The Ecumenical Patriarchate: Pushing for Papist Unity and adding Semi-Hindu Syncretists to the Calendar!
The Ecumenical Patriarch has been steering his dwindling forces headlong into apostasy this month, as he meets with Roman Catholic Bishops to set the talks for complete union, after 50 years of progress. The Patriarch was quoted as saying, “”Thanks to the dialogue that has been ongoing for over fifty years, we have made remarkable progress, building bridges of convergence rather than walls of division, overcoming centuries-old ecclesiastical disagreements and theological disputes.” The full report can be found on the UOJ site.
The Patriarchate also added to their calendar a Constantinople nun, Gabrielia Papagianni, who believed that Christianity and Hinduism were equal paths to salvation. From the warning of the (New Calendar) Greek Diocese of Piraeus: “From the examination of Father Vasileios’s critique, and especially from excerpts from the book, we have observed that the book, in question, is characterized by religious syncretism and interfaith ecumenism from beginning to end. Simultaneously, it undermines the uniqueness of the theanthropic person of our Lord Jesus Christ, reducing Him to the same level as leaders of other religions. Through the words and actions of the Elderess, there is a subtle and systematic effort to indirectly promote the fundamental doctrinal teachings of Hinduism and Guruism, which are meticulously interwoven into Orthodox spirituality. According to the author of the critique, “this book aims to promote popular ecumenism among simple Orthodox Christians, both clergy and laity, teaching that all religions possess part of the truth and, therefore, not only should we not reject their various teachings, but we have a sacred duty to accept them, so that we may eventually achieve the desired union of all religions into one. It is thus an act of hatred, fanaticism, or ‘fundamentalism,’ in modern terminology, and bigotry to persist in the doctrines, rules, and traditions of our Church while rejecting the beliefs and practices of others, a phenomenon attributed, according to the author, to various complexes and fears that afflict us” (page 4).” The full critique is available at the Orthodox Traditionalist website. Of course, we assume in Constantinople they simply responded, “and what are you going to do?”
Because we all know the answer!
Canonization is a much bigger problem than people (“normies”) realize. The modernists canonize all of their supporters with substantial followings. The more conservative the supporters were, the more subversive and hence useful their teachings. When you point out the modernist heresies to normies the response comes back: “All of the recent saints…” They don’t see the sleight of hand because they are being taught (by the conservative wing of WO) to consider only the most recent saints which are closer to contemporary times, but of course the “saints” were selected after the heresiarchs took control which just begs the question (in the old sense of the expression).
Even when you point this out it is like talking to a brick wall. The cognitive dissonance is great when people are directly challenged on the validity of the only saints they have studied. (Worst case, read meme snippets from.) Being lied to hurts and being lied to about the foundations of one’s worldview makes it hard to reach any sensible conclusions. I know it still hurts. Maybe my spelling it out helps someone else.
Bringing it back to the union, in my admittedly limited experience it looks like “I can’t leave until the union is official” is already preemptively becoming “if the bishop commemorates him that’s one thing but if he tells me to…” Compromise is unavoidable if one accepts that those who break with the state churches are schismatics. There will always be room to justify another compromise. Elder Ephraim said to wait until it all gets put right, after all.