The CIA’s Man in Constantinople

The U.S. government is making itself felt in Orthodox internal politics.

(The following article is so good that Handwritings’ editor has decided to lift it wholesale from its original publication, The American Conservative. All credit for this fine piece is attributed to its author, Michael Warren Davis. Photos and captions are not from the original text.)

Everyone knows that the Moscow Patriarchate is in bed with the Kremlin. Few realize that the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople is deeply beholden to the United States government. 

This ignorance is surprising, given that many Greek Orthodox leaders are quite proud of the fact. In 1942, Athenagoras Spyrou—the Archbishop of America for the Greek Orthodox Church—wrote to an agent of the Office of Strategic Services. “I have three Bishops, three hundred priests, and a large and far-flung organization,” Athenagoras wrote. “Every one under my order is under yours. You may command them for any service you require. There will be no questions asked and your directions will be executed faithfully.” 

In 1947, the OSS was rechristened as the Central Intelligence Agencyor CIA. One year later, Athenagoras was elected Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, the spiritual leader of Eastern Orthodoxy. 

One might point out that, when Athenagoras reached out to the OSS, his native Greece was under Nazi occupation. It is understandable that a Greek bishop in America would support the American war effort. But it was more than that. Athenagoras was a strong supporter of American exceptionalism and encouraged Washington’s militarist foreign policy. The U.S. Consul in Istanbul recounted a conversation with Athenagoras in 1951: “As usual, he talked at some length of his belief that the United States must remain in the Near East for several centuries to fulfill the mission which had been given it by God to give freedom, prosperity and happiness to all people.”

(These quotes, by the way, are pulled from a talk given by an Orthodox historian called Matthew Namee at Holy Cross Hellenic College, the Greek seminary in Boston. These are not malicious forgeries peddled by Russian propagandists—the Greek Orthodox are quite proud of their association with the American deep state.)

Athenagoras was not merely an Americanist. He was also known as a renovationist, as liberal Orthodox are known. In 1964, he met with Pope Paul VI in Jerusalem; together, they officially lift the mutual excommunications placed by their predecessors in 1054. This gesture sparked outrage across Orthodox world. Athenagoras was accused of compromising the Orthodox Faith for the sake of a paper union with Rome.

Bartholomew whispering sweet nothings into Elpidophoros’ ear.

The current Ecumenical Patriarch, Bartholomew, is cut from the same cloth as Athenagoras. He is very close to Pope Francis; the two share a passion for mass immigration and environmental activism. Also like Athenagoras, Bartholomew shares a close relationship with the U.S. government—a partnership that has proven mutually beneficial.

The Ecumenical Patriarch is the spiritual leader of Orthodoxy. However, he only has direct jurisdiction over a few thousand Orthodox Christians in Turkey. The rest of the Greek Orthodox world are autocephalous, or self-governing. This includes the Church of Greece, the Church of Cyprus, and the American metropolises (or dioceses). Many look to Bartholomew for leadership, but they are not directly under his authority. It is also worth noting that a large majority of Orthodox Christians around the world belong to the Russian Orthodox tradition. These churches do not look to Bartholomew for leadership in any meaningful way. Some, like the Patriarchate of Moscow, are in schism with Constantinople.

Bartholomew is not the “pope” of Orthodoxy—although he would like to be. Over the last few decades, the ecumenical patriarch has also worked to consolidate hard power over the various Greek Orthodox churches. This effort has proven most fruitful in the United States. 

In 2014, Elpidophoros Lambriniadis, the current Archbishop of America and Bartholomew’s heir apparent, published a short essay called “First Without Equals.” Its name was a play on the phrase primus inter pares, or first among equals. This title originally referred to the Pope of Rome, but was transferred to Patriarch of Constantinople by the Orthodox following the Great Schism of 1054. Of course, the Schism itself was caused in no small part by a sense that the Roman Pontiffs failed to respect the rights and privileges of their fellow bishops, especially in the Christian East. Clearly, the Archbishop was signaling his desire to cultivate a more authoritarian, centralist ecclesiology within the Orthodox Church, a philosophy which has been dubbed Greek papism

In 2022, during an interview with the Greek newspaper Ta Nea, Elpidophoros was asked if he expected to become the next Ecumenical Patriarch. Elpidophoros demurred, claiming that “the succession will be decided by God.” This, too, is a radical departure from Orthodox tradition. In fact, it goes beyond Greek papism. Even the Roman Catholic Church explicitly denies that the Pope is chosen by God.

Nevertheless, the United States government officially supports the doctrine of Greek papism, as will be shown. Strengthening the Ecumenical Patriarchate’s position within global Orthodoxy serves two purposes. First, it necessarily subtracts from the influence of Constantinople’s rival, the Moscow Patriarchate. Washington regards Russian Orthodoxy as a tool for Kremlin propaganda and, therefore, a legitimate target for counterintelligence operations. Secondly, the renovationist Ecumenical Patriarchs are willing partners in Washington’s campaign to spread liberal, democratic values across the globe. 

Consider, for example, the schism in the Ukrainian Church. In 1990, the Patriarchate of Moscow granted self-governing status to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC). It was not, however, given full autocephaly. However, a group of Ukrainian nationalists led by then-president Minister Petro Poroshenko organized an “independent” Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU). With the support of Western media, these nationalists successfully branded the canonical UOC as the “Russian Church.”

In 2018, when asked about the Orthodox Church of Ukraine’s bid for autocephaly, Kurt Volker—then Special Representative of the United States Department of State for Ukraine—appeared to wave the question off. He insisted that the U.S. government does not take a position on such matters and would respect the decision of Bartholomew and his synod. 

Make no mistake: By declaring that the decision belongs to the Ecumenical Patriarchate, the U.S. government is taking a position. First of all, autocephaly cannot be granted unilaterally by any patriarch or bishop. Second, if the decision belonged to anyone, it would be the Patriarch of Moscow, the spiritual leader of Slavic Orthodoxy. Even the great Kallistos Ware denounced the Ecumenical Patriarchate for meddling in the Ukrainian Church:

Though I am a metropolitan of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, I am not at all happy about the position taken by Patriarch Bartholomew. With all due respect to my Patriarch, I am bound to say that I agree with the view expressed by the Patriarchate of Moscow that Ukraine belongs to the Russian Church. After all, the Metropolia of Kiev by an agreement of 1676 was transferred from the omophorion of the Ecumenical Patriarchate to that of the Patriarchate of Moscow. So, for 330 years Ukraine has been part of the Russian Church.

Third, just days before Volker gave his interview, Joe Biden—then only the former vice president—flew to Ukraine to express his support for the OCU. As soon as Bartholomew ruled in favor of the OCU church, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo expressed the Trump administration’s firm support for his decision. Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, our government has implicitly supported Ukrainian president Vladimir Zelensky’s policy of seizing property(including church buildings) from the UOC and transferring them to the OCU. In one particularly egregious episode, a nationalist mob attacked a UOC church in the middle of a funeral, dispersed the worshippers and beat the celebrant-priest so badly he had to be hospitalized. The kicker? It was a funeral for a Ukrainian soldier who died fighting against Russia.

This one detail cannot be emphasized enough: Whatever the media claims, the canonical UOC is not an arm of Russian influence. Its members are not “pro-Russia”; much less are they Russian collaborators. They, too, are giving their lives to defend their homeland against Russian aggression. But that doesn’t matter to Washington or Constantinople. By supporting the separatists, Bartholomew is undermining Moscow’s influence within global Orthodoxy. And that’s good for the Russophobes in our foreign-policy establishment.

In 2019, the State Department gave $100,000 to the Orthodox Times, a news site strongly aligned with the Ecumenical Patriarchate. The purpose? “To counter entities spreading fake news and misguiding believers in Orthodox communities”—in other words, Russian disinformation. 

It’s ironic that Trump’s State Department pursued this pro-Constantinople agenda given that the Ecumenical Patriarchate is openly and proudly aligned with the Democratic Party. The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America boasts: 

President Truman often emphasized the pro-American convictions of Patriarch Athenagoras and the importance and influence of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, along with the Greek Orthodox community in the U.S., as vital to American foreign policy objectives. Indeed, Truman saw the Patriarchate and Athenagoras as crucial to bolstering the pro-Western resolve of both Greece and Turkey, as well as to promoting stability in the Middle East.

In 2020, Patriarch Bartholomew wrote to congratulate his old friend Biden for defeating Donald Trump in the presidential election. “You can only imagine my great joy and pride for your successful election as the 46th president of your distinguished nation, the United States of America.” Archbishop Elpidophoros, in that same interview with Ta Nea, also offered a thinly-veiled endorsement of Joe Biden:

In America, the issue of abortion has been completely politicized…. It is as if the only qualification for being a good Christian or a good politician depends on one’s stance on the issue of abortion. All other principles and doctrines of Christianity do not matter; you can be a crook, a liar, a swindler, a warmonger, violent, or a misogynist, but if you are against abortion, then you are a politician suitable enough for “pious people” to support.

As Rod Dreher pointed out, this little-noticed interview contains quite a few shocking revelations. For instance, Elpidophoros is not simply concerned that abortion has been “politicized”: he is openly pro-choice. “Women bear the full burden in giving birth and raising their children, while men, otherwise directly involved in the pregnancy, do not bear the same burden,” he told Ta Nea. “Therefore, we must support women’s right to make reproductive decisions of their own free will.” Elpidophoros also discusses how proud he was to support the protests which erupted after the death of George Floyd, as well as the infamous “gay baptism.”

For those who aren’t up on their Orthodox church politics: In 2022, Elpidophoros baptized the sons of two wealthy Greek-Americans, Evangelo Bousis and Peter Dundas. (The children were conceived through surrogacy.) The baptism was performed in Vouliagmeni, a suburb of Athens. This set off a firestorm in world Orthodoxy for two reasons. Firstly, it is wrong to baptize a child if there is little to no chance of their being raised according to the Church’s teachings. The parents are making a commitment to their child to the Christian faith without giving them the tools to fulfill that commitment. Second, visiting clergy (including bishops) must receive permission from the local metropolitan before publicly celebrating the sacraments within their jurisdiction. In this case, the local metropolitan was Antonios of Glyfada. Elpidophoros requested and was granted permission to baptize the children of an American couple, but did not inform Antonios that the parents were a same-sex couple. 

Elpidophoros was condemned by the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece as well as the monks of Mount Athos, but he didn’t care. The Archbishop was simply giving the Orthodox world a taste of how he’ll do things once he becomes Ecumenical Patriarch. 

Karloutsos yucking it up with Elpidophoros. Rumor has it that, truth be told, they can’t stand each other.

There’s more. In 2019, Elpidophoros appointed Father Alexander Karloutsos as vicar-general for the Archdiocese of America. Father Alexander is, for all practical purposes, the Biden family’s pastor. He sits on the board of the Beau Biden Foundation and serves as a spiritual advisor to the President. In 2015, Father Alexander attended a (now infamous) dinner hosted by Hunter Biden at the Café Milano in Georgetown. The dinner was a private reception for several Eastern European oligarchs, including Yury Luzhkov, the profoundly corrupt former Mayor of Moscow. This was the night that Hunter introduced his father to Vadym Pozharskyi, an executive at Burisma, allegedly fulfilling the deal for which Baturina had paid Hunter $3.5 million the year before.

More troublingly, Father Alexander is also close to John Poulos, the Greek-Canadian founder of Dominion Voting Systems. Father Alexander has been credibly accused of serving as a go-between for Poulos and the Bidens during the 2020 election scandal. It is said that the priest relayed information between the two parties, but cannot be subpoenaed due to New York’s clergy privilege laws. Though all parties admit that Father Alexander was in frequent communication with both parties during that time, they also insist that he was simply offering them spiritual counsel. Undoubtedly both Poulos and Biden spent those difficult months in prayer and fasting.

As it happens, in 2018, Father Alexander also found himself at the center of an $80 million financial scandal, which was probed by the U.S. government. The federal government’s investigation to the matter was dropped shortly after it began, despite the fact that no explanation was ever unearthed. When President Biden awarded Father Alexander the Presidential Medal of Freedom last year, he jokingly warned, “I’m going to ruin your reputation by talking.”

Unfortunately, such allegations of corruption are fairly widespread in the Archdiocese of America. The Greek Orthodox Church is by far the wealthiest denomination in this country relative to its size. (A Roman Catholic priest can expect to make no more than $45,000 per year; a Greek Orthodox priest can earn upwards of $130,000.) There are many well-established second-generation families who still feel a deep loyalty to the Church even if they tend not to practice very faithfully. 

In other words, the Archdiocese of America is in roughly the same position that the Catholic Church was under Kennedy. It is rich in capital and assets but largely beholden to secular, liberal donors. Hence why the Hellenic College Holy Cross, the Greek Orthodox seminary, refers to former congressman Michael Huffington as a “faithful Orthodox Christian” despite the fact that he’s a practicing homosexual who publicly dissents from the Church’s teaching on sexuality.

Happily, most Greek Orthodox jurisdictions are not renovationist; neither are they in the pocket of the American government or beholden to liberal, secular donors. In fact, when the Greek parliament voted to ratify same-sex marriage, the Church of Greece called the decision “demonic” and excommunicated several of the “immoral lawmakers” who voted for the bill. 

But whatever our government may claim, it will promote Bartholomew and his successor, Elpidophoros, as “Greek Popes” in order to liberalize Greek Orthodoxy and counter Russian Orthodoxy. This is the policy of the U.S. government. There are State Department personnel (and taxpayer dollars) dedicated to achieving this exact goal. It is discussed—openly; gleefully—in the major institutions of the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Archdiocese of America. And yet anyone who suggests that this is a gross betrayal of both the American people and the Orthodox faithful is immediately accused of being a “Russian asset.” Go figure.

EDITOR’S COMMENT: The author of this fine article, Michael Warren Davis, lays all the cards on the table vis à vis the infuriating duplicity of Greek Orthodoxy’s two jackals, Bartholomew and Elpidophoros, and Karloutsos, the hyena. We might ask ourselves whom we have to blame for promoting those three men’s betrayal of our Faith and their unjustified enmity against Russian Orthodoxy.

Why, no one else but our very own CIA and the Biden administration!

A vote to reëlect Biden and his Democrats this fall will be a vote to support the corruption which is American foreign policy for Ukraine and a vote to deepen the rift between Moscow and Istanbul, aka Constantinople. You many American Greeks who intend to defy righteousness and do just that had best take a time to fast and pray before you vote, knowing that heaven will hold you responsible for your 2024 ballot.

I Went to School with Carlton Pearson

I suppose the title of this article will sound like name-dropping to one or two former charismatics out there, but that isn’t my intention in the least. I am not trying to jack up my reputation by associating myself with an erstwhile Christian rock star. There would be no nexus between Carlton Pearson and me if we had not gone to a small Christian college together. I bring him up because a renowned yet controversial Pentecostal preacher, pastor and singer, Pearson died of cancer last November at the relatively young age of seventy.

Bp. Carlton Pearson

This is an Orthodox blog, so I doubt if many of our readers have ever heard of Bp. Carlton Pearson. He was the co-founder of a wildly successful megachurch in the Bible-belt city of Tulsa, Oklahoma. Pearson was hardly an Orthodox believer, or a canonical bishop, but there is a connection between him and me – we were together at Oral Roberts University. Carlton matriculated in the fall of 1971, a year before me. I hardly knew the upperclassman, but I saw him on campus from time to time and I remember a sermon that he preached at one of the semi-weekly chapel sessions. It was called the “Shepherd’s Bag.” As one who can barely remember what his priest talked about last Sunday morning, I certainly won’t even try to recall what was in the shepherd’s bag, but I do remember the talk’s catchy title.

Carlton himself was catchy. He had the most flamboyant personality of anyone on campus, even more than Oral Roberts himself, the televangelist and founder of his eponymous university. Carlton grew up in his father’s black Pentecostal church in San Diego. At ORU, Carlton sang with the exuberant World Action Singers, the celebrities of the student body who performed to a nationwide audience with Oral Roberts at his quarterly primetime television specials. Oral, who was part Cherokee, identified with ethnic minorities, so he took a liking to Carlton. You might say that Oral played favorites, but in the Pentecostal world effervescence of personality is de rigueur. Richard Roberts was Oral’s biological son, of course, but according to Carlton, Oral claimed him as his black son. They were tight and did a lot of ministering together.

Oral Roberts & Carlton Pearson in the early 1970s

Carlton never graduated from ORU. Instead, he and a white classmate of his named Gary McIntosh started a church on the mostly-white south side of Tulsa in 1977 called Higher Dimensions. This start-up went from 75 to 6,000 in short order. Carlton often appeared in shows on the Trinity Broadcasting Network, where he achieved national exposure. He was a guest preacher the world over and became the recipient of several honorary doctoral degrees. He preached up a storm in a way that one imagines his fathers before him had done, or that Oral himself preached. The contemporary Christian rock music at Higher Dimensions was rowdy. Carlton said his band was “slammin’ it”. The congregation was racially integrated on purpose, beginning with the black and white clerical staff, and people of all shades gathered at Higher Dimensions. Times were good in Tulsa.

They were very good… until Pearson had an epiphany. When his two children were small, Pearson witnessed on television the suffering of the victims of the civil wars in Uganda and Rwanda. He saw the suffering of the people around him. It seemed to him that that there was no hell other than the one right here on Earth. If there is no hell, there is no danger of anyone falling into it. There is no reason to preach the Gospel to save the heathen from it. Jesus Christ, the God of love, had already accomplished the redemptive work for everyone everywhere, so there was no reason for anyone anywhere to repent and believe. Pearson had now embraced the age-old heresy of Universalism. Uh oh.

When he started to preach this newly-inspired old “gospel of inclusion”, Pearson suddenly lost his people. Steeped in the bible and sensitive to heresy, his evangelical and pentecostal congregation shrank in number to 200 in no time. Pearson could no longer pay his staff and he lost the building that was their church home. The other bishops of the black Pentecostal Church of God in Christ upbraided Pearson for his error. Oral Roberts himself, now advanced in years, warned him to turn away from this dangerous heresy. Regardless, Pearson would not relent.

Pearson on the radio

Now, one might ask what Carlton Pearson’s story has to do with me and my Orthodoxy? I was raised a stuffy Episcopalian, but I had a born-again experience while in high school. I started to go to “meetings” and Bible studies with charismatic Mennonites and long-haired Jesus People. That’s what led me to apply for entry into ORU. Those were four of the best years of my life. Fast forward half a century. I’m a former Anglican priest who is now fortunate to be an Orthodox layman. Having experienced Pentecostalism and the Charismatic Movement, and having ultimately converted to the Orthodox Faith, I can look back on Pearson’s saga from an Orthodox mindset and view it as a cautionary tale.

Two things struck me about Carlton Pearson’s very public fall from grace. He seems to have known nothing about the weighty authority of the Orthodox and Catholic Church’s Sacred Tradition. Or, if he was aware of it, he dismissed it. The scant tradition upon which Pearson could base his uber-vocal ministry was the Sola Scriptura of Calvinism spiced with the evanescent rhema, or supposéd utterance of the Holy Ghost. This Pearson expressed in an electrified spirituality, absolutely individual and forever loud and fresh. A successful preacher in this Pentecostal milieu is liable to consider his innovative interpretation of Scripture to be the True Way. As we can see, Pearson did just that.

Pearson had allowed himself unwittingly to build a large-scale personality cult that centered upon himself. He became rich and famous. He was known and praised by the stars of the Pentecostal world. By contrast, we Orthodox, in our quasi-monastic observance of self-abnegation, are taught to keep a low profile. Flashy, pop-music performances and sweaty preaching are entirely foreign to our religious custom. They’re ephemeral and shallow. It’s a shame – no, it’s tragic – that such an energetic minister as Pearson, once distraught by the suffering of his racial kin and skeptical that a loving God could assign anyone to eternal suffering worse than that, did not search for the truth of controversial soteriological issues in the rich and clear consensus of Orthodoxy when it was available to him if he had only sought for it. The trouble with Pearson’s mindset was that it was inspired by the emotions of subjective experience, not the unchanging dogmas of the ancient Church. He soon started to normalize gay relationships on the basis of the vague doctrine of love to which his theology devolved. How does God square away the soul of a minister who has so blatantly and abruptly abandoned Church teachings on eternal damnation?

It’s not our place to question whether the soul of Carlton Pearson has landed in the very hell whose existence he so adamantly denied. Christian charity would prevent us from wishing that fate upon him. I suffered a stroke not long after Pearson’s death and I’ll soon turn seventy myself, so the issue of eternal life with God versus eternal separation from God is now front and center for me and people of my generation. Great Lent is a good time for us to sober up and take stock of our lives.

Papal Supremacy and the Suppression of the Latin Mass

Latin Mass Source

On 16 July 2021, Pope Francis issued the motu proprio (apostolic letter) Traditionis Custodes, which imposed severe restrictions on the celebration of the Latin Mass. This policy has upset many conservative or traditional Roman Catholics. They are aggrieved because they very much prefer the Latin Mass to the Novus Ordo Mass aka the Vatican II Mass. Many took to social media protesting the Pope’s decision. But traditional Catholics may be unaware that the recent revival of the Latin Mass was in large part due to another motu proprio Summorum Pontificum issued by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007. In other words, what the pope gives, the pope can take back.

This points to a more fundamental theological problem underlying the brouhaha over the Latin Mass—the Pope’s power to regulate the liturgical life of the Church Catholic. The central issue here is papal supremacy. Papal supremacy means the pope has ultimate authority, not just over all Christians—even non-Catholics—worldwide, but also over the manner in which they are to worship.

This throws light onto one of the fundamental differences between Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy rejects papal supremacy. In Orthodoxy, the authority of bishops and patriarchs, even the Bishop of Rome, is contingent upon fidelity to Apostolic Tradition. The bishop receives Holy Tradition from his predecessor and is expected to transmit Holy Tradition unchanged to his successor. In the Orthodox paradigm, the bishop is under Apostolic Tradition. In Roman Catholicism, however, the pope is over Apostolic Tradition. Thus, it is asserted that the Pope can unilaterally alter the form of worship for millions of Catholics worldwide.

The scope of the pope’s authority over Roman Catholicism is breathtaking. Following Vatican II, Pope Paul VI unilaterally replaced the Latin Mass with the Novus Ordo Mass aka the Vatican II Mass. Despite scattered protests and acts of resistance, the Novus Ordo Mass has become the de facto form for Sunday worship for millions of Catholics worldwide. Traditional Catholics are scandalized by the new expressions of worship—for example, the so-called “chicken-dance Mass”—taking place under the auspices of the Novus Ordo Mass and they yearn for the solemn reverence of the pre-Vatican II Mass. In contrast to these changes, Orthodoxy worldwide for over a millennium—actually for 1500 years—continues to use the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom, which dates to the 400s. This has given rise to the criticism from Roman Catholics that Orthodoxy is stagnant and ossified. To which the Orthodox reply is: Thank you for the unintended compliment!

Is Roman Catholicism Still Catholic?

Traditionis Custodes has troubling implications for Orthodox-Catholic reunion. By suppressing the Latin Mass, Pope Francis has further weakened Roman Catholicism’s historic ties with the Latin Christianity of the first millennium. Through the Latin Mass, Roman Catholicism was able to claim a liturgical link to historic Catholicism of the Middle Ages, as well as Latin Christianity of the first millennium. The Latin Mass linked Roman Catholics to renowned theologians such as Thomas Aquinas and Augustine of Hippo. However, with Traditionis Custodes their link with the past has been all but severed. Reunion has become all but impossible given Orthodoxy’s adherence to Apostolic Tradition and Rome’s continued drift from its historic roots.

According to the ancient theological principle lex orandi, lex credendi (the rule of prayer is the rule of faith) the way one worships God is interrelated with the way one understands God. With the adoption of the Novus Ordo Mass, Roman Catholicism has moved further away the historic Christian Faith towards a new kind of theology. This theological drift has taken on alarming proportion by the recent controversial declaration issued by the Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith in 2023: Fiducia Supplicans, which allows Roman Catholic clergy to give a blessing to couples not considered married according to church teaching, including same-sex couples. With the apparent jettisoning of traditional liturgical forms of worship in Traditionis Custodes and the implied revision of sexual ethics in Fiducia Supplicans, one has to wonder whether the Roman Catholic church still Catholic?

For traditional Roman Catholics the recent controversies raise troubling questions about the validity of the papacy. Can papal infallibility be regarded as valid in light of the recent controversial decisions that have diverged from historic Roman Catholicism? For many devout Catholics, to question the validity of the papacy would constitute another trauma added onto the other crises of faith taking place, but these questions must be faced head on. Roman Catholics who find themselves in this horrific situation need our sympathy and prayers, not triumphalist pressure to convert to Orthodoxy.

The Filioque Again

A lot of ink has been spilled on the Internet (metaphorically speaking) in defense of the Filioque phrase. “Filioque” is the Latin rendering of “and the Son.” (See Wikipedia article: “Filioque.”) Eastern Orthodoxy rejects the insertion of the phrase “and the Son” into the section of the Nicene Creed pertaining to the Holy Spirit. In my opinion as an Orthodox Christian, Roman Catholics and their Protestant counterparts who defend the Filioque by arguing that the inserted phrase makes theological sense have missed the point. The key issue underlying the controversy over the Filioque is: Does the Pope have the authority to unilaterally alter the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed of 381? The Orthodox position is that only the Church Catholic through an Ecumenical Council has the authority to revise the Nicene Creed. This is what happened in 381, at the Second Ecumenical Council.

The issue here is papal supremacy. Is the pope superior to Apostolic Tradition? Because Orthodoxy holds that the pope was wrong to unilaterally insert the Filioque into the Nicene Creed, the Orthodox position is that Rome must drop the Filioque and restore the original Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed of 381 to all its Sunday worship. Until this is done, there can be no reunion between Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. (It should be noted that for all the attention given to the scandal of the 1054 incident, the papal alteration of the Creed took place in 1014.)

Safe Harbor from the Storm

A Word for Distressed Roman Catholics

The recent actions by Pope Francis have caused great distress for many former Protestants who sought refuge from the confusion and tumult in Evangelicalism and mainline Protestantism. My advice to distressed Roman Catholics, both cradle and convert, is for them to take a vacation by attending a nearby Orthodox Liturgy for the next several months. Lie low, spend time in prayer and quiet reflection. Enjoy the reverent atmosphere and the ancient hymns and prayers of the early Church. And enjoy the coffee hour after the Liturgy. Tell the Orthodox Christians that you need time for healing and that you are not ready to convert. Thoughtful mature Orthodox Christians will honor your desire to be left alone.

Grieving for a Lost Past

For better or for worse, Latin Christianity and its signature rite, the Latin Mass, is gone for good. Conservative and traditionalist Roman Catholics will need time to mourn their loss. Many will need time to process their feelings of anger, loss, sadness, and emptiness, while also giving thought about their future. It is important that they understand that Eastern Orthodoxy cannot be a replacement for the Latin Mass they have lost.

It is important for Orthodox Christians to realize that they too have suffered a great loss with the recent suppression of the Latin Mass. The Latin Mass and the Latin Fathers, e.g., Ambrose of Milan, Augustine of Hippo, Leo the Great, and Gregory the Great, are part of the Orthodox heritage. As Roman Catholicism drifts further and further from its historic roots, it now falls on the Orthodox to rescue and preserve these spiritual and theological treasures for future generations.

Western Rite Orthodox Mass at St. Patrick Orthodox Church, Bealeton, Virginia – Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese

Convert to Orthodoxy?

The Latin West and Orthodoxy, having been separated for a millennium, have diverged with respect to theological frameworks, devotional practices, and local customs. For distressed Roman Catholics who have lost their home, Orthodoxy can be their new home but moving into the new home will require adjustment. They cannot expect to carry their traditional Roman Catholicism into the Orthodox Church. One possibility for some is Western Rite Orthodoxy. The Western Rite is patterned after the Latin Mass but it is done in the local vernacular. So far as this author knows, there is no Latin Rite in Eastern Orthodoxy.

If traditionalist Roman Catholics desire to convert to Orthodoxy, we welcome you but you must want to become Orthodox. There is much in the Roman Catholic tradition that can be brought over into Orthodoxy, but there are elements of Roman Catholicism that are incompatible with Orthodoxy and so must be left at the door. To attempt to hold onto these problematic beliefs and practices as one seeks to become Orthodox is like a smuggler seeking to covertly transport contraband over the border. If you desire to become Orthodox, we will help you. However, if you wish to reshape Orthodoxy into something reminiscent of the Latin Rite you are longing for, we ask you to go elsewhere. We’re Orthodox, and we are not going to change.

Priest distributing the antidoron.

You are welcome to attend the Sunday Liturgy as an ecclesial refugee who needs a comforting corner for respite. We ask that you refrain from going up for Holy Communion as the Orthodox leadership have not yet changed the Church’s position on Roman Catholics receiving Holy Communion. Please don’t take this as a sign of rejection or judgment. To receive Holy Communion means that one shares the same Faith as the Orthodox Church and are under the pastoral care of an Orthodox bishop. However, after the Liturgy has been concluded you are welcome to come up and receive the antidoron (blessed bread) from the priest. The antidoron is given to the Orthodox and non-Orthodox as a sign of hospitality.

May God have mercy on us all in these troubled times.

Athenagoras

REFERENCES

Documents

Fiducia Supplicans. Vatican.va

Traditionis Custodes. Vatican.va

Summorum Pontificum. Vatican.va

Articles

Susan Benofy. “The Day the Mass Changed, How it Happened and Why — Part I.” In CatholicCulture.org

Fr. Stephen Freeman. “Belief and Practice.” Glory To God For All Things.com

Filioque” in Wikipedia.

Nicene Creed” in Britannica.com

YouTube Videos

YouTube video: “Shocking: Scandalous Chicken Dance Mass in Germany – Dr. Taylor Marshall” [48:23] 

YouTube video: “Western Rite Orthodox Mass” [1:05:21]

YouTube video: “Western Rite Orthodoxy Explained” [21:02]

Orthodoxy – Right worship for the ages of ages. Come and join us!