(Source) Amidst the admittedly deserving condemnations of the Phanar’s long history of centralization, culminating in its admittedly Eastern Papist Heresy, the Moscow Patriachate continues to associate with, meet with, and formalize working relationships with the original Papists in the Vatican. Recently, Metropolitan Hilarion (Afleyev), head of the Moscow Patriarchate Department for External Church Relations, who said that the Phanar-allied Greek Patriarch of Alexandria had irrevocably associated himself with schism, has been active in participating in so-called “Climate Change” conferences with an host of pagans and heretics, including Pope Francis, in Glasgow under United Nations auspices.. Also present at the meeting was Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, who is considered a schismatic as well by the Moscow Patriarchate. The absurd meeting of world heretics and pagans on “Religion and Education” was also a part of the events.
According to Metropolitan Hilarion, as reported by the Italian news site “Corriere della Serra”, much preparation is underway for a second meeting between Pope Francis and Patriarch Kyril. The first meeting in 2016, resulted in the ecumenistic “Havana Declaration”, which was followed in Russia by a wave of protests by clergy and laity of the Moscow Patriarcahte, including the formation of non-commemorator communities., although Met. Hilarion declares it a success. This second meeting will only be announced, according to Alfeyev, a short time before it takes place, naming the time and place of the meeting.
Dreams of the Moscow Patriarchate leading some sort of world wide fight and crusade against ecumenism and modernism are just that, dreams. The chances of that occurring, through a sort of “revolt from below”, which would seize power from the modernist-ecumenistic leadership, while very low to begin with, become lower with each passing day; it seems evident that, the Moscow Patriarchate, while being willing to condemn the Phanar for its Papistical teachings and invasion of territories, has no desire to condemn and withdraw from the ecumenical movement. In other words, much of its opposition to the Phanar has little to nothing to do with opposition to the modernistic and ecumenistic heresies.