on public display following a Divine Liturgy celebrated Jan. 7 at St. Sophia’s Cathedral.

Bartholomew’s formal conferral of autocephaly is the culmination of a process that began amid the collapse of the Soviet Union, and gained momentum after Russia’s annexation of the Crimean Peninsula in 2014 and Russian backing of separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine.

The Ecumenical Patriarch’s intention to create a single, autocephalous Church in Ukraine is motivated by a desire to unify the country’s 30 million Eastern Orthodox Christians, who were until recently split among three Churches: the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate), which is linked to the Russian Orthodox Church, and two Churches which had claimed autocephaly, but were not recognized by other Orthodox Churches: the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Kyiv Patriarchate) and the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church.

Autocephaly for the Orthodox Church in Ukraine has been a fiercely contested subject between the Patriarchs of Moscow and Constantinople, with the Russian Orthodox Church seeing the move as an infringement of its jurisdiction and authority.

Bartholomew had announced Sept. 7 he was sending two envoys to meets with civil and ecclesial leaders in Kyiv to prepare for Ukrainian autocephaly. In response, Patriarch Kirill of Moscow said later that month he would remove Bartholomew’s names from the diptychs, and would not concelebrate with him.

The Ecumenical Patriarch declared Oct. 11 he would grant autocephaly to the Orthodox Church in Ukraine. At the same time, he restored to communion Metropolitan Filaret, head of the UOC-KP, and also revoked the right, granted in 1686, of the Russian Patriarch to consecrate the Metropolitan of Kyiv.

In response, the Russian Orthodox Church broke communion with Bartholomew Oct. 15, calling his recognition of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine “lawless and canonically void.” Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk, chair of external Church relations for the Russian Orthodox Church, said that “the church that acknowledged the schismatics has excluded itself from the canonical field of Orthodoxy.”

The Orthodox Church of Ukraine was established Dec. 15 at a “unification council” held by representatives of the UOC-KP and the UAOC. In addition, two bishops of the UOC-MP, Alexander Drabinko and Simeon Shostatsky, participated in the unification council. Soon afterward, they were declared schismatic by the UOC-MP, and their sees vacant. Both have joined the OCU.

Several UOC-MP parishes have also reportedly joined the OCU.

It was at the unification council that Epiphanius, 39, was elected primate of the OCU. He had previously been Metropolitan of Pereyaslavsky and Bila Tserkva in the UOC-KP.

Along with ecclesial leaders, Poroshenko has been a strong backer of Ukrainian autocephaly. At the conclusion of the unification council he said, “We are now creating an independent Ukraine. And this event is as important as the referendum on our independence adopted more than 27 years ago.”

He linked an independent Church to Ukrainian patriotism, and said: “Autocephaly is part of our state pro-European and pro-Ukrainian strategy, which we have been consistently implementing for almost five years. All this is the basis of our own way of development, development of the state of Ukraine and development of our Ukrainian nation.”

Fr. Alexander Laschuk, a Ukrainian Greek-Catholic priest, canon lawyer, and professor at St. Michael’s College at the University of Toronto, discussed with CNA both the inter-Orthodox and the ecumenical implications of Ukrainian Orthodox autocephaly.

For the Orthodox Church in Ukraine “it’s a sign of maturity that the Ecumenical Patriarch, who is first among equals, sees they can be a self-governing Church … that’s a sort of vote-of-confidence for the Church in Ukraine.”

Within Eastern Orthodoxy, Laschuk said, the decision also will play into debates about how autocephaly is granted, given that “the power of the Ecumenical Patriarch is not the power of the Holy Father, so how decision are made is much more complicated at times.”

While Constantinople is the traditional and historical center of Eastern Orthodoxy, Moscow has long exercised considerable influence and power, both because of its size and because of its closeness to Russian civil authorities.

The debate over the granting of autocephaly plays into the relations of Constantinople and Moscow, and their relative importance and power. Both the Russian and Ecumenical Patriarchs have written to the heads of the other Eastern Orthodox Churches, asking them not to recognize, and to recognize, respectively, the OCU’s autocephaly.

The decision for autocephaly, Laschuk said, will also have a tremendous impact on ecumenism.

For example, because of the presence of Eastern Orthodox bishops with whom it is not in communion, the Moscow Patriarchate chose not to participate in the 2007 meeting at Ravenna of the commission for dialogue between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.

“It will also affect ecumenical dialogue in the sense of ‘who is our bargaining partner’, for Catholics,” Laschuk said. Previously, the Holy See dialogued only with the UOC-MP as “canonical Orthodoxy” in the country, but “clearly that’s changed” with the recognition of the OCU by Constantinople.

The priest added that he thinks the head of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church, Major Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk, “is excited to have a partner with which he can actually dialogue; we won’t have the union of the Churches tomorrow, but if you can’t even talk to each other, it’s hard to get much done … I think His Beatitude is very happy he has someone with whom he can talk, and be in the same room with, which was not the case previously.”

He commented that “entire regions of Ukraine” are becoming increasingly Seventh-Day Adventist or Pentecostal, and that “collaborative activity by the more traditional Churches is a very welcome thing, as opposed to sort of, warring factions.”

Major Archbishop Shevchuk had written to Epiphanius December 20 to congratulate him on his election as primate of the OCU, commenting, “We have all witnessed how the Lord, through the power and deeds of the Holy Spirit, in cooperation with your good will, heals the wounds of church divisions and enmity, giving opportunity to reconcile with our brother in Christ.”

“At this significant moment, I extend my hand on behalf of our Church to you and all the Orthodox brethren, offering you to begin our path to unity, to the truth. Because the future of the Church, our people and the Ukrainian independent European state depends on how we today will cherish unity and overcome what separates us.”

Major Archbishop Shevchuk added that “we are grateful to the Lord who has blessed the participants of this, without exaggeration, an important event that will enter the history of independent Ukraine as a great God’s gift on the way to the complete unity of the Churches of Volodymyr’s Baptism.”

He noted that “the Churches of Volodymyr’s baptism … live in one liturgical heritage, from the depths of beauty and God-inspired wisdom we draw spiritual strength. Even today, we are not in full eucharistic communion, but are called to jointly overcome the obstacles that stand on the path to unity. This historic mission and the foundation of the future patriarchy of the united Kyivan Church were laid by even the glorious church men Peter Mohyla and Josyf Veliamyn Rutsky.”

The words of the head of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church allude to the 988 baptism of Vladimir the Great, Grand Prince of Kiev, which resulted in the Christianization of Kievan Rus’, a state whose heritage Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus all claim.

The Christianization of Kievan Rus’ forms the roots of the Russian Orthodox Church, the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church, the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate).

The Serbian Orthodox Church, meanwhile, objects to Patriarch Bartholomew's decision; as reported by the Serbian state news agency Tanjug, January 4, 2019:

Metropolitan Amfilohije says that granting autocephaly of the Orthodox church in Ukraine will not affect the status of the church in Montenegro.

The Serbian Orthodox Church (SPC) dignitary, who is at the helm of the Metropolitanate of Montenegro and the Littoral, added that after the latest decision of its head, Patriarch Bartholomew, the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople was "absolutely no longer considered as the supreme church authority by the SPC."

In an interview with Vijesti TV, Amfilohije said that he informed Bartholomew during their recent meeting of the decisions of the SPC Assembly, which is not in agreement with his decision to give autocephaly to the church in Ukrainian.

Amfilohije said that he has known Bartholomew since he was a deacon, and that they studied together in Rome - "but what he is doing now in Ukraine is not absolutely adequate to the spirit of the Orthodox church, because it is destroying centuries-old unity among Orthodox churches."

"And from that standpoint our Church and many other patriarchates do not accept such a position, I've told him this openly. I still have hope, however, many theologians in Greece and archbishop are also against this and his current behavior," the metropolitan said.

Asked if the move could affect the status of the church in Montenegro, Amfilohije stressed that this "absolutely has nothing to do with the status of the church in Montenegro."

"An independent Montenegro is one thing, an autocephalous church is another. A completely different story", Amfilohije was clear. Asked whether the Ecumenical Patriarchate remains the supreme church authority as far as the Serbian Orthodox Church is concerned, the metropolitan replied: "Absolutely not."

He explained that only the Catholic Church has supreme authority, i.e., the pope.

"In the Orthodox church, it's a ten-century struggle for every bishop to have their authority. And from that viewpoint Bartholomew made a mistake of meddling in the life of the Russian Church," said Amfilohije, adding that for this reason, he has been rightly being criticized for (wanting) the role of a pope.

In the Orthodox church, there is no pope, nor has there ever been one - and that is why it remained Orthodox, the SPC dignitary concluded.

See also my posts:

Eastern Orthodox Patriarch of Moscow to meet his counterpart in Constantinople at the end of August (August 16, 2018)

Russian Orthodox Church cuts ties with Archbishop of Constantinople in dispute over Ukraine (September 20, 2018)

Russian Orthodox Church rebukes priest for flaunting designer goods on Instagram

Instagram seems to be facilitating an ecumenism of prosperity preaching, as in the item in the post below, and the following, as reported by Matthew Bodner of the London Daily Telegraph, December 10, 2018 (link in original):

The priest, Father Vyacheslav Baskakov, displayed Louis Vuitton bags and Gucci shoes in his Instagram posts

The Russian Orthodox Church is pursuing disciplinary action against a priest in the city of Tver for a series of immodest Instagram posts in which he flaunts Gucci shoes and Louis Vuitton handbags, a church spokesman has said.

The account, belonging to priest Vyacheslav Baskakov, drew social media heat on Friday when users noticed posts featuring his luxury swag. The account has since been deleted, but not before Instagram users took snapshots of high price Louis Vuitton slippers, among other things.

“I hope this will bring this shepherd to account,” said Alexander Volkov, a spokesman for Patriarch Kirill, the leader of the Russian Orthodox Church, “and to find the words and actions to bring him to reason, so that these kinds of things will not happen again.”

This isn’t the first time Russian Orthodox Church officials have been caught with high end fashion accessories, though it is perhaps the first time one of these holy men have been so blatant about it.

In 2012, Patriarch Kirill himself was spotted wearing a $30,000 Breguet wrist watch in a photo posted on the church’s website. After a wave of outrage, a photo appeared with the wristwatch photoshopped out.

However, Patriarch Kirill’s hand was resting on a table that reflected an image of the watch -- a detail overlooked in the photoshopped image. The original photo, with watch in clear view, was later put back on the website.

All things considered, this was not Russia’s greatest luxury watch controversy. In 2015, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov accidentally flashed a $620,000 Richard Mille RM 52-01 watch, of which only 30 were reportedly made, in a photo taken at his wedding in the resort town of Sochi.

While perhaps marginally more appropriate in the halls of power, Patriarch Kirill’s spokesman laid into Father Baskakov with some harsh words for his Instagram posts, saying that his “immodest and unrestrained way of life” has no place in the church. “The life of a priest cannot be divided between the personal and public and no clergyman can act like a priest in a church from the morning until lunch and then be whoever he wants from lunch until evening,” he said.

10 years ago: The death of Russian Orthodox Church primate Alexy II

On December 5, 2008, Alexy II, Patriarch of Moscow and all Rus' since 1990, died of heart failure at the age of 79. Alexy II, born Alexey Mikhailovich von Ridiger in Estonia, became a Russian Orthodox priest in 1950 and worked his way up through the church hierarchy, eventually becoming the last Russian Orthodox Church primate to be appointed during the existence of the U.S.S.R., and the first during the post-Soviet period.

Patriarch Alexy knew how to work the political system. He was identified by many sources as an agent of the Soviet secret police force KGB, beginning in 1958; upon becoming Patriarch, Alexy was a stronger advocate for the rights of the church, and glorified those who had been victims of Communism.

Alexy II pursued ecumenical dialogue, attracting some opposition within the Russian Orthodox Church. He became one of the presidents of the Conference of European Churches in 1964, and in March 1987 was elected President of the CEC Presidium and Advisory Committee, in which post he served until November 1990. Patriarch Alexy had a dispute with the Roman Catholic Church over over the property rights of the Greek Catholic Church in Ukraine, but was on friendly terms with Latin-rite Catholics in France.earning some opposition within the church. Patriarch Alexy II was succeeded by Kirill.

90 years ago: Pope Pius XI issues encyclical Rerum Orientalium

On September 8, 1928, Pope Pius XI issued his encyclical Rerum Orientalium (On Promotion of Oriental Studies). The word "Oriental" refers to Eastern Rite churches. Pope Pius cited papal predecessors from Adrian II (867-872) to Benedict XV (1914-1922) in support of Roman Catholic encouragement of Oriental studies.

While Pope Pius XI praised the achievements of Eastern churches, he upheld the superiority of the Roman Catholic Church and emphasized that the goal of Oriental studies was to bring the Eastern churches back to Rome, under the authority of the Roman Catholic Church.

90 years later, such ecumenical activities by the Roman Catholic Church continue (not only with Eastern churches, but with "evangelical"), with the same goal: everyone must come back to Rome under the supreme authority of the Roman Pontiff in order to achieve true "Christian" unity.

The Vatican website contains only Latin and Italian versions of the encyclical, but I was able to obtain an English version using that most scholarly of tools, Google Translate. Some excerpts:

...Therefore, not having to neglect anything of what is beneficial to the desired return of such a conspicuous part of Christ's flock to union with his true Church, or to further foster charity towards those who, different in rituals, adhere however intimately with the mind and with heart to the Roman Church and to the Vicar of Christ, we warmly exhort and implore you, Venerable Brothers, to want each one to choose at least one of your priests, who, well trained in Eastern matters, is able to teach in them the Seminary students . We know very well that the erection of a special Faculty, as it is called, of oriental studies is rather the office of Catholic Universities; and We warmly congratulate you that this has already begun to be done, with our own advice and help, in Paris, in Leuven and in Lille; we also enjoy that in many other places of study, even at the expense of the State, and with the consensus and the exhortation of the Bishops, there have recently been found to be chairs of these oriental disciplines. But it will not be difficult to prepare, for each theological seminary, some Professor, who, together with his own subject, or of history or liturgy or canon law, can explain at least some of the elements of Oriental studies. In this way, turning the minds and hearts of the students to the traditions and rituals of the Orientals will necessarily follow a not slight advantage, not only in favor of the Orientals, but of the students themselves, who, as is natural, will draw upon them. a deeper knowledge of Catholic theology and of the Latin discipline, and together they will conceive a deeper love for the true Bride of Christ, while they will admire its marvelous beauty and unity in the same variety of rites, shine, in some way, more radiant...

And from here, as we hope, it will happen that the eastern nations, seeing with their own eyes so many splendid monuments of piety, doctrine, the arts of their ancestors, for this reason they will learn in what honor the true, legitimate, is held by the Roman Church. the perennial «orthodoxy» and with which diligence is preserved, defended and propagated. From this show, as can be hoped for, as impressed by the most valid arguments, if the mutual exchange of studies is added to the motive of the love of Christ, because many Easterners, rethinking glories and having prejudiced prejudices, should not hurry to that desired unity, founded on a profession of faith, not yet mutilated, but whole and open, as befits true worshipers of Jesus Christ, who must be united in a single fold under a single Shepherd?

So, with the wishes and prayers, let us ask God for a happy day to come soon, it may be useful, Venerable Brothers, to mention, albeit briefly, the method with which presently our Oriental Institute employs the work and the efforts of , according to Our wishes, to reach such an important goal...

...That being the case, who ever, concerning so much of the work undertaken especially for the benefit of the Orientals, does not feel strongly grow in the heart the hope that the most merciful Redeemer of the men Christ Jesus, moved to pity the weeping fate of so many men wandering far from the right path, and by favoring Our efforts, will he finally bring back his sheep into the one fold under the only Shepherd?

And this maximally seeing how much of the divine revelation is religiously preserved among them: sincere homage to our Lord Jesus Christ, the singular love and pity towards the most pure Mother, the very actual use of the Sacraments. Therefore having God in his goodness disposed to use the ministry of men, and especially of the priests, to carry out the work of the Redemption, what else remains, Venerable Brothers, if not to return to pray you and implore you as warmly as we can, so that not only be united with us in mind and heart, but you also use yourselves, with your labors, so that the day will soon be felt, long hoped for, when we can greet the return of not only a few, but of most Greeks, Slavs, Rumanians and other Eastern nations, so far separated, to pristine union with the Roman Church? Thinking back to what we, with God's help, have undertaken and intend to do to obtain so much consolation sooner, We seem to be able to compare ourselves to that family father, whom Jesus represents to us in praying to the guests at the dinner " they came, because everything was already set "(Luke, XIV, 17). Applying these words to our case, we ardently exhort everyone, and each of you in particular, to want by all means to join us in promoting the study of Eastern things to realize the great purpose. In this way, finally removed all the impediments that stand in the desired union, under the auspices of the Blessed Virgin Immaculate Mother of God, and of the Holy Fathers and Doctors of the East and Christian Occident, we can embrace, the veterans in the paternal house, the brothers and sons so long by us dissidents, and now very close to us united by that charity that poses as a solid foundation on the truth and on the whole profession of Christian law.

Russian Orthodox Church cuts ties with Archbishop of Constantinople in dispute over Ukraine

As reported by Peter Foster and the foreign staff of the London Daily Telegraph, September 15, 2018:

Russia’s Orthodox church has announced it will cut ties with the head of the church in Constantinople in a bitter row over plans to recognise a rival branch in the pro-Western portion of Ukraine.

The Russian renunciation of ties came as Bartholomew I, the Archbishop of Constantinople and de facto head of the Orthodox church’s 300 million Christians, looked set to approve the new Ukrainian church in a serious blow to the authority and prestige of Moscow.

Ahead of the decision, Patriarch Bartholomew sent two representatives to Ukraine this month, sparking fury in Russia where the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, continues to see Ukraine as part of a greater Russia.

In an apparent pre-emptive move against Bartholmew’s impending recognition, the Russian Orthodox Church said on Friday it would no longer conduct joint services with the Patriarchate of Constantinople and its own Patriarch, Kirill, will stop mentioning Bartholomew I in his prayers.

"Essentially this is a breakdown of relations. To take an example from secular life, the decision is roughly equivalent to cutting diplomatic ties," the Russian Church's Metropolitan Hilarion was quoted by RIA news agency as saying.

Patriarch Kirill, who is seen as a strong ally of President Vladimir Putin, wants to prevent pro-Western Ukraine from getting an independent church.

The Orthodox church in Ukraine is split between a branch whose clerics pledge loyalty to Moscow and one that is overseen by the unrecognised Kiev-based Patriarch Filaret.

The split has deepened following the Russian annexation of Crimea and the outbreak of a separatist uprising in Ukraine's east in 2014.

The Kiev Patriarchate's leader has been sharply critical of Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, and in 2014 suggested he was possessed by Satan.

The rival Moscow Patriarchate vies for influence in Ukraine with the Kiev Patriarchate - a branch of the Orthodox Church that broke away from Moscow in 1992 after the fall of the Soviet Union - and with other Orthodox and Catholic denominations.

Bartholomew I, known as Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch, is regarded as the "first among equals" of the world's Orthodox Christian believers.

The Moscow Patriarchate, the legal term for the Russian Orthodox Church has a sizeable following in Ukraine.

Kiev considers it a tool for the Kremlin to wield influence, while the Moscow Patriarchate sees itself as the only legitimate Orthodox Church in Ukraine.

The Kremlin said it was following the situation closely and opposed any split in Orthodoxy, adding that the state should not intervene in church matters.

"Of course for Moscow and indeed for the entire Orthodox world the single preferable scenario is the preservation of unity of this Orthodox world," said a Kremlin spokesman.

October 17, 2018 update: As reported by the Daily Telegraph, October 15, 2018 (link in original):

The Russian Orthodox Church said Monday it is breaking ties with the Constantinople Patriarchate over its decision to grant independence to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which Moscow does not recognise.

"A decision has been made to rupture full communion with the Constantinople Patriarchate," which means priests from the two churches cannot serve and worshippers cannot take communion together, Hilarion, the bishop in charge of the Russian Orthodox Church's diplomacy, told journalists in Minsk.

Speaking after the meeting of the Holy Synod, or decision-making body, of the Russian Orthodox Church, Hilarion said it does not recognise the decision taken last week by the Constantinople Patriarchate as it has "completely associated itself with the schism".

Moscow considers the Filaret, the Patriarch of Kiev, to be a schismatic, a decision Constantinople has backed since the 1990s but reversed last week amid the drive by Ukraine for its own Orthodox Church independent from Moscow.

The Constantinople Patriarchate, a leading Orthodox authority, also overruled its own decision from the 17th century which adjoined Kievan Orthodox churches to Moscow.

Most of the Orthodox parishes in Ukraine have historically been under the umbrella of the Moscow Patriarchate, and many of these may eventually switch to the new independent Ukrainian Orthodox Church, despite Moscow's warnings.

Hilarion said Constantinople's decision to back a schismatic church effectively drives it into a schism. "We cannot be in communication with this church, which is in a schism," he said. "We hope that common sense prevails and that the Constantinople Patriarchate changes its mind."

The decision in Istanbul was "illegal and canonically worthless," he said. "The Russian Orthodox Church does not accept these decisions, it will not follow them. The schism is still a schism and the schismatics are still schismatics," he said.

The church in Ukraine has been under the jurisdiction of the Russian Orthodox Church since the late 1600s, but calls for independence have increased since Moscow's 2014 annexation of the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine.

As reported by Deutsche Welle, October 17, 2018 (links in original):

A push to establish an independent Ukrainian Orthodox church has also prompted Russian Orthodox bishops in Germany to "temporarily" quit a joint episcopate council. Their departure follows patriarchal orders from Moscow.

The Russian Orthodox Church's three bishops in Germany have "temporarily" ceased work within the Orthodox Bishops Conference in Germany (OBKD), a spokesman for the bishops told Catholic KNA news agency on Tuesday.

The OBKD, based in Bonn and led by Greek Metropolitan Augoustinos, was founded in 2010. It brings together bishops of seven Orthodox churches, comprising some 2 million Orthodox Christians in Germany.

KNA quoted Archbishop Mark, who leads the Russian bishops, as saying the conference cessation was "very painful, but we could not even indirectly endorse what is being done against Orthodoxy in the Ukraine and Russia."

On Monday, the Russian Orthodox Church synod broke ties with the Istanbul [Constantinople]-based Ecumenical Patriarchate, describing its recent decision on Ukraine as "lawless."

Traditionally, Constantinople heads Orthodox Christianity's 250 million believers across 15 autocephalic [self-governing] regions. The Orthodox Church is Christianity's third largest grouping after Roman Catholics and Protestants.

Constantinople, led by Patriarch Bartholomeus I, last week dropped its rejection of Ukraine's efforts to split from the Russian Orthodox Church and began recognition proceedings for a Ukrainian Orthodox church independent of Moscow, likely to be led by Kiev Patriarch Filaret.

If finalized, it would challenge Russian Orthodox jurisdiction and dominance in Ukraine that dates back more than three centuries. The Russian church also owns property in the country such as the Lavra monastery in Kyiv.

Ukrainian calls for church independence have grown since the 2013-2014 Maidan uprising in Kyiv and Moscow's 2014 annexation of the Crimean Peninsula.

Backing those calls has been Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, who is seeking re-election next March. On Sunday, he said any believer would "choose his own path to God," but added it was "an issue of Ukrainian independence."

Dmitry Peskov, spokesman for Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has ties with Russian Orthodox head, Patriarch Kirill, said on Tuesday that the Kremlin was watching developments "very carefully and with a great deal of worry."

OBKD German conference head Greek Metropolitan Augoustinos told Germany's Protestant epd news agency on Tuesday that despite the crisis, good relations among Orthodox congregations in Germany were likely to prevail.

Serbian Patriarch Irinej said: "We don't think in terms of 'for' and 'against'."

Petra Bosse-Huber, foreign-relations bishop for the combined Protestant EKD churches in Germany, described the crisis as an "inner-Orthodox matter" on which the Protestants could neither adjudicate nor intervene.

Bosse-Huber added that during the past 100 years of joint ecumenical efforts, there had been numerous autocephalic disputes among "our Orthodox sister churches."

Coptic Orthodox monk in Egypt confesses to the murder of the bishop

Some of the old mystics were really mistakes. They tried to be more saintly by living in caves. Living in a hole never made anybody holier. Vance Havner, Pepper 'n' Salt, 1966

More evidence that monasticism doesn't produce godliness, as reported by Gianni Valente in La Stampa, August 11, 2018 (updated August 12, 2018) (bold in original):

The Coptic bishop Epiphanius, abbot of the monastery of Saint Macarius, was killed by one of his monks. He smashed his head with an iron rod, in the early hours of Sunday 29 July, while Anba Epiphanius, after leaving his cell, was on his way to church to start the Sunday liturgy with the morning prayer.

The killer’s name is Wael Saad Tawadros and the Egyptian media report that, under the pressures of the investigators, he confessed his crime, and also revealed where to find the murder weapon, which he had carefully hidden in the monastery’s warehouse.

The murky affair is causing dejection and dismay throughout the Coptic Orthodox community. In the meantime, Coptic Patriarch Tawadros II reiterates that the Church “must not hide anything” and invites everyone not to get upset in this trial, trusting that “faith does not need protectors” because the Lord guards it.

A murder and two suicide attempts

Facts have occurred around the tragic end of the bishop-abbot, and objectively disturbing details continue to emerge: internal struggles, human miseries, complicity, ecclesiastics who profane the sanctity of monastic life and do not hesitate to attempt suicide when they see the suspicions and pressures of the investigators coming their way with regard to the murder in the monastery.

Wael Saad Tawadros, 34, had been ordained monk of the monastery of Saint Macarius in 2010, with the name of Isaiah al Makary, but last August 5, in the tense spiritual atmosphere after the murder of Anba Epiphanius, Wael was expelled from the monastery and defrocked, with a decree approved by the Patriarch Tawadros that justified this provision by referring to acts “incompatible with the monastic conduct”.

The day before, Wael had attempted suicide by ingesting insecticide. But in those days Father Boulos Halim, spokesman of the Coptic Orthodox Church, declared that the expulsion measures ordered against the former monk were not to be related to the investigation of the death of Anba Epiphanius: they were the culmination of a canonical disciplinary process begun as early as the beginning of 2018 – said Father Halim –, and whose first punitive disposition imposed against Wael – the expulsion for three years from the monastery, and the transfer to another structure – was not implemented after some of his confreres signed a petition in his defence.

On Monday, another monk from Saint Macarius, Faltaous al-Makary, attempted suicide, cutting his veins and jumping from a four-storey building of the monastery. He is now in serious condition in a hospital in Cairo. According to the reports of the Egyptian media, including Wataninet, it seems that the security cameras of the monastery have recorded scenes of tension and quarrels between some monks and the abbot-bishop Epiphanius, in the hours before his killing.

Many indications suggest that the tragic end of Anba Epiphanius is the result of personal resentments cultivated in the days marked by the rhythms of monastic life, in the shadow of religious zeal. But the story is becoming an upheaval for the Coptic Church, and above all, for its monasticism. With speculations that involve divisions and latent contrasts within the entire Coptic ecclesial structure and its hierarchy.

Contrasting passions have been raging in the monastery of Saint Macarius for decades. In the late sixties, Matta el Meskin arrived at the monastery. He was a prominent figure in the rebirth of Coptic monasticism and of all the Coptic spirituality in the second half of the last century. A strong and charismatic personality, who experienced a significant clash with Patriarch Shenouda III, the other great protagonist of the Coptic awakening of the last decades. Among the reasons for the clash, there were character incompatibilities, theological contrasts and even a different approach to relations with politics: the monk criticised the politicisation of the Church and the excessive activism of hierarchies in opposing established powers.

In the confrontation between Shenouda and the Egyptian President Anwar Sadat – who forced the Coptic Pope to exile himself in the monastery for years – Matta justified the choices of the latter, arguing that the Church was betraying her nature, conceiving herself as a political party, in which “the mind replaced inspiration, and planning replaced prayer”. At the culmination of the confrontation, Shenouda went as far as to prohibit the spread of the works of Matta el Meskin in the Coptic parishes.

Things have changed with his successor, the current Pope Tawadros, who put an end to the damnatio memoriae (“condemnation of memory”) against Matta el Meskin and offered support for the rebirth of the monastery of Saint Macarius, where the monks who had studied with him – including the late Anba Epiphanius – guarded his memory. But in the Coptic hierarchy, most of the active bishops were ordained by Patriarch Shenouda, therefore they shared a feeling of opposition or at least mistrust towards Matta el Meskin’s teaching. Now, the serious episode of bloodshed occurred in the monastery of Matta is also used as a pretext for operations of ecclesiastical politics, perhaps aimed to create new obstacles and problems for the ministry of Pope Tawadros, pastorally cautious and open-minded, but also opposed by a part of the Coptic establishment.

The murder of Anba Epiphanius has been perceived as a serious and alarming signal by the pastoral concern of Patriarch Tawadros and his collaborators. On Friday, August 3, the committee for the monasteries of the Orthodox Coptic Holy Synod established 12 rules – ratified by the Patriarch – by which all those who live the monastic condition in the Coptic Orthodox Church should abide. These measures aim to guard monastic life as a condition of seclusion from the world, marked by moments of prayer, work and silence.

Among other things, the Coptic monks and nuns were asked to take leave from social media and shut down their personal accounts and any blogs they managed, considered by the Patriarch as instruments used to “waste time”, to spread confused ideas and foster personal polemics. The intention of the current Orthodox Coptic leadership is obviously to react to the processes of mondanisation underway within the ecclesial structure. But this desire does not rely primarily on disciplinary measures or rhetorical statements on a “zero-tolerance”.

In his last, traditional Wednesday sermons, Pope Tawadros used other words to try to comfort and confirm into faith the people of Coptic believers: he exhorted everyone not to give in to agitation; he remembered that evil has always existed and that even Judas committed suicide when he betrayed his Master; he repeated that the monks are men, with their fragility, and that many of them have fallen in the course of history because Satan has always besieged monastic life with particular fury; he expressed its confidence that the monastic communities will dwell in the Egyptian deserts “until the end of the world”. He reiterated that the Church has nothing to hide because the treasures that she has as gifts and that keep her alive cannot be dispelled by weaknesses, mistakes, sins and crimes of individuals. Above all, Tawadros invited everyone to recognise that Christian faith is a gift guarded by the Lord, and for this “it does not need other guardians”.

Eastern Orthodox Patriarch of Moscow to meet his counterpart in Constantinople at the end of August

The ecumenical movement continues, as reported by Gianni Valente of La Stampa, August 7, 2018 (bold in original):

The Patriarch of Moscow Kirill is preparing to visit his brother Bartholomew in Constantinople, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, primus inter pares among the leaders of the Orthodox Churches. The meeting is scheduled for next August 31, on the eve of the “extended” Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, which meets once every three years and is also attended by the Churches of the Orthodox Diaspora that fall under the direct jurisdiction of the “Mother Church” of Constantinople.

The meeting at the end of August – anticipated by a Greek religious information website – could mark a turning point with regard to the “Ukrainian issue” which has long been stressing the relations between the Orthodox Churches, called to take a position in the canonical-ecclesiological dispute between Moscow and Constantinople on the future of Orthodoxy in Ukraine.

In that country, political and ecclesial groups have been insistently asking that the Patriarchate of Constantinople give its canonical endorsement for the recognition of a national Orthodox Church, completely independent of the Moscow Patriarchate. While the leading exponents of Russian Orthodoxy – like Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk – predict that “blood will flow” if the creation of an independent Orthodox Church, strongly supported by the current political leadership of Kiev, will actually take place (with a consequent rift that would take away from the Church of Moscow jurisdiction over the dioceses and parishes currently belonging to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church linked with a status of autonomy to the Moscow Patriarchate).

The agenda and the tactics

The news about the imminent meeting between Bartholomew and Kirill was confirmed by both the Patriarchates. But also in the confirmation communiqués the tones are different. From Constantinople / Istanbul, they say that the request for the meeting has come from Moscow, that Patriarch Kirill will be accompanied by a delegation including Metropolitan Hilarion and that the main focus of the talks will be the issue of the Orthodox Church in Ukraine and the request to recognise its autocephaly to the Patriarchy of Constantinople. Metropolitan Elpidoforos of Bursa, bishop of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, also declared that the representatives of the Moscow Patriarchate will be called to account for the polemics raised by sectors of the Church of Moscow against leading exponents of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, starting with Bartholomew. The official confirmations of the meeting from Moscow appear much more laconic: the official spokesmen of the patriarch (priest Alexander Volkov) and of the Department of external relations (archpriest Nikolay Balashov) have confirmed that the meeting will take place but added that the agenda of the talks is still being defined.

The different tones of the communiqués seem to confirm the tactics involving media and ecclesiastical politics that have increasingly dominated the intra-Orthodox confrontation on the Ukrainian issue. In recent weeks, the Ecumenical Patriarchate, relying on its prerogatives of “Mother Church” of Orthodoxy, has sent its representatives to visit the leaders of the other Orthodox Churches – including the Russian one – to scrutinise the prevailing orientations within Orthodoxy before the hypothesis of granting autocephaly (full independence) to a national Church in Ukraine. The results of this particular survey were not disclosed but, in the meantime, the Russian media linked with the Moscow Patriarchate gave broad prominence to pronouncements by senior Orthodox hierarchs – such as Patriarch Theodoros of Alexandria, or representatives of the Orthodox Church of Georgia – that currently stigmatise the “political pressures” put in place to promote the recognition of an independent Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

Even the recent celebrations for the 1030th anniversary of the so-called “Baptism of Rus’” – considered as the initial act of conversion to Christianity of the Eastern Slavs – have become an occasion to try to decipher the moods of the different Churches and Orthodox communities regarding the Ukrainian issue. A delegation from the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople – led by Metropolitan Emmanuel of France – took part in the celebrations for the Baptism of Rus’ that took place in Kiev at the invitation of Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. Emmanuel also delivered to Poroshenko a message from the Ecumenical Patriarch, in which Bartholomew writes, among other things, that the See of Constantinople, by virtue of its traditional concern for the unity of Orthodox Christians and for the overcoming of schisms and divisions, “has taken the initiative to restore the unity of Orthodox believers in Ukraine, with the ultimate goal of granting autocephaly to the Ukrainian Church”.

In the same days, in Moscow, the representatives of 10 Orthodox Churches, including Patriarch Theodoros of Alexandria and of all Africa, took part in the celebrations for the 1030th anniversary of the Baptism of Rus’ organised by the Russian Orthodox Church. Media close to the Moscow Patriarchate report that all representatives of the Orthodox Churches expressed their support for the Russian Orthodox Church and for the Ukrainian canonical Orthodox Church linked to Moscow, against the claims of independence sustained by “schismatic Ukrainian” groups.

Exhausting contrasts

In the recent past, the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Moscow Patriarchate have already experienced difficult times and cut-offs in bilateral relations for controversies related to issues of jurisdiction over Churches and Orthodox communities present in former Soviet territories. So far, they have always found a way to mend their relations. The unfortunate attempt by the Moscow Patriarchate to boycott the pan-Orthodox Council convened by Patriarch Bartholomew in Crete in 2016 has widened the gap. Now, the Ukrainian issue risks infecting the open wounds in the communion tissue that holds the Orthodox Churches together, especially if the tactics of ecclesiastical politics, the buck-passing and the trials by fire continue to prevail over criteria of genuinely ecclesial and pastoral discernment.

The idea of starting again from the Pan-Orthodox Synod of Crete could be a good opportunity to resume the right path: taking up from there, recomposing the consensus and the ecclesial unity around that event that the Moscow Patriarchate continues not to recognise as a pan-Orthodox assembly that, still with all its limitations, represented a good beginning of confrontation and communion among the Orthodox Churches in the face of urgencies and problems coming their way, in the present and in the time to come.

Pope Francis invites leaders of Eastern churches to summit in Bari, Italy

The ecumenical movement of the end times continues, with the Bishop of Rome as its leader. The reader will notice the "go along to get along" attitude of some of these churches. This is "cultural Christianity," not Biblical Christianity, and is part of the deception that characterizes the last days before the return of the Lord Jesus Christ. As reported by Gianni Valente of La Stampa, July 4, 2018 (bold in original):

Rome - The Bishop of the Church of Rome, the one "who presides in charity" (Saint Ignatius of Antioch), summoned the Patriarchs and the heads of the Eastern Churches to Bari, inviting them to pray together for peace in that region. Almost everyone will come, from the Coptic Pope Tawadros to the Armenian Catholicos Aram I, from Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to Metropolitan Hilarion, High Representative of the Patriarchate of Moscow. It will be an unprecedented event, never happened in history. But the occasion does not call for grandstand tones or triumphalism. The heads of the Churches, in some parts of the East, will talk about how they see the Christian presence thinning out in lands from where the proclamation of Christ has spread throughout the world, and where now Christianity seems to be on the verge of extinction.

The Bari meeting does not appear to be a strategic summit conceived to mimick the summit meetings of political leaders. It shouldn’t even be reduced to a parade of clerical jet-set. No "final document" will be drawn up. There will be no elaborate plans of resistance and counteroffensive. After the prayer, the the heads of the Churches will pray and dialogue behind closed doors, softening whatever limelight might there be. It will be an opportunity to speak and listen, and to help each other - above all - to look through the eyes of faith at what is happening in the Middle East.

What makes the meeting in Bari so precious is above all the presence of almost all the heads of the Churches who have lived through the convulsions of the Middle East over the last few decades. They do not represent a compact phalanx: among some of them there are differences which can’t be considered secondary in judging the facts and phenomena of the present time. In recent years many of them have suggested criteria and provided valuable details to grasp what is happening in the Middle East and to Christians in living in that area, yet they have almost always been ignored. Out of commonplaces and political operations that in the West continue to be sewn on the skin of Middle Eastern Christian communities.

Everybody is Suffering

The heads of the Churches present in the Middle East tend not to isolate the sufferings of Christians from those of the rest of the Middle Eastern peoples. "In recent years," Chaldean Patriarch (and now Cardinal) Louis Raphael Sako said, "Christians have suffered injustice, violence and terrorism. But this also happened to their other Iraqi Muslim brothers, and to those of other religious faiths. There is no need to separate Christians from others, because in this way the sectarian mentality is nourished". Those who hold in high regard the baptized killed in the Arab and Middle Eastern countries recognize that in recent times Coptic Christians in Egypt have been targeted massacres, along with murders, kidnappings, assaults and destruction of churches, deportations and mass escapes. But as the Maronite Patriarch Béchara Boutros Raï reiterated, when there is chaos in the Middle East "Christians get caught in the middle, it always happens so. But we cannot speak of real and systematic persecution, let alone genocide... Christians are victims like everyone else, and the 12 million Syrians who have had to flee their homes are not Christians". The atrocities perpetrated by the Jihadists have persecuted "more the Moslems than the Christians". "It worries me", once said Antoine Audo, Chaldean bishop of Aleppo and responsible for Caritas in Syria, "the use of cases of persecution as a propaganda tool to raise money. As Christians, we desire justice for all, and when Christians are persecuted, we report the stories. But let us not use the suffering of Christians to accuse others or to feed our own interests. These phenomena represent a real danger, even for the Churches of the Middle East".

The "enemy" is not Islam

Even in recent years, with rare exceptions, those responsible for Christian communities in the Middle East have always avoided attributing to Islam the violence and abuses of which they were victims. Jihadist barbarity is a religious disease that has developed among Islamic communities. The power struggles, as Orthodox Syrian Patriarch Ignatius Aphrem II, who has his seat in Damascus, said, have used "also an aberrant religious ideology that claims to refer to the Koran. And it can do so because in Islam there is no authority structure with enough strength to provide an authentic interpretation of the Koran and to disavow these preachers of hatred with authority". But the Christian leaders of the Middle East have never denied the common destiny that binds them to the major Islamic communities: "We - said Patriarch Raï - want to remain in our land, along with the Muslims, where we have lived together for 1400 years, and we want to remain in the name of the Gospel. We have created a culture together, a civilization together.

Suspicion over the wannabe "protectors"

The Eastern Christian communities repeat like a mantra that they are not a foreign body exported into those lands by other civilizations. They obstinately continue to reaffirm their character as Churches born from the preaching of the apostles and therefore their indelible autochthonous character, which in some cases - such as that of the Copts or Assyrians - in the early centuries of Christianity even exposed them to the abuse of power by soldiers and officials of the Byzantine Christian Empire. Middle Eastern Christians remain an uncomfortable presence for all those who want to divide the world along the ethnic-religious faults of real or presumed "clashes of civilizations". For this reason, too, the Bari gathering does not deserve to be reduced to an expression of a political alliance between ecclesiastical apparatuses to make a "common front" against someone, and even less to think of it as an appeal to invoke geo-political protections and sponsorships from the outside.

In August 2016, the Coptic Patriarch Tawadros II publicly distanced himself from the demonstrations promoted in the USA by Coptic diaspora groups in protest against the sectarian violence suffered by the Coptic Christian communities in various areas of Egyptian territory. The Coptic Orthodox Pope disavowed the vast program of demonstration initiatives set forth especially in the United States under the banner of the "defense" of Christians in the Middle East, stating that: "We in Egypt know how to deal better with our problems and setbacks”. While the Maronite Patriarch recalled that also in the past the forms of "protectorate" exercised by Western powers against the Christians of the East "did more harm than good", seeing that "the States do only their interests, and the Christians were identified as a foreign body, to be expelled. While we were born in our lands, and we were able to live even under the most dictatorial regimes”.

Martyrdom minus the propaganda of "persecution"

In Bari, some patriarchs and heads of the Eastern Churches will have the opportunity to propose anew the gaze of faith that they usually bear witness to in the face of the experiences of martyrdom lived by their communities. "Our martyrs, and the act of martyrdom in itself," said Coptic Pope Tawadros in December 2016, celebrating the funeral of the massacre perpetrated in the church of Botrosiya, "unite us to Heaven and make our hearts rise to those who are already there, and from there intercede for us ...". "We bid farewell to our loved ones with a spirit of praise", added the Primate of the Coptic Orthodox Church, "because we believe that there is no death for those who love God: they will be raised in joy to eternal life".

For many Eastern Christians, possible martyrdom is not seen as an anomaly to be erased or as an incidental situation against which to mobilize, protest and raise one's voice. Their very existence represents a ridge to the counterfeits that place the sufferings of the baptized under the stigma of fear, of revenge against any enemy. And it is precisely the objective factors of helplessness entrusted to grace, which characterize the experience of many Middle Eastern Christians, that make their communities a sign and a prefiguration of the proper and real condition of the faith and of the Church throughout history, beyond any victimisation and any pathetic clerical triumphalism.

For this reason - once said Aram I, Armenian Apostolic Catholicos of the Great House of Cilicia - it is always convenient "to find Christian ways to express closeness to the Christians of the Middle East. We must avoid the two extremes. The extreme of those who frantically say that something must be done and go to the Middle East to protect Christians. And the opposite extreme, of immobility that becomes indifference. Everyone must see that Christians in the Middle East are not left alone. They are part of one Church of Christ, they are part of the one Body of Christ".