Whose interests were represented at Pan-Orthodox Council on Crete?

Is the convocation really Pan-Orthodox?

The 'Pan-Orthodox' Council, which finished on 26 June on Crete under the chairmanship of the Archbishop of Constantinople Bartholomew I, has not made any sensation. As it was expected in the last days before the opening, it was not attended by four Churches, representing the majority of the Orthodox population of the planet, and most of the bishops, those persons who are competent to make decisions at such meetings. However, at the last moment the Serbian Church hesitating for a long time decided to go.

The documents, the drafts of which had long been criticized by the bishops, theologians, monks and laymen around the Orthodox world, have been adopted almost unchanged. So, they positively refer to the 'ecumenical movement', where the searches for doctrinal truth have long been lost, for the sake of which — and for the sake of unity around the truth, if it had been found together — it was created.

'The documents, the drafts of which had long been criticized by the bishops, theologians, monks and laymen around the Orthodox world, have been adopted almost unchanged.' Photo: foma.ru

The special attention was paid to the activities of the World Council of Churches (WCC). This organization was also established for the search of the unity of all who call themselves Christians. They loudly claimed themselves in the 1950s and 1960s, was the scene of ideological confrontation between the Soviet and Western 'camps' in the 1970s and 1980s, and then obviously 'was contaminated'. Today, you hardly can find news about the WCC and about the occupied positions — the Council has become largely a platform for the consideration of internal bureaucratic problems and the using of grants received from UN agencies and Western funds. In the 'profile' document of the convocation — not 'ecumenical' but intra-Orthodox forum — even 4 points out of 24 are dedicated to that a half-dead office.

Without the challenges to the global establishment

As though the criticism has not been heard. Yes, one of the documents states: 'The Orthodox Church <...> represents an authentic continuation of the United Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church'. Besides, on Crete they recognized the ecumenical authority of a number of cathedrals of IX-XVII centuries, where, in particular, were condemned Catholicism and Protestantism. In principle, all this can be considered as a claim to unique possession of the truth — but this declaration is drowning in an extremely politically correct language of the documents of the convocation. People who insist on a strict confession of the Orthodox faith could not ignore the fact that among the observers was a representative of the 'Evangelical Church in Germany', which at the regional level approves 'the blessing' of same-sex marriagies, and the Church of England, where this is also being actively discussed. There also was represented the WCC, in the leadership of which there are communities, who are actively 'wedding' the homosexuals and allowing them to serve as 'pastors' and 'bishops'.

The tone of the public position 'Bartholomew's convocation' reminds the rhetoric of the 1970s. Quasi-pacifist condemnation of a war, the sluggish criticism of the global economic injustice, 'the fight for peace', soft environmental calls… And nothing that really would challenge the world elites or would induce the Christians to overcome the threat of terrorism or aggression by the only way it can be overcome — by military force. In general, on the difficult and urgent problems they answered in general form.

'The real goal of the organizers of the forum, primarily the 'phantom' Patrirchate of Constantinople <> — it is the development of a mechanism to control more numerous Orthodox Churches, particularly the Russian.' Photo: SEAN HAWKEY (orthodoxcouncil.org) — Bartholomew I of Constantinople

However, the real goal of the organizers of the forum, primarily the 'phantom' Patrirchate of Constantinople located in Istanbul but the well-known by its tangled games with the world political and financial elite, — it is the development of a mechanism to control more numerous Orthodox Churches, particularly the Russian. For that purpose, they are trying to make such meetings regular and to declare their decisions compulsory for all, like international law. By the way, on Crete there were statements about the desirability of convening similar meetings in a few years or even this year.

Ukrainian bargaining chip

In order to force all Churches to renounce their 'sovereignty' in favor of viscous 'Constantinople' they can use speculation on their internal problems. Such problem for the Russian Church is Ukraine. Recently, the Verkhovna Rada has appealed to Patriarch Bartholomew with the proposal to repeal the act of 1686, according to which the Kyivan Metropolitanate (which, by the way, included Lithuania and Belarus) became a part of the Russian Church. 'Constantinople' was also offered to head in Ukraine 'a unification convocation'. It was not accepted any decision in this regard on Crete. However, the Patrirchate of Constantinople has already declared that they will consider the issue on their own. And, probably, they already trying to blackmail Moscow: you do not recognize the outcome of the Cretan assembly and will not involve in the future 'common' work — and we will begin to tear away Ukraine from you. To succumb to this blackmail, it means not only 'to lose face' but also to allow the newly created international mechanism, financially dependent on the European Union and the Greek diaspora in Europe and the United States, to govern the Russian Church.

Anyway, the Ukrainians also should not nourish high hopes. 'Constantinople' do not need them — as usual, someone wants to use them as a bargaining chip in someone else's game. Even if the bishops living in the Istanbul quarter of Rum Fener hold in Kiev a meeting or appoint to Ukraine its representative (there were rumours about this during the Cretan forum), they will try as long as they can to 'suspend' the situation, control it and use it for their own purposes. They do not need a Church-independent Ukraine — they would like to have it under their control.

'Constantinople' was also offered to head in Ukraine 'a unification convocation'. It was not accepted any decision in this regard on Crete. Photo: GOA/DIMITRIOS PANAGOS (orthodoxcouncil.org)

However, the liberal-ecumenical tendencies in the activities of 'Constantinople' do not let it become a real leader of the conservative Orthodox world. Even on the Mount Athos, canonically subordinated to Rum-Fenero, they expressed disagreement with the 'ecumenical' projects of the Cretan documents. Constantinople has no spiritual authority. That is why to the blackmails and intrigues Moscow — both ecclesiastical and political — must respond with solidarity with those hierarchs, pastors, monastics and laity who are standing for the purity of Orthodoxy, including in the Greek and Romanian environment, as well as in Ukrainian and Western. You should work with an active majority but not with a bunch of bureaucrats, even influential. It is what will allow us to put an end to the manipulations, harmful to the Russian world and to the world Orthodoxy.