Friday, December 22, 2023

Jad Ganem: When will We Smash the Idols?

Arabic original here.

When will We Smash the Idols?

Everyone following developments in the Orthodox world today notices that the essence of the crisis afflicting the Orthodox ecclesiastical institution lies in the re-drawing of the map of the Orthodox world on the basis of non-ecclesiastical considerations following a dialectic of "fragmentation and expansion".

Following the fall of the Ottoman Empire last century and the accompanying diminishment of the role of the patriarch of Constantinople as head of the Orthodox millet in that empire, the emergence of local, national churches in Bulgaria, Romania, Greece, Serbia and Albania, and Greece's loss in the war with Turkey and the consequent population exchange, Patriarch Meletius (Metaxakis) developed a policy of expansion, creating new dioceses dependent on his patriarchate in Europe and America on the basis of the theory of "barbarian lands" that he invented, in addition to seizing a number of dioceses that had belonged to the Patriarchate of Moscow and granting them autonomy after the fall of tsarist Russia.

In parallel, the Church of Russia practiced its own policy of expansion during the tsarist period, doing away with the independence of the Church of Georgia and incorporating it into its canonical jurisdiction, before turning around and granting it autocephaly at Stalin's request. This church likewise established dioceses in the countries of the diaspora and autonomous churches dependent on it in China and Japan.

Alongside the policy of expansion, Patriarch Meletius (Metaxakis) inaugurated a policy of fragmenting the Church of Moscow by granting autocephaly to the Church of Poland and incorporating the churches in Finland and Estonia into its own jurisdiction. This came as a delayed reaction to the role that the Russian Empire had played in supporting churches dependent on Constantinople in their efforts to obtain autocephaly.

The borders of the Orthodox churches stabilized during the Cold War, until Patriarch Bartholomew resumed the policy of fragmenting the Patriarchate of Moscow in 1996 by establishing an autonomous church dependent on him in Estonia. Since 2016, he has quickened the pace of this fragmentation by granting autocephaly to the schismatics in Ukraine and by creating a parallel church in Lithuania. Moscow responded by establishing an exarchate dependent on it in Africa.

It is clear that the changes to the borders of the local churches according to non-ecclesiastical considerations contradicts the apostolic principle upon which evangelism is based and is instead centered on the principle of expanding influence.

Here we must wonder why the churches that had depended on Moscow must belong to Constantinople. Why should there not be, for example, an autocephalous church covering Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Finland and Sweden, on the model of the Church of Czechia and Slovakia, such that Constantinople's decisions don't just seem to be acts of revenge against the Patriarchate of Moscow? And why does the Church of Constantinople refuse to treat the Ukrainian issue through a common Orthodox decision that prevents the authorities from persecuting the legitimate church in the country?

Perhaps the most important question for both Moscow and Constantinople is why do they have this attachment to a policy of expanding their influence instead of respecting the apostolic principle of establishing autocephalous local churches capable of managing their own affairs themselves? Would it not be wise to admit that the map of the Orthodox world needs to be re-drawn on new principles which do not focus on dependence on ancient centers that refuse to admit that bearing witness in today's world must be based on the principle of cooperation, mutual complimentarity and respect for the specificities and aspirations of nations? Just imagine if the Apostles had wanted to attach every place where they evangelized to the church in Jerusalem! Or if the Third Ecumenical Council had not taken account of the situation at the time and had refused to create a patriarchate for Constantinople, then the capital of the empire!

When will we smash the idols that we think are the essence of our faith?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

The Patriarch of Constantinople is clearly deranged and out of his mind. Even worse than Meletios Metaxas, of thrice wretched memory. I think this is why they warn drug dealers not to get high on their own supply. As a Greek, I am incredibly ashamed and embarrassed by this egomaniac. Anaxios!!