Conflicts in the Orthodox Ecumenical Council

bartholomewA fierce conflict between the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Patriarchate of Moscow, that may lead to a new schism, threatens the forthcoming Orthodox Ecumenical Council.

The reason is the effort of the Russian Church to degrade the primacy of Constantinople in the orthodox world and to expand in China and Japan.

This expansive strategy has clear political extensions of geopolitical character, with the assistance of president Poutin.

Patriarch Bartholomew reacted intensely, sending a letter to the Patriarch of Moscow, Cyrillus, and two others, of informative character to Archbishop Ieronymos.

According to the letter to Cyrillus, the facts that caused the reaction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate are: the suppression of the contribution of the church of Constaninople to the christianization of Kievan Rus, the degradation of the Patriarchate’s delegation, the improper enhancement of the “autocephalous” Orthodox Church in America, and the unannounced presentation of a text that disapproved the violence in the Middle East. This had already happened in 2011, at the Council of high-ranking Bishops of Orthodox Churches of the Middle East, in Phanari.

The interest of the Russian Church for proselytism in China and Japan is not only religious, but also political. The text concerning the violence in Middle East is included in that framework.

It seems that the Tsaric subconscious comes to the surface, connected to the old theory of  “Third Rome” and this, despite being refuted, consists the main target. The opulent grand events contribute to the gold wrapping.

All the above have already caused serious side-effects. Most important of which, is the danger of cancellation of the Orthodox Ecumenical Council.


  1. How long is the Russian patriarch going to continue to put up with these adolescent tantrums from this moribund bishopric?

    Patriarch Kyrill should lose the Fanar’s telephone number.

  2. “the old theory of ‘Third Rome’ and this, despite being refuted…”

    And when did this “refutation” happen? When you decided it hurt your feelings? The Ecumenical Patriarch can assume leadership of the world’s Orthodox Christians when he 1) has an actual Church to lead (he’s not even in charge in Greece!) and 2) repudiates his pro-abortion remarks.

    Until then, we’ll stick with Moscow, thanks.

  3. There are two problems with the article:

    1. The way it is written.

    2. The stance of the Patriarch/ate.

    The letter you write of refers to events that took place in Russia weeks ago. There is no reference to the work of the Russian Church in Japan or China in that letter. On what basis are you claiming that this is a problem or that it is “proselytism”?
    Furthermore, the Church in Japan is self-governing and has been for a long time. The same with the Church in China. Suddenly, the Patriarchate has awoken from its century old slumber to scream bloody murder and claim billion-strong China for itself – when the Russian Church sent missionaries there centuries ago? You do jest, right?

    With regard to the Patriarchate’s stance generally, the real issue with the so-called “Ecumenical Council” that the masons in the Phanar have been planning for decades is not Russian imperialism but Phanariote cacodoxy! This Patriarch preaches “another Gospel”, a masonic one, which St. Paul expressly told us to reject straightaway. This is because he speaks of a Church which is divided (“Is Christ divided”) and a Church which is “wounded” or less than holy (for it includes heresy and delusion when it includes Rome).

    While the rest of Orthodox may not be thrilled with Russian imperialism, we are far less tolerant of the Phanar playing with our Faith, preaching that which is contrary to the Symbol of Faith (“In ONE, HOLY, Catholic and Apostolic Church).

  4. WHO NEEDS A 3rd ROME!! Wasn’t one enough! We are not here as Christians to create EMPIRES! Our city is the HEAVENLY JERUSALEM – and not some National Church that is in the pocket of its political leaders!! – no matter where they live!

  5. The Ecumenical Patriarchate has not forgotten the inappropriate and unchristian way in which Moscow behaved in Great Britain (driving out the mainly British adherents of the Diocese of Sourozh) or in Nice (taking over the Cathedral from the community which had worshipped there for 80 years) – to give just two examples from many.

  6. Interesting. To have a Full Ecumenical Council, you still need Rome. All old original churches must be present. That is the problem

  7. I think the most important thing is to take the word of the gospel. Regardless of whether the gospel will be preached by the Russian Church or not. Because fights like these, the gospel is not preached, and this occurs with the advancement of the Muslim religion in China mainly. The Ecumenical Patriarchate can not afford to do a mission in China and even in Japan, so why not leave the Russian Church?

  8. This is inaccurate. Even the original Ecumenical Councils took place without Roman bishops, and without the participation of Churches outside the Empire. “Ecumenical” is a term bestowed on *a given Council* after its acceptance by the whole Church as such after the fact. You can’t just call a Council “Ecumenical” and make it so (see the Robber Council (II Ephesus)), and Rome has nothing to do with it.

  9. Oh, please. The EP is a joke, trying to sow discord in the Russian Diaspora. Is it appropriate canonically or charitably to create an Estonian Orthodox Church and tear apart the former flock of Patriarch Alexey II right before his eyes?

    And as far as Nice: is it more Christian to charge people *entrance fees* to worship? Entrance fees that weren’t even use for church upkeep, and the ceiling collapsed? What good is the EP doing, besides complaining that nobody respects them?

  10. “Bartholomew: With Francis, we invite all Christians to celebrate the
    first synod of Nicaea in 2025”

    surprising, since Bartholomew further disenchanted many jurisdictions
    last week with his unilateral, semi-unauthorized, anti-canonical, and
    arguably harmful dealings with the Bishop of the Latin church, the Pope
    of Rome in Jerusalem.

    If the Patriarch of Constantinople does not
    do all this properly, that is, by stepping on the toes of other
    patriarchs through his own self-aggrandizements and lack of proper
    council with the rest of the Orthodox world, there is sure to be further
    schism from all of this. Mainstream “canonical” Russian Orthodoxy would
    be first to go in my mind as they vehemently rejected the hyped-up
    events of last week involving the Pope and Patriarch in Jerusalem

    about the schism between Antioch and Jerusalem over property,
    jurisdiction and territory
    (,, There are matters of
    Faith, Doctrine and Discipline that are seemingly overlooked. The
    Patriarchate of Moscow does not much care about union with Rome and the
    Ecumenical Patriarchate. It has been said the Patriarchate of Moscow
    want Rome to get out or give back the ‘Uniates’. And, where does all
    this leave the Oriental Orthodox or the Assyrian Church of the East? Or,
    on the other side of history, the “un-canonical” Orthodox Church in
    America, still unrecognized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here