Dissent at Constantinople?

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.