Professor Ioannis Kornarakis | March 13, 2012
The modern history of the
Ecumenical Patriarchate, especially from 1948 until today, is written with many
pages of ecumenist activity.
Each time, the master of the Patriarchal
Estate led efforts of union with those unable to be united. The eye of the
Patriarchate, steadily turned toward the heterodox sphere, was renouncing the
truths of Orthodoxy for the sake of a secularized Christianity, alienated from
the vitality of authentic evangelical and patristic truths.
In particular, the present master
of the Phanar demonstrated great initiatives within heterodox circles and
participated in heterodox liturgical acts.
The foremost event, which
recently documented the intense dismantling of the Holy Canons on the part of
Mr. Bartholomew, was the concelebration with the Pope [Benedict XVI] during the
Thronal Feast of the Patriarchate, on November 30, 2006. On that day, from the
balcony of the Patriarchate—with his hands joined with the Pope’s—both proclaimed
their common decision to unite the Orthodox Church with Papism.
In general terms, the summit of
“Orthodoxy,” with its many and well-known to all ecumenistic directives, gave
courage to many clerical and lay ecumenists to proceed to acts of dismantling
and betrayal of the truths of Orthodoxy in the Ecumenical Councils.
Selectively, some extreme overtures
will be pointed out, which align with the patriarchal initiative – but also
purpose – for subversive actions to arise in the Orthodox sphere against the
Holy Spirit and the God-bearing Fathers of the Church.
The union of the Patriarchate
with Papism will definitely take place. And, at some point, the Orthodox world,
which ignores the reality, or those who think that this union is not going to
be realized, will be astonished.
The matter of this realization had
already been “locked in,” a few years ago, in the well-known dialogue between
Orthodox and Papists in Ravenna, Italy. In this dialogue, the Orthodox
representatives voted for and accepted, in its entirety, the papal text which
their papal “partners” presented to them.
According to this text, the papal
authority over the Orthodox Church is depicted with the image of a pyramid. At
the top of the pyramid is the Pope. Any Bishop who will not accept the Pope
will remain outside of the papal “church,” which is the only one complete and
definitively shaped by the Roman tradition.
The Patriarch has promoted this
union with the aid of the chief champion of this union: Metropolitan John
Zizioulas of Pergamon, who is well-known for his constant insistence on the
dominant and authoritative primacy of the Pope, and not on the primacy of
honor.
Suddenly, then, our churches will
be filled with papal faithful, for the realization of the common Chalice of
Pascha of the Orthodox with the Papists!
I. Already, Archbishop
Christodoulos [of Athens, +2008] – an extreme ecumenist – went along with the
Patriarch in making overtures to ecumenical circles. He also, before the
Patriarch, brought the Pope [John Paul II] to Athens, and celebrated the event
with festivities and demonstrations of concession of Orthodoxy.
A little before the Pope came to
Athens, and after he had organized everything for his reception, the Archbishop
invited four emeritus university professors – among them also the signer
of the present text – to help him compose the related texts which he would read
before the Pope, so that these might have a thoroughly Orthodox character.
However, I personally ascertained that these specific texts were read before
the Pope without our corrections.
In 2003, two years after the
coming of the Pope, Archbishop Christodoulos proposed the innovation of the
“Liturgical Renewal” of the Church. The theological foundation of the Renewal
that he had in mind was published the same year in the journal Ecclesia,
as a synodal text, written by professors of the Theological School of the A.U.Th
[Aristotle University of Thessaloniki]. This text reflects, with the principle
of postmodernity as its criterion, the sweeping changes that had to be made in
order for the “Liturgical Renewal” of the Church to be completed.
From these proposed changes, we will
mention two:
a) On
account of the progress of the humanistic and social sciences, the identity of
the Church must be redefined, in order that we may keep pace with these
advances and cultural developments.
b) For
the same reasons, the Mystery of the Divine Eucharist must also be continually
redefined. The broader reformulation of this Mystery – also proposed in another
text of his, in an annual publication of the School – explains that we do not partake
in this Mystery in order to become saints, but in order to acquire a spirit of
solidarity among ourselves (in the spirit of globalization), so that we may
reach the last things!!!
Since, however, the identity of
the Church and the Mystery of the Divine Eucharist are Christ Himself, this
synodal text essentially proposed the continual redefinition of Christ
Himself!!!
It is strange that no Bishop
appeared to denounce it. Nor did the Permanent Holy Synod give any attention to
the eight-page Memorandum of the undersigned, which was lawfully delivered to
all the members of the Synod of that time.
II. About a decade ago, at
the Theological School of the A.U.Th., two dissertations were composed – and
accepted – which “proved” as Orthodox two heretics of the Fourth Ecumenical
Council of Chalcedon: Dioscorus and Severus (the one called “headless” in the related
troparion at the Orthros service of the Feast of the Holy
Fathers).
The justification and the cause
of the composition of the said dissertations is that both pave the way so that
a future Council may be persuaded about the “Orthodox” convictions of the two –
synodally condemned – heretics.
III. The “Orthodoxizing”
of the Protestant soteriological teaching about the “invisible Church”:
Archbishop Anastasios of Albania
– with great work in the field of missions in Africa, but also contributions to
the Autocephalous Orthodox Archdiocese of Albania – on account of his identification
with the academic field (that is, with non-Christians and especially with
Islam), proceeded to a falsification of a Gospel passage, in order to show that
even all the faithful of the other faiths will definitely be saved, through
the “invisible Church”!!!
The disputed passage, which he
falsified, belongs to the Epistle to the Ephesians of the apostle Paul, chapter
3, verse 6. In this passage, the apostle of the nations refers to the manner of
the salvation of the nations, which also will be saved, once the Gospel of
Christ is preached to them and they accept it: “The nations are fellow heirs
and of the same body and partakers of His promise in Christ through the
Gospel.”
The Archbishop of Albania,
however, in his work Traces from the Search for the Transcendent,
replaces the phrase “through the Gospel” with the phrase “through the Church,”
thus developing the teaching of invisible salvation! With this falsification,
he has the ability to surpass the authentic apostolic teaching concerning the
salvation of the nations, through their acceptance, application, and living of
the Gospel. And noting that, “the older as well as the newer theologians of the
Eastern Church emphasized that the grace of God operates even beyond the
boundaries of the visible Church,” the Archbishop of Albania concludes with the
result that, in this “invisible Church,” even the nations “may invisibly
belong, with the gentiles, the heterodox…” (pp. 423–4).
However, in Orthodox soteriology,
there is place for invisible salvation. This teaching is Protestant, dark, and
indistinct. According to the Orthodox tradition, God indeed saves the whole
visible world, but with visible and specific actions. The theory of “invisible
salvation” was created by the Protestants in order to overcome difficulties of
a personal character (such as their Roman Catholic origin and the dominance of
Western rationalism).
***
These few examples of the
rejection or dismantling of the principles of the truth of the Orthodoxy of the
Fathers show the results of the long-standing ecumenical activity of the
supposed “center” of Orthodoxy. Thus, in the Patriarchal Estate, the Orthodoxy
of the patristic tradition was succeeded by the “modern” Orthodoxy, altered to
the measures of ecumenism and of the fundamental principles of postmodernity.
***
The undersigned composed the
present text, being consistent with his doctoral oath before God and the
Church: “wherever on earth I may be, I will uphold the dogmas of the Orthodox
Church.” All doctors take this oath. But the Bishops also swear to fulfill
their duties in a God-pleasing manner and to respond with divine zeal to the
keeping of the principles and teachings of the Orthodox Church.
This means that those Bishops who
leave the door wide open to the ecumenist sphere and undertake activities which
nullify their personal dignity and their respect toward their office as
clergymen and as men of the Church, are in breach of their oath.
In such a case, the Antichrist
seems to be carrying out his defiled work even through the Church.
Ioannis Kornarakis
Professor Emeritus
of the University of Athens
Greek source: https://apotixisi.blogspot.com/2025/08/blog-post_17.html
Reposted
from: https://aktines.blogspot.com/2012/03/blog-post_13.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.