Month: October 2020

Categories
cinema

The Great Horror Films of all time (Special Halloween Entry)

Reviews for individual films may be done at a later time. For Halloween, my list as cinephile and horror fan of the greatest horror films of all time. A brief summation will follow the list.

1) The Exorcist (1973)

2) Night of the Living Dead (1968)

3) The Evil Dead (1982)

4) The Haunting (1963)

5) Frankenstein (1931)

6) Dracula (1931)

7) Horror of Dracula (1958)

8) Jaws (1975)

9) An American Werewolf in London (1981)

10) Hereditary (2018)

11) Dawn of the Dead (1979)

12) The Curse of Frankenstein (1957)

13) Psycho (1960)

14) Rosemary’s Baby (1968)

15)The Wicker Man (1973)

16) The Conjuring (2013)

17) The Wolf Man (1941)

18) Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

19) The Blair Witch Project (1999)

20) The Old Dark House (1932)

21) Demons (1985)

22) Creepshow (1982)

23) The Last Exorcism (2010)

24) The Bride of Frankenstein (1935)

25) Drag me to hell (2009)

26) Evil Dead 2 Dead by Dawn (1987)

27) 28 Days Later (2003)

28) The Woman in Black (2012)

29) Suspiria (1977)

30) Insidious (2011)

31) Son of Frankenstein (1939)

32) Silence of the lambs (1991)

33) Sleepy Hollow (1999)

34) Halloween (1978)

35) House of 1,000 Corpses (2003)

36) Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed (1969)

37) Return of the Living Dead (1985)

38) Salem’s Lot (1979)

39) The Raven (1935)

40) Nosferatu (1922)

41) Dracula Prince of Darkness (1966)

42) The Blob (1958)

43) Nosferatu (1979)

44) The Others (2001)

45) Pet Semetary (1989)

46) Abott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (1948)

47) The Last Man on Earth (1964)

48) 1408 (2007)

49) The Black Cat (1933)

50) Requiem (2006)

51) Army of Darkness (1993)

52) The Revenge of Frankenstein (1958)

53) Carrie (1976)

54) House on Haunted Hill (1958)

55) Martin (1978)

56) Vampyr (1932)

57) The Exorcism of Emily Rose (2005)

58) The Mummy (1932)

59) House of Frankenstein (1944)

60) Dracula has risen from the grave (1968)

61) House of Wax (1953)

62) The Mist (2007)

63) Signs (2002)

64) The Brides of Dracula (1961)

65) Fright Night (1985)

66) From Dusk Till Dawn (1995)

67) Island of lost souls (1933)

68) Damien Omen 2 (1978)

69) Young Frankenstein (1974)

70) The Mummy (1999)

71) Planet Terror (2007)

72) Plague of the Zombies (1966)

73) Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man (1943)

74) Count Dracula (BBC Film) (1977)

75) The Devil Rides Out (1968)

76) Shaun of the Dead (2004)

77) The Conjuring 2 (2016)

78) The Devil’s Advocate (1997)

79) Taste the Blood of Dracula (1969)

80) Dark Shadows (2012)

81) Diary of the Dead (2008)

82) The Ninth Gate (2000)

83) The Phantom of the Opera (1925)

84) The Invisible Man (1933)

85) Stephen King’s IT (1990)

86) Isle of the Dead (1945)

87) Day of the Dead (1985)

88) The Devil’s Rejects (2005)

89) Dracula (1979)

90) Dawn of the Dead (2004)

91) The Mummy (1959)

92) Murders in the Rue Morgue (1932)

93) Interview with the Vampire (1994)

94) Misery (1990)

95) Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954)

96) Curse of the Werewolf (1961)

97) Ghost of Frankenstein (1942)

98) Zombieland (2009)

99) Night of the Living Dead (1990)

100) The Wolfman (2010)

Summarization of my horror list

Horror films vary from scary and terrifying (The Exorcist, Hereditary) to films that are more lighthearted (Evil Dead 2 Dead By Dawn). There are only a handful of serial killer films (slasher films) on this list. These include classics and masterpieces such as “Psycho”, “Texas Chainsaw Massacre”, “Halloween”, and “Silence of the the Lambs” that stand out because of their sophistication and intelligence.

Slasher films are usually garbage but these handful of films are exceptions. Many of the films on this list are from the golden age of horror of the 1930’s and 1940’s produced by Universal Studios. Some are from Hammer Film Studios, the British studio that remade Frankenstein and Dracula.

Some films that would be near the top of most horror film lists such as the “Shining” and the “Omen” do not appear on this list. “The Sixth Sense” does not appear on this list either. These are three very overrated films.

“The Shining” is probably the most overrated film in horror history. Two and a half hours of a film that has only three main characters. It is never clear if one has not read the novel whether Jack Torrence (played by Jack Nicholson) is losing his mind or if the ghosts he sees are real. A tremendously overrated film with too much overacting. Jack Nicholson is good in the film but he is less scary than he is unintentionally funny. In addition, I simply do not care for Director Stanley Kubrick whose films in general are depressing and undermine the pleasures involved in going to the movies.

The best horror film in recent years is “Hereditary” which is one of the scariest movies made in a long time. The story about a dysfunctional family and a grandmother who was active in the occult is one of the best horror films ever made. Other great films in recent years include “The Blair Witch Project” which was a tremendously scary film when it was released in 1999.

“The Exorcist” remains the greatest horror film of all time. a truly theological film with great drama and suspense. “Night of the Living Dead” is the follow up at number two. A classic filmed in black and white and the film that came to define the zombie genre the story has much to say about man’s nature in times of crisis. The film can be seen in many ways as a metaphor for the expulsion of man from paradise.

A happy and safe Halloween to all!

Categories
Letters

Letter to My Senator

Dear Senator,

I am writing to inform you of the blatant violation of my right to freedom of religion as a result of the policies of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and American Ambassador to Greece Geoffrey Pyatt. I will try to be as brief as possible. The State Department has meddled in the internal affairs of Eastern Orthodox Churches in Constantinople (Istanbul) and Greece. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for the past two years has asked the hierarchy of these two Orthodox Churches to recognize a schismatic faction of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in the country of Ukraine.


There is an ecclesiastical schism in Ukraine which is strictly an internal religious matter for the Orthodox Church to deal with. Unfortunately, the Secretary of State lobbied Orthodox hierarchs in the above mentioned Churches to extend recognition to the Ukrainian schismatics. The Secretary of State had no business intervening in religious matters and had no business lobbying any Orthodox hierarchs on matters that were strictly religious. I am certain that the Secretary of State and the American Ambassador to Greece have violated theAmerican constitution and American law by in effect pronouncing on the validity of religious beliefs and doctrines as they have made a mockery of the Orthodox Church’s traditional teachings on priestly ordinations and the consecration of Bishops. 


 The Eastern Orthodox Church holds that the schismatic faction in Ukraine is invalid under its canon laws which regulate and govern the spiritual life of Eastern Orthodox Christians worldwide. By intervening in these internal matters the Secretary of State and the American Ambassador are completely out of order and deserve to be reprimanded and/or possibly removed from their present positions as a result of their highly unethical and inappropriate actions. The Ukrainian Orthodox Church in the country of Ukraine which is considered the legitimate Church by Eastern Orthodoxy has been fiercely persecuted by the Ukrainian government which grants favoritism and support to the schismatic entity whose followers engage in violence and the forcible seizure of Churches from the legitimate Church which meets the criteria under Orthodox Canon law to be considered canonical.


 The intervention of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in these internal religious matters has played havoc with the spiritual life of Orthodox Christians throughout the world. This includes myself as your constituent. I have a parish that I especially like but as a result of the schism in Eastern Orthodoxy that is growing I may have to go to another Orthodox jurisdiction in order to maintain my status as an Orthodox Christian in good standing with the universal Orthodox Church. Presently, I am under the Ecumenical Patriarchate which resides in Constantinople (Istanbul). The present Patriarch altered the traditional stance of his Patriarchate in 2018 and extended recognition to the breakaway faction of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church at the behest of American officials at the State Department.


 During the fall of 2019, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo travelled to Athens and lobbied the Orthodox Archbishop of Athens to extend recognition to the break away faction of the Ukrainian Church. He had no business asking the Archbishop of Athens to do this. Furthermore, the American Ambassador to Athens Geoffrey Pyatt in a speech in Athens last November openly endorsed the subsequent change of stance on the aforementioned religious issue by the Archbishop of Athens. The Ambassador had no business commenting on Church matters and no business interfering in them.
 

In recent days, it appears the Greek Orthodox Archbishop of Cyprus has now followed the actions of the Ecumenical Patriarch and Archbishop of Athens and has extended recognition to the schismatic Ukrainian entity. News reports suggest this decision was made not long after the visit to Cyprus of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. I am sorry to bother you with matters of religion but the fact of the matter is that Secretary Pompeo, Ambassador Pyatt, and others within the State Department are violating the right to freedom of religion and freedom of conscience. These matters impact me personally as the actions of these officials may eventually force me to find another Eastern Orthodox jurisdiction in America. 


 Thank you for your time. My thoughts and prayers for you and your staff, and for all the members of the United States Senate during these very difficult times.


Theodore G. Karakostas 

Categories
history

OHI DAY!!!!

Today in history the treacherous forces of Mussolini’s Italy invaded Greece. Mussolini believed that Greece would be an easy conquest. As Hitler had conquered country after country in Europe without consulting his ally Mussolini, the “Duce” decided he would show Hitler by taking Greece. It was a miscalculation and Prime Minister Metaxas responded with the defiant “OHI” when the Italians requested free passage of their troops in Greece.

In only ten days, the Greeks crushed the Italians and pushed them back into Albania. Hitler had not been interested in Greece and had Mussolini not ordered the invasion of Greece, it is possible Greece would have sat out the war unscathed. Hitler ordered the invasion of Greece to bail out his Italian allies.

The significance of the Greek victory cannot be understated. The decisive victory over the the Italians and the German invasion of Greece delayed the Nazi invasion of Russia which allowed the Russian winter late in 1941 to have its effects on the Germans. This was the restoration of Hellenic glory.

The Germans forced the Greeks to surrender to the Italians despite the fact that Greece had decisively crushed them. Greece was subsequently occupied by Germany, Italy, and Bulgaria. Greece endured three and a half years of brutal occupation accompanied by famine and horrific massacres.

In addition, the Jews of Greece became subject to humiliation and subsequent deportations to Auschwitz where the vast majority were murdered. Most of the Jews of Northern Greece were deported under the zone of the Bulgarian occupation. The Greek Orthodox Church made maximum efforts to protect the Jewish population.

Archbishop Damaskinos of Athens protested and condemned the efforts to deport the Jews of Athens. Other Bishops such Gennadios of Thessaloniki, Chrysostom of Zakynthos, and Ioacheim of Volos assisted Greek Jews and have been recognized as “righteous among the nations” by the Yad Vashem in Jerusalem. In Northern Greece, Greek Bishops had been expelled and replaced by Bulgarian Bishops and this was a contributing factor to the high death rate of Greek Jews.

The war had a devastating impact on Greek society. Nevertheless, the Greeks fought with bravery and honor from the initial invasion by the Italians to the end when the Germans and their Bulgarian allies were forced to withdraw from Greek soil. The Greeks fought hard and bravely.

As a result of the Greek participation in the war and Turkey’s neutrality, the Dodecanese islands were ceded to Greece by the Italians as compensation for the invasion. Greek bravery led to the liberation of the Dodecanese! These same islands that are today claimed by Turkey.

The Greeks have always been valiant fighters. They will fight again in defense of Greek territory today if Turkish aggression were to manifest itself against Greek territory. May the Greek nation never forget the heroes who fought in defense of Greece against the Italians, Germans, and Bulgarians.

Categories
political

The Statesmanship of Mitsotakis

Greek Prime Minister Mitsotakis continues performing well in his duties as an international statesman. The Prime Minister hosted Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Greece. The two agreed that Greek membership in NATO and the European Union would not be an obstacle to Greek-Russian relations.

Foreign Minister Lavrov affirmed Russian support for Greece’s right under international law to extend its territory in the Aegean Sea to twelve nautical miles. Russia is coming down firmly on Greece’s side against Turkey. This is welcome as Greece is also gaining the support of the United States. In addition, Turkish President Erdogan has mocked the Trump administration by daring Washington to impose sanctions on Turkey.

Greece faces a challenge in attempting to win over both Washington and Moscow. Washington seeks to impose sanctions on Turkey because it purchased an s-400 defensive system from Russia. It is true that America is very staunchly anti Russian at this point.

However, American and Russian interests may conceivably merge with regard to Turkey. For centuries, Great Britain and France loathed the Russians and their foreign policies were directed againt the Russian Empire. Despite this traditional hostility both London and Paris made common cause with Russia during the First World War against Germany.

During the Second World War, London and Washington made common cause with Stalin against Hitler’s Germany. It is not inconceivable that Washington and Moscow could come to see Turkey as a common threat. For this reason, it is better for Donald Trump to be reelected President than for Joe Biden to be elected President.

The Russians and the Turks are on opposite sides in Libya as they were in Syria. Turkey is sponsoring Syrian jihadists in Azerbaijan and Libya, the same elements that fought Russia and the Asaad government in Syria. There can be no question that over the long term Russian and Turkish interests are completely incompatible.

The Trump administration’s friendly attitude to Russia is welcome on the grounds that in the event of a Russian-Turkish conflict (as nearly occurred in 2015), Washington will stay out of it. Joe Biden and the Democrats have become so anti Russian that they will not be able to be responsible in the event of a Russian and Turkish clash in the future. Greek interests necessitate depriving Turkey of both American and Russian support.

Prime Minister Mitsotakis is doing very well in defending Greek national interests. He is keeping all options open by maintaining friendly ties to both Washington and Moscow. The Erdogan government in Turkey is bound at some point to trigger a confrontation with with either one or both of these countries.

With some serious diplomatic activity, Greece can win the support of both America and Russia. The fact that American and Russian diplomatic officials have been visiting Athens lately demonstrates that Greece is rising as an important regional player. The opportunities are endless.

Categories
faith

Ukrainian Schism engulfs Church of Cyprus

Four Bishops of the Orthodox Church of Cyprus have angrily responded to the commemoration in the divine liturgy by Archbishop Chrysostom II of Epiphanios Dimenko, the “bishop” of the schismatic entity in Ukraine. The Archbishop’s commemoration of a man who has no priestly ordination or bishop’s consecration and is therefore not the head of an autocephalous Church is a serious violation of the canonical order of the Orthodox Church. This threatens to lead to a rupture of communion between the Orthodox Church of Cyprus and the Russian Orthodox Church of which the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church is an autonomous part of.

It is quite probable that the Archbishop has succumbed to pressure from the Ecumenical Patriarch and his powerful friends in the American government. The Members of the Holy Synod of the Church of Cyprus are rightfully furious with the Archbishop for making a decision that could destroy relations with the Russian Church and affect its relations with the rest of the Orthodox Church unilaterally.

Archbishop Chrysostomos II is only the latest Greek hierarch to disregard the holy and sacred canons of the Orthodox Church and to recognize the fake entity in Ukraine. Originally, the Bishops of the Church of Greece entered into communion with the fake “church” of Ukraine. Some of the Greek Monasteries on Mount Athos concelebrated the divine liturgy with some of the fake “bishops” of Ukraine. Like Patriarch Theodore of Alexandria, Archbishop Chrysostom had stated that he recognized only the canonical Ukrainian Church but then turned around and recognized the schismatics.

This action on the part of the Archbishop of Cyprus has now engulfed the last of the Greek speaking Churches in Orthodoxy. The Patriarchate of Jerusalem has refused to recognize the Ukrainian schismatics but while the Patriarch and most of his Bishops are Greek, the Patriarch’s flock is Arab. Jerusalem is therefore both an Arab and a Greek Church.

It cannot be stressed enough that Patriarch Bartholomew is provoking a schism in Orthodoxy that widens each time an autocephalous Church enters into communion with the schismatics. As all the Churches to have recognized the schismatics are Greek, this will leave the Greek Orthodox world estranged and cut off from the whole of Orthodoxy. Since the Ecumenical Patriarch invaded the Russian Church’s territory in Ukraine we have seen the following,

1) The persecution of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church by the Ukrainian authorities.

2) The cessation of communion between the Russian Church and the Churches of Constantinople and Alexandria.

3) The cessation of communion between the Russian Church and some Metropolises of the Church of Greece.

4) The division and estrangement between the upper ranks of the Patriarchate of Alexandria and the native African Bishops that resulted when African Bishops protested the Patriarch’s decision to establish communion with the Ukrainian schismatics.

5) A division within the Church of Greece between twelve principled Bishops who refuse to violate the canons of the Church, priests, monastics, theologians, and faithful on the one side and the Archbishop of Athens and a vast majority of Bishops on the other side who endorsed entering into communion with the Ukrainian schismatics.

At a time when Greece and Cyprus face increasing encroachments on their territorial rights from Turkey, this latest development in the two year crisis within the Orthodox Church is especially unwelcome. Over the past two years, Patriarch Bartholomew has sought to portray himself as a Greek nationalist. His infamous chauvinistic comments about the Russians needing to recognize “our people” at the head of Orthodoxy comes to mind.

Patriarch Bartholomew has failed to recognize the damage he has done to Orthodoxy. From the outset, the Ecumenical Patriarchate made itself an accomplice in the fierce persecution of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church. By colluding with American officials in Washington and Athens to pressure the Church of Greece (and later the Patriarchate of Alexandria) to establish communion with schismatics, the Ecumenical Patriarchate made their synods complicit in the persecution of Ukrainian Orthodoxy.

In recent days, Russia has released statements supporting Greece’s territorial rights in the Aegean against Turkey. Russia has released a statement reminding Turkey of the Russian bombardment of the Ottoman Empire at the Battle of Navarino in 1828. Very crucially, the Russian government has condemned the Turkish decision to reopen the town of Varosha in the Turkish occupied territories of Cyprus.

The decision of Archbishop Chrysostom to commemorate the fraudster Dimenko is despicable first and foremost for violating the canons of the Orthodox Church. It is also inherently stupid for alienating the Russians at a time when Russian diplomacy has been stepping up for Cyprus and Greece. The violation of canon laws by the Greek speaking Churches and the appalling treachery and cowardice by Greek hierarchs in four Churches demonstrate that the Greek Orthodox world has reached its greatest spiritual crisis in at least two centuries.

All this can be blamed on the Ecumenical Patriarch, the so called Greek “ethnarch”. Many Greeks scattered throughout the world have remained fervently loyal to Patriarch Bartholomew. This misguided loyalty has not been returned by the Ecumenical Patriarch.

If Patriarch Bartholomew cared for the Greeks and the Greek speaking Churches he would not have sought to divide them from their sister Churches in the communion of Orthodox Churches. Nor would he have destabilized them by creating one crisis after another in Greece, Alexandria, and now Cyprus. Greeks who continue to support Patriarch Bartholomew should ask one question.

If the Ecumenical Patriarch cared about Greece and Cyprus would he be creating divisions and conflicts not only between the Greek Churches and the Russian Church, but divisions among Greeks themselves?

Categories
political

The Right Vote Intellectually, Morally, and Spiritually

Putting aside previous reservations I have cast my vote by mail. It was the right choice and was formulated as a result of great spiritual, intellectual, and moral considerations. There really was only one choice to be made. It could not have gone any other way!

The name of this blog originates from the banner of the Byzantine Empire. The successor to that Great Empire which was once centered on Constantinople is Russia. It was simply unthinkable to choose a candidate from a political party that has spent the last four years bashing what is today the center of Orthodox Christianity! Unthinkable and intolerable!

Well educated people who prefer the intellect and learning understand that Russia is the country that smashed Napolean and Hitler. Wise statesman seek friendship and not confrontation with Russia. The historically illiterate party whom I voted against would exacerbate tensions with a nuclear armed country.

There are too many wars that the United States has waged in recent decades. The destruction of Orthodox Serbia, the invasion of Iraq, the overthrow of the Libyan government in 2011, and the attempt to overthrow the Syrian government were miserable failures that produced human misery and opened up the door for genocide and slavery under the Islamic State.

I voted for the anti war candidate whose policies were a reversal of the traditional foreign policy of both parties. Desiring reconciliation with Russia is something to brag about, not to be condemned as it is by the historically illiterate candidate. The candidate that I voted for worked with Russia to destroy the Islamic State that resulted in the stabilization of Syria. The destruction of the Islamic State resulted in the end of the slave trade and genocide of Yazidis, Christians, and Shiite Muslims.

I voted for the candidate who opposes infanticide. The political party of the other candidate has become notorious for its open support of nine month abortions. The Governor of Virginia who belongs to the party of the candidate I voted against not only supports abortion up to the time of birth but has openly said that in the event an infant survives an abortion at that stage that it would be permissible to permit a living baby to die!

I voted for the candidate who opposes the mutilation of children. The party I voted against is the party of the rainbow flag. The party whose base of political supporters believe it should be permissible to support the “transition” of boys to girls and vice versa. There is presently a case involving an eight year old boy in Texas whose mother (a Greek woman at that!!!!) won permission from a court to “transition” him into a girl!

I voted for the candidate that opposes drag queen story hour and child drag queens. Drag Queen Story hour (I have witnessed this first hand) consists of men in drag reading books to toddlers. There is also the sickening appearance of eleven year old boys who are drag queens.

The candidate I voted against has criticized the candidate I support for his relationship with North Korea. The candidate I voted for has demonstrated skills and abilities in international diplomacy. He has brought the North Koreans to the negotiating table something that three previous Presidents were unable to do.

Voting for Donald Trump was the right way to vote intellectually, spiritually, and morally. Intellectually it is because the President understands the world from Russia to the Middle East much better than the pack of historically illiterate pagans in the Democratic Party. Spiritually because the Democrats have declared themselves the enemies of Christianity, and morally because, well, the President does not support killing live babies and mutilating children.

Four years ago, an ancient people called the Yazidis were being mercilessly slaughtered in a planned genocide by Islamic State. Yazidi women were sold in slave markets by the barbarians of Islamic State. The President wanted to go after Islamic State (which he did through his successful policies in Iraq and Syria) while the Democrats wanted to go after Russia. The President stopped the abuse and enslavement of women under ISIS while the Democrats ensured that men would have absolute access to the ladies room!

From a moral and logical standpoint, my vote speaks for itself.

Categories
political

Greece, Italy, and Russia

An interview with an Italian Admiral (comments further down) at this link with full interview

https://greekcitytimes.com/2020/10/21/italian-admiral-greece-turkey/

Russian warning to the Turks at this link

https://greekcitytimes.com/2020/10/21/russia-turkey-greece-navarino/

“There is no doubt that in the absence of an agreement, such measures will have to be taken. The only thing that is holding back Europe right now is Greece’s unwillingness to find honorable compromises. As long as Athens remains on intractable positions, the EU will have difficulty in supporting it.”

Italian Admiral on Greece

Regarding the comments from this Italian Admiral. The mind of any Greek is not far from the treachery that was perpetrated by the Italians, French, British, Americans, and Soviet Communists in 1922. It can be said that Greeks should not be prisoners of the past and we should see things within the context of today’s realities. This is true, but at the same time we should be cognizant of past wrongs and injustices.

These insulting comments from the Admiral bring to mind the Italian arming of the Turks in Asia Minor from 1919 to 1922. It also recalls the Italian support for Albania and the undermining of the Greek effort to liberate Northern Epirus. We can also go back to the Fourth Crusade in 1204 when the Italians and the French invaded and destroyed Constantinople.

Hopefully, this Admiral speaks for himself and and his stance is not that of the Italian Government. At this time, Greece has allies and supporters in France and Austria. For now there is no reason to doubt their sincerity. However, Greece should be careful in the event of a potential betrayal by her allies as has happened many times in history.

The Russians have reminded the Turks of the Battle of Navarino (see second link above) in 1828 which consolidated the liberation of Greece. The Russians have also affirmed Greece’s territorial rights that are being infringed upon by the Turks. Greece is presently conducting a strong foreign policy but Athens should be careful to maintain warm ties with Russia as well as America.

Russian and Turkish proxies are fighting on opposite sides in Libya. Syrian jihadists sponsored by Turkey are fighting in Libya and against the Armenians in the Caucuses. The same jihadists the Russians helped the Syrian government defeat. The new pro Greek statements coming from Russia could very well indicate that the Russians anticipate that Turkey is going to be an enemy.

Athens needs to act wisely and prudently and act according to Greek national interests which are based on the right of self defense against Turkish aggression. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that Washington and Moscow could both come to view Turkey as a jihadist threat. This would be the best case scenario for Greece.

Greece must act wisely and avoid being entangled in the tensions between Washington and Moscow. Athens should maintain friendly relations with both as they both seem to be moving away from Turkey. Time will tell what will happen as Greece faces potential dangers as well as great opportunities.

Categories
Letters

Letter to the Guardian

The Following letter is in response to the article, “Greece extends wall on Turkish border as refugee row deepens” (October 21). The Guardian writes that the plight of migrants has been “weaponized” by Greek and Turkish politicians. This is only half right. The migrants have been used and exploited by Ankara for the purposes of serving Turkish expansionist aims at the expense of Greece and possibly exporting the Erdogan governments Islamic Revolution by establishing influence over the people it is pushing into Greece.


 Over the past decade, Greece has accepted many migrants that have fled the chaotic and miserable situation in the Middle East. Greeks have welcomed refugees and provided them with food and shelter. However, there is a limit as to how many migrants Greece can actually accept. Greece did not support any of the Middle Eastern wars. Turkey, on the other hand supported the arming of jihadist rebels in Syria in order to overthrow the Syrian government and to establish influence over a potential jihadist state. 


Turkey is a state sponsor of terrorism and is supporting Syrian jihadists with its ally Azerbaijan in Baku’s war of aggression against Armenia. Turkey is also sponsoring Syrian jihadists in Libya. The refugees in question have only been weaponized by Turkey who are using these unfortunate people as weapons in its expansionist claims against Greece. Having supported the war in Syria, Turkey has no right to complain about refugees on its soil, and certainly no right to push them into Greek territory.


                        Theodore G. Karakostas 

   

Link to the article being responded to

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/20/greece-extends-wall-on-turkish-border-as-refugee-row-deepens

Categories
faith

The Impending Ruin Of The Ecumenical Patriarchate

The Ecumenical Patriarchate for me was always worthy of admiration and reverence as an ecclesiastical institution. I am reminded of Steven Runciman’s classic “The Great Church in Captivity” about the Patriarchate’s history under the rule of the Ottoman Empire from the fall of Constantinople to the Greek War of Independence. Runciman, a legendary historian of Byzantium wrote about the Patriarchate with a good deal of sympathy.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate survived the fall of Byzantium and the Ottoman Empire. It has appeared to have survived the demise of the Turkish Republic which was a greater threat to its existence than the Ottoman Empire ever was. The Ecumenical Patriarchate has survived much political hardship and persecution but its demise appears to be on the horizon as a result of the policies of its current Patriarch rather than as a result of Turkish oppression and brutality.

This is a profound shame. The Eastern Orthodox Church recognizes the Ecumenical Patriarch as “first among equals” and considers the Patriarchate to have a “primacy of honor”. This is not an insignificant status. Indeed, Constantinople could have done much good for the whole of Orthodoxy had its leadership been content with the recognized status that it holds.

The primary focus of the Ecumenical Patriarchate has been itself rather than the interests of Orthodoxy in general. The Ecumenical Patriarch could have been the statesman of Orthodoxy but chose instead to become a partisan figure putting forward claims on the territorial rights of autocephalous Churches that are not substantiated by canon law or Orthodox ecclesiology. The present Ecumenical Patriarch in the early years of his Patriarchy achieved some good things.

In March 1992, he convened a historic synaxis or gathering of Orthodox Patriarchs and primates at the Ecumenical Patriarchate that was truly historic. Less than a year after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Patriarchs worked together to produce a statement criticizing the Vatican for its missionary activities in Russia and other freed Orthodox countries and for supporting the Unia in Ukraine and Rumania.

The statement released stated that Orthodox dialogue with the Vatican was being limited strictly to discussions over the Uniates that were seen by Orthodoxy as a threat. It was a wonderful statement achieved through the traditional method of conciliarity. This Patriarchal reign that started with promise appears to eventually in tragedy.

Patriarch Bartholomew’s goal was to secure the existence of the Ecumenical Patriarchate after its near extinction as a result of the Turkish sponsored genocide and ethnic cleansing of the twentieth century. Patriarch Bartholomew’s primary achievement has been to upgrade the status of the Ecumenical Patriarchate from a nearly forgotten ancient Church facing severe restrictions to an internationally recognized Church that enjoys diplomatic status and protection.

This remains an impressive accomplishment. The problem regarding the Ecumenical Patriarchate has been that it thinks only in terms of itself. For example, the Patriarchate believes its interests are the interests of Orthodoxy and vice versa when this is clearly not the case. Each autocephalous Orthodox Church is inseparable from the rest and must act in accordance with the tradition of conciliarity and not independently or above the desired will of the body of local Churches.

Constantinople has adopted an authoritarian streak that is not compatible with Orthodox tradition. This ethos has led Constantinople to make fatal errors in its relations with the Russian Orthodox Church which it sees as a rival rather than as a sister Church. While the Ecumenical Patriarchate has achieved diplomatic recognition from the western world as a counter to Turkish oppression and discrimination, this has led Constantinople to align itself with extremist political interests in Washington that are anti Russian.

This collusion with the west against the Russians has tragically placed the Ecumenical Patriarchate against the greater interests of Orthodoxy. Russia is the largest Orthodox country in the world that has been targeted by western liberals and others because it is a Christian country that espouses sacred values. Constantinople should have praised the miraculous building of Churches and Cathedrals throughout Russia and should have recognized that contemporary Russia is the carrier of the great spiritual tradition of Constantinople.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate’s intervention in Ukraine has done enormous damage to Orthodox unity. The damage was not limited to Ukraine but was carried over into the Churches of Greece and Alexandria which have become severely compromised, and onto Mount Athos itself which has become divided. Constantinople’s actions are truly lamentable.

The Ukrainian crisis has been recounted in greater depth on this blog. Needless to say, the longer this crisis continues the less likely that the Ecumenical Patriarchate will recover its reputation and prestige. The Ecumenical Patriarchate’s disastrous handling of affairs in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese has further damaged its reputation and prestige.

There are certain Greek elements that have endorsed each and every disastrous decision made by the Ecumenical Patriarchate. These cheerleaders are contributing to the eventual ruin of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

Categories
books

The Transgender Craze

Book Review

Irreversible Damage by Abigail Shrier

Regnery Publishing. 2020.

“Irreversible Damage” is written by Abigail Shrier who writes for the Wall Street Journal. This book of investigative journalism is particularly enlightening as the “mainstream” media will not address this subject. The subject has to do with girls (some as young as thirteen years old) believing themselves to be “transgendered”.

Shrier recounts the influential role that both social media and youtube have played in convincing girls that they are transgendered. Furthermore, schools and Universities have contributed to undermining parents by encouraging these girls to adopt male names and identities without informing their families. Shrier has conducted interviews with both defenders of “transgenderism” and critics.

There are numerous interviews with distressed parents whose daughters went off to Colleges and Universities and subsequently proceeded to “transition” on the advice of “mental health councillors”. These stories are profoundly disturbing. Most disturbing is the hidden role played by women who have transitioned into men on Youtube who encourage their very impressionable female viewers that they are “trans gendered”.

Social media is cited as a particularly destructive influence. In some cases girls who thought they were transgendered changed their minds but found themselves under pressure by “friends” on social media not to change their minds. There are at least two mothers mentioned in this book (one who is now a member of a group that combats the trans movement) who felt it necessary to move across the country in order to remove their daughters from the influences of their friends and the schools which have been tainted by pro trans “social progressives”.

The book is very balanced and recognizes that some people have in fact benefitted from having surgery and changing genders. But, these people are very few in numbers and the author suggests that the large number of girls around America who consider themselves “trans” is a cause for alarm. Examples are made of therapists who indulge minors in their belief that they are trans and no efforts are made to be critical or objective in the interest of preventing girls from making mistakes that cannot be reversed.

The book is fascinating reading and will leave many with utter disgust at the way that young women and girls are being exploited by social and political activists in twenty first century America.