Nicaea – Phanar: What exactly happened?

Metropolitan Klemes of Larissa and Platamon

November 30 / December 13, 2025

 

A great commotion was recently caused regarding the celebration of the 1700th anniversary of the First Ecumenical Council in Nicaea of Bithynia, and subsequently of the Thronal feast of the Holy Apostle Andrew in Constantinople (November 28–30).

Pope Leo XIV of Rome and Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, along with their entourages, Patriarch Theodore of Alexandria, as well as many representatives of the wider Christian world, were at the center of attention.

The event was promoted and praised as being of historical significance in a particularly positive manner. Words concerning unity and love, images and scenes of embraces, kisses, as well as joint ceremonies, prayers, signatures, blessings, messages, and benevolent gestures made the rounds across the world and transmitted strong impressions from a worldly and emotional standpoint.

However, from a purely spiritual perspective, what impression did all these events leave? On the basis of the Orthodox Christian criterion, as we know it from our theology, our history, our tradition, and the experience of our Saints, where can we place these celebrations, and how are we to evaluate and characterize them?

Already some have undertaken this task from an Orthodox perspective and have reminded that the same things were observed, as happened during the visits of Popes to the Phanar in the previous two decades (2006, 2014), with the uncanonical joint prayers and joint declarations, as well as the incomplete concelebrations. And that these constitute unequivocally a great theological falsehood. For these were syncretistic manifestations to be seen by men, with one and only purpose: that of the promotion and establishment of the Pan-Heresy of Ecumenism.

Papists and Ecumenists from among the Orthodox, as well as representatives of Ecumenical Organizations and other heresies, once again expressed in the most official manner their identification with their Ecumenistic vision. According to them, there is love, an overemphasis on love, yet without Truth. They speak of and express their unity without Truth—something unnatural from an Orthodox standpoint.

A. Nicaea – Anniversary Celebration

There, precisely where the Arian heresy was put to shame—in Nicaea—there a joint celebration took place with the Pope of Rome, who, with his Primacy and especially with his Infallibility, constitutes and represents a grievous Neo-Arianism, according to the Confessor Father Justin Popović. This is something tragic and disgraceful!

The Ecumenists, for the past century, through the novel doctrines they proclaim, practice, and promote, essentially tear apart the seamless robe of the Faith and abolish the Holy Patristic order and decorum of holy Orthodoxy.

These grievous observations are not exaggerated. The commemoration of the First Ecumenical Council, which defined and confirmed the Orthodox dogmatic truth in the Holy Spirit, is being used by the Ecumenists “as a pretext for the blurring of dogmatic boundaries” (Metropolitan Luke of Zaporozhye, “Romfea,” 6-12-2025).

And this becomes even more tragic with the realization that unity is being pursued with the Papists and other heterodox—despite the absence of Truth—without there being, first and foremost, any essential concern for the healing and remedy of dreadful divisions that occurred in the past and more recently, precisely due to the decisions and actions of Ecumenists from among the Orthodox. Let us recall the Calendar issue, which concerns the matter of Ecumenism, as well as the Ukrainian issue.

It is an important observation that where there is no repentance and correction of faults, only spiritual confusion is caused and intensified. This is what we are facing, unfortunately, without any solution appearing on the horizon.

In this regard, it is rightly noted that “the event that took place in Nicaea is not simply a cultural occurrence; it is a sign of direction. And the direction points not toward Orthodox conciliarity, but toward a new form of Unia” (Metropolitan Luke of Zaporozhye).

In the face of this reality, the Ecumenists are celebrating the “message of unity, reconciliation, truth, and love” that was supposedly sent forth from Nicaea (Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Messinia, blog “Panorthodox Synod,” 29-11-2025).

Of course, the Ecumenists acknowledge that there are “theological differences” which cannot be bypassed, yet they emphasize that this does not constitute an obstacle “for the Christian Churches to express their unity through a constructive discourse in contemporary society and to provide answers to the problems of man” (Chrysostomos of Messinia).

In other words, they admit that they are doing the exact opposite of what the Holy Fathers of the First Ecumenical Council and all subsequent ones did. Those proclaimed and secured their unity on the basis of dogmatic agreement and the resolution even of administrative matters of Canonical order. But the present-day ones believe that they can feel united with the heterodox and express a common constructive discourse as a response to problems, without first confessing a unity of faith and truth!

Bartholomew of Constantinople spoke in Nicaea of a “historic common pilgrimage,” of “common reverence and a shared sense of hope,” and of offering a “living testimony of the same faith which the Fathers of Nicaea expressed”!

Pope Leo, for his part—being by position an expression of Vatican-centered Roman Ecumenism and bearing the sense of a “universal shepherd”—spoke of the need for “global reconciliation and fraternity,” and wished that “the anniversary milestone may serve as a starting point for new fruits of unity, reconciliation, and peace for all humanity”…

It becomes clear that the Ecumenists, in reality, have no connection with the Truth of Nicaea, and that their joint celebratory and commemorative ceremonies constitute uncanonical and impious acts, which diminish the true Faith.

B. “Joint Declaration” of the Pope and the Patriarch

The Pope and the Patriarch co-signed a “Joint Declaration” at the Phanar on Saturday, November 29, according to the established custom in such instances.

In it, they consider that they possess a common faith and confession with that which was expressed in Nicaea. This position has been articulated for decades by Ecumenists from among the Orthodox, as particularly useful to their objectives. For example, the then Myron Chrysostomos declared at the Phanar that “all Churches and Confessions coincide and meet upon the same faith, which is expressed by the Symbol of Faith” (periodical Episkepseis, 15-6-1981, p. 6).

This, however, is disputed, since the theological presuppositions of each side are different, even if they are able, verbally, to recite together the Symbol of Faith in the original Greek without any alteration. Yet, there is no common Trinitarian theology with the Papists and the other heterodox, nor is there a common Christology, Ecclesiology, or Soteriology—especially in light of the other Ecumenical Councils, which are interconnected, interdependent, and mutually complementary.

A central point of the “Joint Declaration” is also the following: “It is our common desire that the process of exploring a possible solution for a joint celebration of the Feast of Feasts each year continue. We hope and pray that all Christians, ‘in all wisdom and spiritual understanding’ (Col. 1:9), will commit themselves to the process of achieving a common celebration of the glorious Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

The joint celebration of Pascha, as has been commented, can “inspire new and courageous steps” toward the direction of unity (Voria.gr, 10-12-2025).

The Ecumenists, also in this matter, maintain the same erroneous reasoning. Despite the differences in faith, they consider that they are able not only to express their unity by offering a “common witness,” but also to celebrate the feasts together—something which occurred precisely with the Calendar Reform of 1924, based on the Patriarchal Encyclical of 1920, and indeed with Pascha itself.

The Ecumenists from among the Orthodox clearly expressed at the 2nd Pre-Synodal Pan-Orthodox Conference in Chambésy, Geneva, in 1982, their desire for the so-called “new Orthodox calendar” to be implemented by all, as more accurate both for the fixed feasts and for the Paschalion (see analysis in our book: 100 Years of Calendar Reform…, Larissa 2024, pp. 80–88).

This is what Bartholomew of Constantinople is promoting as the common date “according to the Paschalion of our Orthodox Church.” This would also complete the full implementation of the Calendar Reform, which was decided by Meletios Metaxakis at the so-called “Pan-Orthodox Congress” of 1923 in Constantinople, and which Bartholomew appears to have as a lifelong dream to bring to completion—if, of course, the Lord permits it.

Even commentators from secular newspapers perceive in the statement concerning a “Common Pascha” an “indication of unity,” namely that “the common date will constitute a visible sign of convergence between the Churches,” and that this constitutes “a fundamental central axis with immediate global significance” (see newspaper Dimokratia, 4-12-2025).

Nevertheless, since nothing specific was determined in the “Joint Declaration” on this matter, beyond the remark and the wishes expressed, it means that the issue has not yet undergone any particular joint elaboration. Apparently, they will attempt within 2026 to proceed to a common agreement, since it has already been stated that they hope to establish a “Common Pascha” beginning from the year 2027 onward.

In the “Joint Declaration” there is also laudatory mention of the 60th anniversary of the “historic joint Declaration” of Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras of 1965, which “eliminated the exchange of anathemas of 1054.” This event is described as a “prophetic gesture.”

From an Orthodox perspective, the so-called “lifting of the anathemas” is placed within the context of the Uniatizing tendency of the Ecumenists from among the Orthodox, as we describe in the aforementioned work (see 100 Years of Calendar Reform…, pp. 73–75).

Also, in the “Joint Declaration” of the Phanar (November 29, 2025), it is written that “those who hesitate in any form of dialogue should listen carefully to what the Spirit says to the Churches (Rev. 2:29), which in the current circumstances of our history urges us to offer the world a renewed witness of peace, reconciliation, and unity.”

Thus the Ecumenists, being certain that what they are doing is an inspiration of the Holy Spirit, are unfortunately attempting to weaken the resistance of those who are still hesitant. Yet in the case of a true Dialogue of Truth according to the Patristic model, no genuinely Orthodox person would have the slightest hesitation. The objection lies both in the framework in which it has been conducted (since 1980), and above all in its entire Ecumenistic presupposition and objective.

The signatories of the “Joint Declaration,” the Pope and the Patriarch, acknowledge that a theological dialogue is also being conducted “in the process of rapprochement between our Churches,” yet they also admit that the process includes other “necessary elements,” such as “fraternal contacts, prayerful and joint work in all those areas where cooperation is already possible.”

This is the problem: they prioritize what should follow, without resolving what precedes!

However, we remind that the Holy Spirit has spoken through the Holy Councils, the Holy Canons, and the Holy Fathers regarding the determination of ecclesiastical matters under dispute, and it is not possible for it now to give a “renewed” directive concerning these, by urging and permitting things which until now were and still are unacceptable, impermissible, and condemnable!

It is evident that the unfortunate Ecumenists are being deluded by the evil spirit and are taking its promptings—those contrary to the All-Holy Spirit of Truth—as supposedly divine, true, and necessary instructions! Thus, they themselves are grievously deceived, but they also drag into destruction those who happen to trust them and regard them as truthful and reliable.

C. Thronal Feast of Constantinople

Before the signing of the “Joint Declaration,” in the early afternoon of Saturday, November 29, Pope Leo was received by Patriarch Bartholomew at the Patriarchal Church of Saint George in the Phanar, where a Doxology was chanted and messages were exchanged.

Pope Leo was formally commemorated as Bishop of Rome by a Patriarchal Deacon, prior to the commemoration of the Latin-minded Patriarch himself. Moreover, the choir chanted the Polychronion for him, as if he were a canonical and communicant Bishop and Primate. A kiss of peace was exchanged, and a joint blessing of those present in the church space was performed—this space having been transformed into a venue of worldly spectacle, since it had once again been defiled. Everyone—men and women—with professional or amateur photographic or video devices, in a frenzy and jostling with one another in a state of ecstasy, sought to capture what were, in their view, “unique” moments. No sense of sanctity, no trace of awareness. All the lights were on the “idols,” on the “protagonists of the drama,” with no room left for worship and honor to be rendered to the One who, in every sense, was the Great Absent One: the God-man Lord Jesus Christ!

Yet this is something that has become established, an Ecumenical ethos. For sixty years now, there has been a continuous liturgical mingling on many levels and in many forms.

For the Uniated Ecumenists, this is an entirely natural consequence of their professed faith. Orthodoxy and Papism, for Patriarch Bartholomew and those with him, together constitute “the one Body of Christ” (Orthodoxia journal, July–September 1994, p. 444). Together with the Anglicans as well, they share—according to Bartholomew—a common responsibility “in the whole Church” (Episkepseis journal, 499/31-12-1993, p. 6). Let us also recall that sacramental mutual recognition officially took place within the context of their dialogue at Balamand, Lebanon, in 1993, without, of course, the issues of faith—supposedly dividing them—having been resolved.

Let us once again recall that according to the Orthodox Canonical and Patristic Tradition, this is inconceivable and unacceptable. The Holy Fathers Basil the Great and Theodore the Studite, for example, who faced similar situations, consider such communion to be “destructive” and “soul-corrupting.”

The Holy Confessor Athonite Fathers of the 13th century, in a letter to the Latin-minded Emperor Michael Palaiologos, emphasize that “communion is defiled merely by the commemoration of him [the name of a heretical bishop in the Divine Liturgy], even if the one mentioning it is otherwise Orthodox.” If the Latin-minded are not commemorated, yet the mere mention of them defiles the one who mentions them—even if he is otherwise Orthodox—can the very Leader of the Latins and Latin-minded, the Pope of Rome, himself be commemorated?!

That is to say, 650 years after the above-mentioned letter—when Papism has dogmatized so many other false doctrines and heresies, and even its condemned Calendar Reform of the 16th century—can it now be commemorated in the person of its Leader without any consequence? Without causing any longer defilement and without any spiritual cost?

We hold that whoever, even through guilty silence, swallows the bitter truths that arise self-evidently from all this, renders himself complicit in the Latinism of his Patriarch and of those with him. The defilement of this new Unia has thoroughly tainted the spiritual atmosphere. Those who are unable to perceive this obvious reality—those who, despite everything, think they are sailing in seas of spiritual well-being and uplift—are in a pitiable state of spiritual anesthetization, from which may the Lord preserve us!

***

Returning to the matters of the Thronal Feast, we say that after the signing of the “Joint Declaration,” Patriarch Bartholomew officially attended, vested in a mantle, late in the afternoon, a liturgy celebrated by Pope Leo for the Papists living in Turkey, held in a stadium of the City.

Earlier, on Saturday morning, there had taken place an “Ecumenical Meeting of primates and representatives of churches, which was held in the newly built Syro‑Jacobite Church of Saint Ephraim, in the suburb of Agios Stefanos.”

On the morning of Sunday, November 30, a patriarchal concelebration was held in the Church of Saint George at the Phanar, with Pope Leo present at the Synthronon in a prominent position. A liturgical kiss of peace was exchanged at the “Let us love one another” between the Patriarch and the Pope, as well as between the Patriarch of Alexandria and the Pope. The Pope recited the Lord’s Prayer (“Our Father”) in Latin.

 

At the end, messages were exchanged, the Polychronia for the Pope and the Patriarch were chanted once again, and kisses of peace and joint blessings were given to their congregation. Finally, from the balcony of the Patriarchate, they blessed those in attendance. An official meal at the patriarchal table followed.

The Ecumenists, feasting together, proceed unimpeded in the practical implementation of their objectives, since no serious resistance exists...

D. Pretexts for Deception

While a strong reaction ought to be raised in the face of this storm of anti-Orthodox reality, nevertheless, such a thing does not appear to be happening. When the Truth of the faith is so crudely trampled upon and scorned, when it is obscured and lost, resistance according to God is the only path. It is a critical matter of spiritual survival, witness, and responsibility.

However, both clergy and laity in Greece and more broadly—who, of course, are fully aware of all that has taken place in every detail—exhibit the following main tendencies:

a. That of shameful silence, at least publicly, an utter ostrich-like denial, which, as we have emphasized, constitutes complicity. There prevails a deafening pretense that nothing has happened and nothing is happening that concerns them. As if there exists another reality, a parallel universe, where all is well and proceeding safely!…

b. There are also those who, either out of pangs of conscience or due to pressure from their surroundings, unfortunately attempt to justify the unjustifiable, making themselves publicly pitiable and ridiculous.

Thus, some claim that the Pope went to Nicaea and the Phanar as a head of state—since he also holds that monstrous title—and was therefore received by Patriarch Bartholomew not as a Primate of a Church and especially not of a “Sister” Church!

Others argue that it is merely a matter of dialogue or of actions and statements “out of love,” even regarding the matter of a Common Pascha, yet without any actual consequence in reality.

Others insist that a full concelebration did not take place, since they did not reach a common chalice, and therefore there is no need for disturbance or concern. That is to say, as if we had an unwed couple engaging in everything—even beyond “cohabitation”—but since they do not “fully consummate,” then we cannot accuse them nor attribute to them any serious responsibility! They are simply engaging playfully, out of love! What would the Spiritual Fathers say? Is this something innocent and beyond reproach? Truly, is there any trace of seriousness left in some people?! We ask forgiveness for the comparison, but how else can one portray such a perversion?

Others emphasize that the Church of the Symbol of Faith is One—the Orthodox Church—and therefore there is no place for the Papists, who are obliged to return in repentance in order to be united to her. We agree that this is the Orthodox position; however, those who, in light of what is taking place, naively repeat this theory of theirs must open their eyes and face the grim reality concerning the state in which they find themselves.

Others assert that it is enough for them to pray and to celebrate the Divine Liturgy, without, however, concerning themselves with the commemoration of the “uncommemorable.” In their opinion, this does not matter, nor does it bear any serious negative consequence. And yet, we have seen that holy Orthodoxy proclaims and confesses otherwise.

Accordingly, others say that prayer is needed for the Patriarch and the Ecumenists—of course, in unity with them—in case they might come to their senses. Prayer for their repentance, yes; but prayer together with them and in communion with them not only does not bring them back to the Truth, but on the contrary, defiles the Orthodox in their mindset, who mistakenly think that they can combine the incompatible and participate harmlessly in things that are contrary and mutually exclusive.

Others invoke the stance of renowned Elders from past decades, supposedly for their tolerance of those inclined toward heresy, even though they know well their anti-ecumenist position, as well as the significant worsening of the Ecumenists’ stance over the last three decades. Such selective invocation is not a sufficient excuse, and is made deliberately for the purpose of extinguishing, not of strengthening, the zealous struggle for the faith. No serious struggle for salvation is being undertaken in such a glaring spiritual degradation.

Others again invoke the Lord’s saying, “Judge not, that ye be not judged,” as if they are unaware of the Patristic teaching, which clarifies that this does not apply to matters of the faith.

All these and similar arguments are evasions and lack any Orthodox foundation or serious Patristic and Canonical support.

There are, of course, also the few who react (only one from among the Hierarchy of the New Calendar as far as bishops are concerned!), who for the time being content themselves with the familiar “paper warfare,” considering that by this means their duty is fulfilled. This shows a certain sensitivity, but at the same time it disappoints, since it exhausts the struggle in a written objection, without further continuation—something not particularly disturbing or decisive for the transgressors of the faith.

We will not omit to point out that there certainly also exist those souls—known to the Lord—who in silence, without sorrowful excuses and much talk, truly suffer and sincerely pray concerning what ought to be done. May the Lord hear them and grant salvific enlightenment!

***

We, without any intention of self-exalting superiority or harsh condemnation of others, remind that the major problem of Faith arising from the Pan-Heresy of Ecumenism is the cultivation of Dogmatic Syncretism and the abolition of the preaching of Repentance.

Ecumenism is content with peaceful mutual recognition, mutual acceptance, and undisturbed COEXISTENCE, and not necessarily with unifying amalgamation.

However, this constitutes a deviation from Orthodox Ecclesiology, resulting in the adulteration of the Theanthropic Truth of the Church and the danger of spiritual perdition.

These are not merely “dialogues” that have failed or are stagnating, but rather a falling away from Orthodoxy. The constant slogans about peace, unity, love, and brotherhood simply demonstrate the worldly orientation of the present heresy. They are nothing more than empty embellishments and florid expressions—surface-level terms of goodwill—without the seal of the Holy Spirit.

Those who deceive themselves and others with excuses lacking divine confirmation are clearly placed outside of the Orthodoxy that struggles against heresy, as deniers of the divine contest of God-pleasing Confession in deed and word—something of primary importance today.

We pray that divine Grace may strengthen those who struggle well and in a God-pleasing manner in the contest of the faith until the end. May it call to the right path those who are undecided and troubled, and may it utterly defeat this heresy of the last times, which clearly constitutes the Apostasy—from which may the Lord preserve us and save us in His Kingdom! Amen.

 

Greek source:

https://imlp.gr/2025/12/13/%ce%bd%ce%af%ce%ba%ce%b1%ce%b9%ce%b1-%cf%86%ce%b1%ce%bd%ce%ac%cf%81%ce%b9-%cf%84%ce%af-%e1%bc%80%ce%ba%cf%81%ce%b9%ce%b2%e1%bf%b6%cf%82-%cf%83%cf%85%ce%bd%ce%ad%ce%b2%ce%b7/