Author: admin

The following letter arrived today from UNESCO in response to a letter I sent last December.

Culture Sector World Heritage Centre Ref.: CLT/WHC/EUR/21/8771 
Mr Theodore G Karakostas 
17 March 2021 Dear Mr Karakostas, 

I would like to thank you for your letter of 22 December 2020 concerning the decisions of the Republic of Turkey to change the status of Hagia Sophia and the Chora Museums. 

As you may be aware, both Hagia Sophia and Chora Museums are components of the World Heritage property ‘Historic Areas of Istanbul’, which was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1985. The property’s Statement of Outstanding Universal Value highlights that Hagia Sophia represents a unique architectural masterpiece of the Byzantine period. Its status as a museum reflects the universal nature of its heritage, and makes it a powerful symbol for dialogue, peace and mutual understanding between cultures and peoples. Adding the uniqueness of architectural and religious significance of the mosaics and paintings dating from the 14th and 15th centuries of the former Church of the Holy Savior of Chora, both Hagia Sophia and Chora Museums require our outmost efforts to promote peace and mutual understanding.

 Following the decision of the Turkish authorities to change the status of Hagia Sophia and Chora Museums, UNESCO issued a statement on 10 July 2020 (see https://en.unesco.org/news/unesco/-statement-hagia-sophia-istanbul) and the UNESCO Secretariat is closely following this issue. 

Two UNESCO missions took place in October 2020 and January/February 2021 in order to collect the necessary information for a comprehensive examination of the state of conservation of the World Heritage property ‘Historic Areas of Istanbul’ at the next session of the World Heritage Committee. All possible efforts are being undertaken to ensure that the 21 elected members of the World Heritage Committee have all of the information necessary to make a decision on this matter at their extended 44th session. 
UNESCO is following this issue in compliance with the World Heritage Convention and its relevant texts. 

Thanking you for your continuous collaboration and support in the implementation of the World Heritage Convention, I remain, 

Yours sincerely, 
Mechtild Rössler Director

Patriarch Theophilos of Jerusalem recently wrote to the primates of the Orthodox Churches on the first anniversary of the mini council that took place in Amman, Jordan last year. That gathering was attended by no more than five Orthodox Churches but is bound to become historically significant as it was the first step (albeit a very small one) taken to resolve the schism emanating from the Ecumenical Patriarch’s unilateral and uncanonical recognition of make believe bishops and priests in Ukraine. Patriarch Theophilos has suggested he will attempt once more to convene a gathering of Churches when conditions emanating from covid improve.

Traditionally, the Ecumenical Patriarch as “first among equals” convenes pan Orthodox gatherings. A reality check for the apologists of Patriarch Bartholomew. Before Patriarch Bartholomew sent two “exarchs” to Ukraine in September 2018, several Orthodox Churches wrote to Patriarch Bartholomew not only asking him not to take unilateral measures in Ukraine, but to convene a council to deal with the Church schism in that country. Once the Church crisis was triggered by Patriarch Bartholomew, various primates including the Archbishop of Albania and the Patriarch of Antioch asked Patriarch Bartholomew to convene a council. Anyone who has read the letters of these distinguished Orthodox primates and the hostile responses from Patriarch Bartholomew would know that Constantinople has no intention of convening a council.

Patriarch Bartholomew has no intention of convening any kind of Church council that will not be rigged. It is more than apparent that the Ecumenical Patriarch knows full well that if a real council took place, it would rule against Constantinople. Patriarch Bartholomew has both created the crisis in Orthodoxy and permitted it to continue entirely unconcerned about the consequences. Consequences include the appalling persecution of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church through acts of violence by fascist militias and legal harassment by the government in Kiev.

Therefore, the Patriarchate of Jerusalem is fully justified in convening a council since Constantinople has abrogated its responsibilities and has no interest in healing the schism. For the Greek speaking Orthodox world, Jerusalem is the only remaining Church that remains unscathed by the nefarious collaboration between Patriarch Bartholomew and his “allies” at the State Department. Patriarch Bartholomew has done enormous harm to the Greek Churches who foolishly followed him down the path of destruction.

The Church of Greece has been morally and spiritually compromised as a result of the Holy Synod’s capitulation to American and Ukrainian demands to recognize the false entity in Ukraine masquerading as a Church. The Patriarchate of Alexandria has likewise suffered as a result of the unilateral decision of Patriarch Theodore to recognize the false synod in Ukraine. The Archbishop of Cyprus without consulting the holy synod of his Church recognized the fake Church in Ukrainian triggering outrage from his bishops and leaving the Cypriot Church in a state of crisis.

The Patriarchate of Jerusalem strictly speaking is not an exclusively Greek Church. The majority of the faithful are Palestinian Arabs who have real grievances about their mistreatment. That is an issue that must be addressed. Still, Patriarch Theophilos is Greek as are members of the synod of Jerusalem and in this regard demoralized Greeks can take comfort that at least one part of the Greek speaking Orthodox world remains unscathed by the destruction unleashed by Patriarch Bartholomew.

Patriarch Theophilos of Jerusalem has been justifiably praised by the Russian Church for his efforts to overcome the Church schism. Orthodox Christians everywhere should hope and pray that Patriarch Theophilos and his synod will remain firm and refuse to recognize the abomination that calls itself “Orthodox Church of Ukraine”. May a synod representing the whole of Orthodoxy be convened and may the schism in Orthodoxy be healed.

It has been reported that a prominent bishop at Constantinople has been removed from his Metropolitan see. Metropolitan Athanasios of Calcedon has been removed on the orders of Patriarch Bartholomew. It is still entirely unclear why his Eminence was removed from his position.

News reports have implied there have been disagreements between the Bishop of Calcedon and the Ecumenical Patriarch. The question remains why there is no specific information as to the alleged offenses of the Bishop of Calcedon? Dissension has always been a part of Orthodox ecclesiastical tradition unless dissenting views constituted heresy.

In the past, dissension in the Church came from bishops and priests who were solidly Orthodox and stood in opposition to hierarchs that espoused heresy as their official position. Greek Orthodox faithful have the right to know why Metropolitan Athanasios was removed. One wonders whether it had anything to do with dissenting views on the Ukrainian schism?

Considering that no bishops under Constantinople have expressed any dissenting views on the Ukrainian crisis in over two and a half years, it would be a welcome development if even one hierarch were to express opposition to Constantinople. Assuming the problem here had nothing to do with Ukraine, dissent in the ranks at Constantinople is still welcome considering that the Phanar has adopted an authoritarian streak over the past several years. Since the pseudo-council of Crete the Ecumenical Patriarchate has been crushing opposing views.

During the pseudo-council of Crete in 2016, Bishops of the Patriarchate attempted to bully the highly esteemed Metropolitan of Nafpaktos (Church of Greece) into signing documents that were considered unorthodox. Such pressure tactics have become more common in recent years as the Ecumenical Patriarchate has put forward claims that the Patriarch is “first without equals” in Eastern Orthodoxy. The Orthodox Church is conciliar and this necessitates that bishops, priests, theologians, and laypeople have a right to express their views and challenge their hierarchs. Hierarchs have been wrong frequently throughout Church history as can be seen by the example of the iconoclast Patriarchs and bishops.

Whatever the dissension at the Ecumenical Patriarchate was about, it would be a good sign if it were to emerge that a member of the Patriarchal synod actually challenged the Ecumenical Patriarch. If even one dissenting bishop were to challenge Patriarch Bartholomew on his highly authoritarian reign, then perhaps other bishops might speak and the process of resolving the crisis in Orthodoxy (however slowly) could begin.

Reports have indicated for quite some time that Patriarch Bartholomew will be visiting Ukraine sometime in 2021. Latest developments regarding the Patriarchal visit to Ukraine suggest that the Patriarch of Alexandria and the Archbishops of Cyprus and Greece will accompany the Patriarch to Kiev where they will most likely concelebrate the divine liturgy with the unordained lay person known as Sergei Dimenko. There are several disturbing aspects about these reports if they are true.

If the primates of four Greek speaking Churches meet with and concelebrate with the impostor “bishop” of Ukraine it can only be construed as a serious insult directed at the Russian Orthodox Church. There will be nothing religious or spiritual about such activities. This will simply be a politically motivated attack against Russia.

Patriarch Bartholomew has exploited Greek Orthodox faithful from around the world. I love the Church and city of Constantinople but I love Christ and the holy gospel more. Patriarch Bartholomew has proceeded to drag the the Greek speaking Churches into his war on Russia and to make them accomplices in the plan to dismember the Russian Church. It is a tragedy beyond comprehension that the primates of the Churches of Alexandria, Greece, and Cyprus have joined Constantinople in trampling upon the sacred canons of the Church by recognizing laymen posing as Orthodox bishops.

Archbishop Ieronymos of Athens is a moral coward. An unworthy successor of his two predecessors Archbishops Serapheim and Christodoulos. Patriarch Theodore of Alexandria and Archbishop Chrysostom of Cyprus once supported the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church under the synod of Metropolitan Onuphry. Their defections are tragic and disturbing. Considering the dramatic reversal of their previous stances there can be no question that something has been happening behind closed doors.

The Greek Orthodox world is in a very sorry state. Never before in my lifetime have the Greek Churches been in such a state of crisis. Then there is the state of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America which has been mired in scandal after scandal over the past several years.

Patriarch Bartholomew has done everything he can to provoke conflict between the Greek Churches and the Russian Church. Greek Orthodox Christians should not support any of these policies. The Russians and Ukrainians are our brothers and sisters in the faith. Patriarch Bartholomew does not represent me and he does have the right to conduct these nefarious activities under the Greek flag.

As a Greek, I also look forward to the celebrations of the two hundredth anniversary of the Greek War of Independence. It is unfortunate that the Phanariots in New York are playing a leading role in the celebrations. We should all keep in mind that while we celebrate the heroism and bravery of the Greeks who fought against the Ottoman Turks in a long and bloody struggle, that Greek independence remains seriously compromised.

That former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and “Ambassador” Geoffrey Pyatt can influence both Church and State in Greece proves the realities in Greece today are less than ideal. At a time when Greece and Cyprus face existential threats from Turkish aggression and expansionism the last thing the Greeks needed was an inter Orthodox war with the Russians.

Patriarch Bartholomew and some of his supporters have been making chauvinistic and outright racist comments about non Greeks. Such statements deserve condemnation by Christian Greeks as they contradict the spirit of the gospel and the historic experience of the Greek nation. It should be remembered that the Greek Orthodox Church has always condemned racism and the greatest example of this comes from the defiant letter of Archbishop Damaskinos of Athens to the General of the Nazi SS when he expressed support for the Jews of Greece while denouncing Nazi racial theories.

For twenty seven years, Patriarch Bartholomew has never uttered a word about the Turkish occupation of Cyprus nor against the acts of Turkish aggression against Greece. When Patriarch Bartholomew started his ecclesiastical war against the Russian Church in Ukraine, he proceeded to so under cover of the Greek flag. This is a dishonor to the Greek flag.

The Churches of Greece, Cyprus, and Alexandria have been compromised enough and should not participate in any activities in Ukraine. If their primates wish to visit Ukraine they should do so in a spirit of repentance and should seek forgiveness from the bishops of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church. If the Greek speaking world loves the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the spiritual heritage of Constantinople (as I do) then it is time to hold Patriarch Bartholomew accountable for his actions in Ukraine.

Back in 1973, there was a synod of the Eastern Patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem that presided over a dispute within the Church of Cyprus. A similar synod took place in Australia in 1993 over actions undertaken by the Patriarchate of Jerusalem and was attended by representatives of the Churches of Constantinople, Alexandria, and Greece. Perhaps such a synod of the Greek Churches need to meet to sort out the problems that Patriarch Bartholomew has created for them by dragging them into his vendetta against the Russian Church.

Whatever happens, if the primates of the Churches of Greece, Cyprus, and Alexandria join Patriarch Bartholomew in Ukraine, the schism that has been in effect since 2018 will get much worse. May the Lord enlighten them!

Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople has sent a letter to the Archbishop of the Orthodox Church of the Czeck Lands and Slovakia protesting that Church’s celebration of the seventy year Tomos of autocephaly it received from the Russian Orthodox Church in 1951. In 1998, the Ecumenical Patriarchate issued its own Tomos of autocephaly to the Church of the Czeck Lands and Slovakia. At the time, this Church sought to ease tensions with Constantinople and apparently agreed to receive a Tomos from Constantinople. A Tomos is bestowed by the Mother Church upon a daughter Church when the latter receives the status of autocephaly.

The dispute in this particular case emanates from Constantinople’s claims that only it can bestow autocephaly to a Church. The issue of autocephaly is actually quite complex and there is no agreement as to who can and cannot bestow autocephaly on a particular Church. In 1970, the Russian Church bestowed autocephaly to one of its Churches in America that is now called “Orthodox Church in America” (OCA). Some Churches recognize the autocephaly of the OCA while others do not.

Even those who do not recognize the autocephaly of the OCA recognize it as being canonical and so is a part of the Orthodox Church. Constantinople does not recognize the OCA’s autocephaly but recognizes it as an autonomous part of the Russian Church. The question of how autocephaly is bestowed and who can bestow autocephaly was complicated enough before the events in Ukraine were undertaken in 2018.

The issue of autocephaly is one in which the Churches can disagree in good faith until an agreement is reached some time in the future. Despite disagreements on the matter of the OCA, Constantinople and Moscow maintained communion and friendly relations. Constantinople’s attempt to bestow autocephaly on schismatics in Ukraine has created much damage within Orthodoxy. It has also complicated the issue of autocephaly which will make it impossible in the near future for all the Churches to agree on how autocephaly should be bestowed.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate is opening up old wounds on top of new wounds. The Church of the Czeck Lands and Slovakia has been defacto autocephalous since 1951. Constantinople refrained from recognizing that autocephaly (as was its right) until 1998. Constantinople is within its rights to withhold recognition from a particular Church but does not have the right to bully that Church as it is now doing to the Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia.

The best way to resolve the issue of autocephaly is to return to the conciliar tradition of the early Church. The Churches of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Cyprus were all bestowed autocephaly by one of the Seven Ecumenical Councils. Some Churches such as that of Georgia did not receive autocephaly in this manner but was granted it by the Patriarchate of Antioch.

In order to avoid these never ending disputes, it would be best to convene an Ecumenical Council to resolve the problem of autocephaly. A Council needs to be convened to rule on the Ukrainian crisis anyway! The best solution would be to agree that autocephaly should only be granted by the unanimous agreement of all existing autocephalous Churches.

Patriarch Bartholomew continues to be a destabilizing source in Orthodoxy. His criticism of the Church of the Czeck Lands and Slovakia for commemorating an anniversary on their own territory is petty. The Church of the Czeck Lands and Slovakia is an autocephalous Church which means it does not answer either to Constantinople or Moscow.

Patriarch Bartholomew’s clumsy attempt to bestow autocephaly on schismatics on the territory of another canonical Church remains the real problem in Orthodoxy. The behavior of the Ecumenical Patriarch continues to damage both Orthodox unity and the prestige of the Church of Constantinople.

Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Dendias raised the issue of Hagia Sophia at a human rights council at the United Nations. Credit should be given to the Greek government for raising awareness of the Turkish government’s deplorable conversion of Saint Justinian’s Church. Except, Minister Dendias referred to Hagia Sophia in the context of culture.

Certainly, it would make sense to mention the cultural significance of Hagia Sophia. But the Minister should have also mentioned it as a source of religion and Christianity as well. Hagia Sophia was a Greek Orthodox Cathedral and the seat of the Ecumenical Patriarch until the Ottomans conquered Constantinople in 1453.

The Minister should also have mentioned Hagia Sophia as an important national shrine of the Greek nation as well. Can any Greek forget the men, women, and children who were butchered or taken away into slavery on the day that the Ottoman Turks entered Hagia Sophia? Greek officials must not only raise the issue of Hagia Sophia, they must stress why the Erdogan governments actions are so offensive and provocative not only against the world, but against Orthodox Greeks specifically.