On May 30th, 2012 in Kazakhastan, Patriarch Theophilos III of Jerusalem met with the leader of the Kremlin-based Moscow Patriarchate, Kirill. The meeting took place in the context of both Patriarch Kirill and Patriarch Theopilos attending the World Congress of Traditional Religions. It was previously believed that only Patriarch Kirill would be in attendance for the trans-religious event with Muslims, Jews, Buddhists and Hindus, as well as Protestants and Roman Catholics, etc, but, it appears now that Theophilos has provided added weight to the organization. Though the World Congress of Traditional Religious has come to an end this year , one is still left with questions as to why Patriarch Kirill, and Patriarch Theophilos were present while Phanar chief, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, was not.
Of course, in these matters, there are always power struggles between different sections of the World Orthodox; and it is probably alone due to the left over decentralized ecclesial structure of the Patriarchates that full out open communion in all manners with Rome has not been achieved. Not that it is not desired (as we recall, for example, the Buglarian Patriarchate Metropolitan Tychon’s insistence on immediate union with the Vatican, or the actions of Metropolitan Corneau of Romania, or the Antiochian Syrian and Lebanese practice of giving communion to Roman Catholics or even those claiming to be ‘baptised Christians). Thus, even though the World Orthodox are generally Orthodox in name only, they still control and maintain the buildings, structures, outward rites, and to a large extent, the descendant peoples, of the original true Orthodox Patriarchates of the regions they now occupy. Yet, this control has meant they inherited a decentralized ‘anarchic’ structure, making it that much harder to control. Indeed, even in the wake of World Orthodox apostasy, we see how well the Orthodox ‘model’ has worked. It has worked to slow down things to such a degree that other covert means have been resorted to in order to maintain and enforce conformity and control.
However, while the Phanar’s main goal may be full, or at least, partial open concelebratory union with Rome, it must proceed within the context of its fight with the Big Boss of Slavic ‘Orthodoxy’ (MP chief Kirill). It has been long suggested to this author that one of the models the World Orthodox and Vatican will base their union upon will be initial limited intercommunion and concelebration ( such as that previously achieved by Vatican and the Assyrian Church). This would provide a solid model of ecumenistic union, with the years leading to greater assimilation of the two parties (or one party more likely), and any opposition largely dying down due to the general theological ‘dumbing’ down of the rump populaces of the Patriarchates. Yet, if the Phanar’s main goal has been this, what can the moves by Kiril and Theophilos portend? Most likely Kirill is gathering his strength, and a lot of out of sight ecclesial politiking is transpiring; the Phanar wants Union with the Vatican above all things, however, the MP, while willing to accept that, has its eye on the prize of the Ukrainian Greek Catholics in the Ukraine. To work out a deal would be too much at this point, thus, they have to ease the union in.
Now let us examine the current Russian state’s political motives, and then see how this can affect the ecclesiastical world.. Recent events can shed some light on this. Russia has long been known to be seeking to extend its influence into the Middle East, and the two world powers of America and Russia, among others, have long sought to promote their own (equally selfish and destructive) motives in the Middle East with little to no regard for the peoples of the regions. Let’s take some cases for example. While Russia may be more sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinian peoples, America has decidedly been in favour of the Israelis; yet, Russian sympathy may generally be seen as political expediency; another example would be the catastrophe of Syria, where the Russian government supports the Assad regime in what may be described as an ‘uncritical’ fashion, while the US government has given backing and even weapons and money to the Syrian rebels who are turning out to be not exactly the good guys portrayed, but a more radical Islamic force (just like in Libya).
Thus, one wonders how the powers that be (America, Russia, the general Globalist mafia, etc) will ultimately have their own agenda pushed by presenting two false choices for not only the Syrian (or Libyan? or Iranian? or Iraqi? etc..) people, but for Western or Russian or Chinese audiences? Will it be brutal KGB supported Alawite Dictatorship that composes a minority Muslim group (Alawites) allied with another minority Muslim group (Shia) against the Salafists CIA supported group (which seeks to represent the majority Sunni populace in so far as groups that compose the rebel movement, like Al Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood, and other CIA fronts, and can effectively control even the genuinely persecuted pro-freedom protestors)? The Christian populace in that country has long been terrified; and it made a deal with the devil, so to speak, by backing the Assads (like the Iraqi Christians by backing Saddam); this was all because of the professed nature of the Baath Party (founded by Michael Aflaq, who was a Chaldean Christian) which rules Syria. Thus, the CIA Salafist Muslim groups will agitate the populace into either taking revenge upon the Christians, or at least largely standing by; yet, even if the Christians had not supported the Assad regime they still would have undoubtedly been in trouble, thus, where was the solution in one evil over another? The Assad brutalities are well known, but the Syrian rebels massacre of the Christian populace in Homs, has not been covered widely (at least not by the western globalists). Yet, it seems suspicious that the BBC faked its photo of the Houla massacre?
There are more than two options here, and dark powers are at work on both sides, for the dialectic of falsehood has a great power to ensnare. Maybe making a decision between the ‘lesser’ of two evils is still to make a decision in favour of evil; does Christ call us to support one evil over the other, or rather to support the good irrespective of ‘reasonable success’?
Again, why is one portrayed as the forces of goodness in general, in America, and the other as bad; or vice-versa from the Russian perspective? Because when one deals with the world of immoral leaders who run (and have run for many decades) both Russia and America, all things are not quite as they seem.
Thus, within the context of a now rising Russian power, controlled by its own post-Soviet style ruling class ( a ruling class that professes nationalistic and patriotic Russian slogans, but, has so far delivered little in the way of important concrete reforms that would actually make Russia a free land), we see all that is happening. The current Russian ruling class, with Kirill as an important figure, were able to defeat the multiple competitor oligarchs of the 90s during the Yeltsin years (and, ironically, when Russia was in ‘chaos’ over these fights between competing parties, there was more religious freedom than now under ‘stability’!). Then, with the support of the MP, the former KGB, and former Communist party big wigs, and others, the now Russian ruling established their rule, which is currently manifested in the United Russia party (Putin’s party). Yet, these folks represent a distinct mafia class of their own; one which has its own agenda distinct from the gloablists allied Chinese ruling class and the Globalist powers that control America, Europe, and other nations of the planet. None of these mafias are good, it’s just that some (like the Russians) are used to brutal oppression methods in an outright fashion, and the populace has been sufficiently trained to accept the most brutal measures; while Americans still have some distant memory of ‘how things should be’ even though they’re not. The wolves ruling the world do not ultimately have the best intentions for the sheep (us) they farm (or is that ‘pharm’). And when the time comes we all will soon discover that even the party we voted for, the leader we supported (with minor exceptions) in the political arenas of power, the company or NGO or PAC we thought was good, all of these will have their masks unveiled; and the face underneath will not be pretty.
The MP can be used as a Russian tool of state, with Kirill and others being actual members of the power structure. The lines however, even here, can sometimes be blurred. At one point it appears as if the MP is a separate structure of power within the Russian system, at other times it appears to be wholly subservient. Yet, even at periods that the MP represents one of the allied powers to the structure, it would never seek to outright challenge the state apparatus; it acquires too many benefits, and Kirill himself well remembers what happened to all the oligarchs in Russia that challenged Putin.
If the fascistic gang ruling Russia, a gang that is oligarchical in its nature, with certain important guys in the power structure (Putin, Kirill, Medvedev, and others), wants the Soviet creation called the MP to do something it will have it done. This, of course, does not preclude the possibility that there will be mini schisms in the power structure, and Kirill and others would sell Putin down the river if it would benefit them, and if they could.
The whole ecumenical policy of the MP is determined by ‘Russian national’ aims. The enslavement of a large portion of the ROCOR we are told, was ‘about healing the ‘Russian nation’. But, what good is it to unite the Russian people if they are united on something other than Truth, Who is Christ? Is it good to have unity based upon evil and lies and even heresy?
The Orthodox Church is composed of all Her members, not just the Hierarchy. The Priesthood has the important role of leadership, while the laity must obey within the limits of things that are not sins and evil. But, if we risk turning our conception of Orthodoxy into some sort of world of ecclesiatical politics among different proclaimed hierarchical nobility, then we have a displaced role for the laity who are to be informed about the Scriptures, Canons, Canonical Tradition and application, Councils, Saints and Fathers, and how to behave and act in a Christian manner. Orthodoxy and the Church should never become terms that are synonymous with the Latin understanding; that is, wherein ‘the Church’ becomes almost an exogenous entity and term used by laity to describe what they really mean, that is, the hierarchy. Yet, as has been shown, if the Hierarchy of professed true Orthodox can not themselves behave and operate in a manner befitting at least a devout Christian man, then, what can we expect? This, again, is not to indict all; but, it is most certainly to indict the behaviour of those who have abandoned Truth for convenience; it is to indict those who feign love for their neighbors under the banner of ridicule, laughter, cruelty, and arrogance; and it is to indict most certainly an attitude so prevalent among World Orthodox, and even others, that obedience to the Bishop means the Bishop himself becomes an infallible figure.
In conclusion, we see the power struggle between the different leaders of World Orthodoxy, a power struggle with each side being manipulated and controlled for the agenda of the global elite (whether it be the Russian government controlled MP, the American controlled and influenced Phanar, etc), and in this struggle Orthodoxy, which is the pure and simple Gospel has been overturned. The powers and motives of Masonry have been long known, and the groups associated with them, powers that go all the way up to the top of all political establishments of note, as well as religious establishments, will not be halted by easily manipulated nationalistic and partisan strifes which have no bearing on the Gospel of Christ; nor will an essentially christless ‘Orthodoxy’ or a christless political philosophy overturn the world rulers of wickedness. Our Lord said that we must be harmless as doves and wise as serpents, because the children of the Kingdom of God are not as wise as the children of this world. The good have always had a difficult time analyzing and understanding evil, because evil, being an essential non-entity, a negation of Truth, is near impossible to be penetrated by those who aren’t walking down that path. And, if we look too long into it, and examine it too closely, we may ourselves fall down the ‘rabbit hole’ so to speak; we become suspicious of the motives of all, friend, ally, family, kin, or even neutral acquaintances. Evil will have then manipulated us into positions and frames of mind that will be totally counterproductive to the ultimate goal, even though we may progress along other good goals.
There is a simple answer for all this, and an answer that is disliked, by most. It is disliked even by those who accept it, but, only because upon uttering the answer we all know how difficult it is. If you are in danger of death, and the only answer is a painful surgery, which will ultimately save your life and relieve you of the unbearable pain being endured now, the right thinking man would accept the procedure. He would not look forward to the pain, even though he knows it will be ‘cathartic’, or purifying, in delivering the rotten material from him, and helping cleanse the body; yet, the pain of the procedure for most of us will overshadow the ultimate good.
This is what the answer for us is: the Gospel. Yes, and not in some ‘pietistic’ neo-‘evangelical’ protestant sense that people hear it. The real sense, the Gospel is simple Orthodoxy and Orthodoxy is the simple Gospel. It’s the unwanted answer to all the world’s problems, the answer has not been tried and found wanting, but has been tried, found hard, and thus not wanted. The only real answers are simple and hard; simple because of the Truth, hard because of the method. Will the world listen to real Prophets anymore?