Sunday, February 23, 2020

Who is going to Amman to discuss Ukraine and who isn't

Here is the current accounting...

Nay: 9 / Aye: 6

Ecumenical Patriarchate

Patriarchate of Alexandria

Patriarchate of Antioch

Patriarchate of Jerusalem - Hosting

Church of Russia - Committed

Church of Serbia - Committed

Church of Romania - Committed

Church of Bulgaria

Church of Georgia

Church of Cyprus

Church of Greece

Church of Poland - Committed

Church of Albania

Church of Czech Lands and Slovakia - Committed

Orthodox Church in America - Russians can always send as part of Russian contingent

Orthodox Church of Ukraine


  1. Um, The OCA is an autocephalous church; or, if you don't believe that, as some don't, it's at least not part of the Moscow Patriarchate. So "the Russians can always send as part of Russian contingent" sounds peculiar. Please flesh it out.

    1. Not according to a lot of Churches. So when the OCA does get involved internationally they do so under the aegis of the Russian Church. This is especially true when the event takes place within the bounds of a patriarchate that does not recognize it. So, Jerusalem, for example...

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    3. The OCA is technically recognized by some as an autonomous Church of the Moscow Patriarchate. Yet the disparity couldn't be more obvious. The OCA commemorates Patriarch Bartholomew, while the autonomous churches of Moscow don't. This disparity is possible because the OCA is autocephalous in relation to Russia. Yet if Russia were to order and "send" the OCA anywhere, then that itself would essentially be a retraction of their autocephaly agreement.

      Anyhow, the last thing Russia wants at this meeting is the example of the OCA that we can all just get along with Patriarch Bartholomew.

  2. Recognizing Self ordained, defrocked and excommunicated schismatics who refuse to repent of the grave sin of schism? Seems legitimate.

    Recognizing uppity Americans who don’t want to pay taxes to the motherlands?


    1. I'm not stating things the way they should be, I am stating the way things are.

    2. Oh of course, not taking a shot at you Father, just couldn’t help but comment on the absurd hypocrisy, apparently Americans would have a better shot at being recognized if we were ethnic schismatics instead of inheritors of a church started by saints.

      But oh well, honestly I’m glad that church politics don’t have to (directly) affect the day to day of working out our salvation. Even if they are embarrassing and disappointing.

    3. This meeting should be the perfect opportunity for Patriarch Kyrill, Metropolitan Onuphrey, and Metropolitan Epiphany of the OCU to all come together and have an honest dialogue. The meeting is not being billed as an official council of the Orthodox Church, and there is no Divine Liturgy. No communion necessary. Unfortunately the OCU is not invited.

      How can there be any purposeful discussion about the problem in Ukraine without inviting the relevant parties in Ukraine? Instead, the whole point of this meeting appears to be for Moscow to once again deliver it's one point monologue: green dad bad!

  3. Once again, you go around in circles. You can't seem to convince anyone on Monomakhos.Here ok seems you have two allies. Why would a Patriarch and a Metropolitan of an autonomous church meet with a doubtfully ordained layman? Especially if the doubtfully ordained layman invaded the Metropolitan's canonical territory.
    And please don't bring up St. Alexis Toth again. He came into the church, renouncing his Papist heresy. No Orthodox church deprived him of his priesthood; he was received into the church by a canonical Orthodox bishop.
    And don't bring up Lev Puhalo either. I don't care what the OCA says; he was synodically deposed as a deacon. At least one OCA bishop recognized that Puhalo was deposed. His one-time vicar, the newly-reposed Bishop Varlaam, is another matter. Varlaam was never ordained by ROCOR in the first place. I will pray for him as a bishop.If Puhalo departs this life before I do, I shall pray for him as the layman Lev Puhalo.

    1. Metropolitan Epiphany was never deposed by anyone, and he was received into the Orthodox Church by a canonical Orthodox bishop, Patriarch Bartholomew. If you recognize the episcopacy of Bishop Varlaam, then Metropolitan Epiphany's is the same. Both were ordained bishops by the "Kievan Patriarchate".

    2. Mr. Lipper, on the Monomakhos site, you admitted that you don't have theological training. I guess it's best that you pontificate here, seeing that you allies such as David the Ukrainiophile, Jake the Farter, and others. Varlaam was recognized by the OCA out of economia. And not every OCA bishop was on board with it. Your Patriarch took an unordained layman and proclaimed him a Metropolitan.My late mother, who was a WASP and(unfortunately) an atheist, had a saying,"Saying so doesn't make it so." Keep preaching to your allies on this site. I just wonder what happened to the sensible stuff you used to post on Monomakhos.I have not the time to waste of defenders of Bartholomew and his papal pretenses. And that's that.

  4. "Instead, the whole point of this meeting appears to be for Moscow to once again deliver it's one point monologue: green dad bad!"

    I agree, this is going to be another Russian "canonical" monologue.

    "Why would a Patriarch and a Metropolitan of an autonomous church meet with..."

    Your right - when you conceive of the Church, Life, Man, and God as a legalistic monologue what's the point of talking...

  5. But Boris, your Rocor was in communion with various unordained schismatic groups for about half a century. Why is this a problem for you now?