The “Official” Church, termed canonical, was created by men who were

themselves outside the ancient faith.  This man made church is best termed

Neo Orthodox because it was established in opposition to the ancient faith as

once delivered to the Saints.

 

The Russian Orthodox Patriarchate was established by extortion.  

 

HISTORY OF NEO ORTHODOXY

_________________________________________________

 

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE VARIOUS

OLD WORLD EASTERN PATRIARCHS WAS A FRACTURE

FROM THE FAITH AND PRAXIS OF THE EARLY CHURCH.

THE NEWLY FORMED PATRIARCHS NOW DEFINED

THE ‘ORTHODOX CHURCH’ TO MEAN THOSE SUBJECT

TO THEIR SELF ASSUMED AUTHORITY AND MAN

MADE POSITION.  THIS ESTABLISHED AN “OFFICIAL CHURCH”

THAT IS CONTRARY TO THE FAITH OF ORTHODOXY.

AS SHOWN BELOW, THESE MEN WERE ALREADY HERETICAL

AND IN THEIR LUST FOR POWER ESTABLISHED WHAT

CAN ONLY BE CALLED NEO ORTHODOXY. 

 

Origin of Neo-Orthodoxy

BISHOP BRIAN J. KENNEDY, O.S.B.

 

The term Neo-Orthodox is used to define the church

 created by men who were and are under

the influence and illusion of Satan and his demonic

minions.  Hiding under the mantel of the title “Patriarch”

or as they prefer to

be called “His All Holiness”

 they continue to spew forth the heresy and the

illusions spawned in hell by

the demonic forces. 

 

Every Jurisdiction is man made. Christ and the Apostles did not establish any Jurisdiction.  The office of Patriarch was created not by Angels or by Divine Mandate but by men, and sanctioned, titled and empowered by the Secular State.  Those who occupy these ancients Apostolic Sees have redefined the Church in Political terms.  They seek not to establish, preserve and defend the truths of Holy Orthodoxy but rather to establish, preserve and defend their political power. 

 

The Eastern (Greek) Orthodox Patriarchate is generally considered to have been established in the year 451.  At the time the Office of Greek Patriarch was established, the Eastern Church had a long history of heresy and schism from the ancient faith. The Holy Spirit did not inspire the heresies or the so called church leaders who teach these heresies. Where error and heresy abound, the devil is ever found.

 

The Office of Patriarch was the beginning of the Neo Orthodox Church (the church established by men) and the first order of business was to establish an office higher than Bishop.  The Church established by Christ upon the Apostles had no office higher than Bishop.  Prior to the establishment of the office of Patriarch, the Bishop at Constantinople was called an Arch Bishop.  The term Arch Bishop was basically a meaningless title indicating he had authority over the Greek population in Turkey.  He was based out of the city of Constantinople that today is called Istanbul, Turkey.

 

In their effort to establish their political superiority and seek justification for their self-aggrandizement they spared no expense to ensure their titles, claims to authority and position in the Imperial Court and in their man made church.  Prior to the establishment of the office of Patriarch, the Eastern Church had a long-term experience as being in error and schism from the ancient faith.  Most notable of these are:

    Antioch, Paul of Samosata 260-269 Modalist
    Antioch, Eulalius c.322 Arian
    Antioch, Euphronius c.327-c.329 Arian
    Constantinople, Eusebius 341-42 Arian
    Constantinople, Macedonius 342-60 Semi-Arian
    Antioch, Leontius 344-58 Arian
    Alexandria, George 357-61 Arian
    Antioch, Eudoxius 358-60 Arian
    Constantinople, Eudoxius 360 Arian
    Antioch, Euzoius 361-78 Arian
    Constantinople, Nestorius 428-31 Nestorian!
   

AT THIS POINT THE OFFICE OF GREEK ORTHODOX PATRIARCH

WAS ESTABLISHED IN 451 AND THE FIVE PATRIARCHS OF EASTERN ORTHODOXY

WERE FIRMLY ESTABLISHED LET US REVIEW

THE MEN THAT HEADED THE EASTERN CHURCH AND THEIR HERESY:

Alexandria, Dioscorus 448-51 Monophysite
    Alexandria, Timothy Aelurus 457-60, 475-77 Monophysite
    Antioch, Peter the Fuller 470,475-7, 482-88 Monophysite
    Constantinople, Acacius 471-89 Monophysite
    Antioch, John Codonatus 477,488 Monophysite
    Alexandria, Peter Mongo 477-90 Monophysite 
    Antioch, Palladius 488-98 Monophysite
    Constantinople, Phravitas 489-90 Monophysite
    Constantinople, Euphemius 490-96 Monophysite
    Alexandria, Athanasius II 490-96 Monophysite
    Alexandria, John II 496-505 Monophysite
    Alexandria, John III 505-518 Monophysite
    Constantinople, Timothy I 511-17 Monophysite
    Antioch, Severus 512-18 Monophysite
    Alexandria, Timothy III 518-35 Monophysite
    Constantinople, Anthimus 535-36 Monophysite
    Alexandria, Theodosius 535-38 Monophysite
    Antioch, Sergius c.542-c.557 Monophysite
    Antioch, Paul "the Black" c.557-578 Monophysite
    Alexandria, Damianus 570-c.605 Monophysite
    Antioch, Peter Callinicum 578-91 Monophysite
    Constantinople, Sergius 610-38 Monothelite
    Antioch, Anthanasius c.621-629 Monothelite
    Alexandria, Cyrus c.630-642 Monothelite
    Constantinople, Pyrrhus 638-41 Monothelite
    Antioch, Macedonius 640-c.655 Monothelite
    Constantinople, Paul II 641-52 Monothelite
    Constantinople, Peter 652-64 Monothelite
    Antioch, Macarius c.655-681 Monothelite
    Constantinople, John VI 711-15 Monothelite
To mention but a few.

     

The demonic spirit behind the establishment of the office of the Patriarchs is demonstrated by these historical facts which may be briefly summarized as follows: All three of the great Eastern sees were under the jurisdiction of heretical patriarchs simultaneously during five different periods: 357-60 (Arian), 475-77, 482-96, and 512-17 (all Monophysite), and 640-42 (Monothelite): a total of 26 years, or 9% of the time from 357 to 642. At least two out of three of the sees suffered under a heterodox "shepherd" simultaneously for 112 years, or 33% of the period from 341 to 681 (or, two-thirds heretical for one-third of the time), Thus the East, as represented by its three greatest bishops, was at least one-third heretical for nearly three-quarters of the time over a 340-year span.  If we examine each city separately, we find, for example, that between 475 and 675, the patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria, and Antioch were outside the catholic orthodox faith for 41%, 55%, and 58% of the time respectively.        

 

Furthermore, these deplorable conditions often manifested themselves for long, unbroken terms: Antioch and Alexandria were Monophysite for 49 and 63 straight years (542-91 and 475-538 respectively), while Constantinople, the seat of the Byzantine Empire and the "New Rome," was embroiled in the Monothelite heresy for 54 consecutive years (610-64). There were at least (the list is not exhaustive) 41 heretical Patriarchs of these sees between 260 and 711.  

 

Furthermore, essentially the entire Eastern Church seriously missed the mark doctrinally on at least two occasions: the "Robber Synod" at Ephesus in 449, and in the signing of the Monophysite Henoticon of the Emperor in 482. The record of heresy in the East, then, could scarcely be more sobering for those Orthodox who define the Church in terms of subordination or Communion with a Patriarch.  

 

Eutyches [a Monophysite] was supported by the Imperial Court, and by Dioscorus the Patriarch of Alexandria . . . A general Council was summoned for the ensuing summer at Ephesus [in 449] . . . It was attended by sixty metropolitans, ten from each of the great divisions of the East; the whole number of bishops assembled amounted to one hundred and thirty-five.

 

The proceedings that followed were of so violent a character that the Council has gone down in history under the name of the Latrocinium or "Gang of Robbers."  Eutyches was honorably acquitted, and his doctrine received . . . which seems to have been the spontaneous act of the assembled Fathers.  The proceedings ended by Dioscorus excommunicating the Pope, and the Emperor issuing an edict in approval of the decision of the Council . . .  The Council seems to have been unanimous, in the restoration of Eutyches; a more complete decision can hardly be imagined. It is true the whole number of signatures now extant, one hundred and eight, may seem small out of a thousand, the number of Sees in the East; but the attendance of Councils always bore a representative character.  

 

The whole number of East and West was about eighteen hundred, yet the second Ecumenical Council was attended by only one hundred and fifty, which is but a twelfth part of the whole number; the Third Council by about two hundred, or a ninth; the Council of Nicaea itself numbered only three hundred and eighteen Bishops.

 

Moreover, when we look through the names subscribed to the Synodal decision, we find that the misbelief, or misapprehension, or weakness, to which this great offence must be attributed, was no local phenomenon, but the unanimous sin of Bishops in every Patriarchate and of every school of the East.



Three out of the four patriarchs were in favor of the heresiarch, the fourth being on his trial. Of these Domnus of Antioch and Juvenal of Jerusalem acquitted him, on the grounds of his confessing the faith of Nicaea and Ephesus . . . Dioscorus . . . was on this occasion supported by those Churches which had so nobly stood by their patriarch Athanasius in the great Arian conflict.  These three Patriarchs were supported by the Exarchs of Ephesus and Caesarea in Cappadocia; and both of these as well as Domnus and Juvenal, were supported in turn by their subordinate Metropolitans. Even the Sees under the influence of Constantinople, which was the remaining sixth division of the East, took part with Eutyches . . . Such was the state of Eastern Christendom in the year 449 JUST TWO YEARS BEFORE THE GREEK PATRIARCHATE WAS FIRMLY ESTABLISHED;

 

Conclusion:  The Five Patriarchs were established by men who, in order to satisfy their need for power, prestige and wealth created a “Neo-Orthodox” church. The church created by man.

 

The Eastern Church had a long and unquestioned history of heresy before the establishment of the office of Patriarch.

 

The Eastern Church had a long history of heresy after the office of Patriarch was established.

 

The Eastern Orthodox Church remains in heresy today in their teaching about Ecumenism and other heresies too numerous to mention in this short article. The Eastern Orthodox leadership remains the leaders of a church made by man TEACHING AS DOGMA WHAT IS ONLY HUMAN PRECEPTS.

 

THE ORIGIN OF THE MOSCOW PATRIARCHATE

 

Jeremias, Patriarch of Constantinople, undertook a journey to Moscow, to obtain money in his battle against his rival Metrophanes and to drive him, by the force of money, from the Patriarchal throne. On this

occasion, the Patriarch of Constantinople, was physically forced and was forced by his financial need to yield to the Russian demand to create the Russian Orthodox Patriarchate. Accordingly in a council assembled at Moscow in the year 1589, Jeremias nominated and proclaimed Job, archbishop of Russia, the “first patriarch” of the Muscovites. It is clear that prior to the need to receive help from Russia, the Patriarch of Constantinople and the rest of Eastern Orthodoxy viewed the Russian Orthodox Church as being outside the church. The Russian Orthodox Church was an ‘independent’ church.  In effect “Patriarch Job” forced Jeremias II to create the Moscow Patriarchate and to now view the Russian Orthodox Church as part of “Canonical” Orthodoxy.  The Patriarchate of Moscow was born of extortion and nationalism.

TODAY, THE PATRIARCH OF MOSCOW WANTS TO BE CALLED “HIS ALL HOLINESS”. 

_________________________________________________

 

LETTER OF ST. ATHANASIUS 

In the fourth Century the Age of Apostasy was firmly established when a group of heretics, schismatic and other apostates gathered together to form the “official” church.  Their unholy plan was to consolidate all power into their hands by claiming only those in submission to them were part of the church.  These men called themselves “Patriarchs” and to this day they operate outside the church established by Christ upon the Apostles. Their motivation was to combat the truth of Biblical Orthodoxy and established as dogma what was only human precepts.    

____________________________________________________

 

With the beginning of the Neo Orthodox church in the 4th century, the Biblical church was physically ousted from their churches and Monasteries.  Clergy who were remaining faithful were ostracized. The Biblical Church of the Apostles was relegated to the fringes and that is where it remains today.  The heretics that established the manmade office of Patriarch controlled the buildings but lost the faith. 

 

Letter of Saint Athanasius to His Flock

 

The Biblical Church Ravaged in the Fourth Century

 

Saint Athanasius lived in the fourth century during the time of what used to be considered the greatest crisis of faith ever to befall the Orthodox Catholic Church, the Arian Heresy. (The Arians denied the Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ). The vast majority of Churchmen and all the newly established Patriarchs fell into this heresy, so much so that Saint Jerome wrote of the period, "The whole world groaned and was amazed to find itself Arian". Athanasius was the Orthodox Bishop of Alexandria in Egypt for 46 years. He was banned from his diocese at least five times and spent a total of 17 years in exile. He even suffered an unjust excommunication from Pope Liberius (325-366) who was under Arian influence. It is a cold fact of history that Athanasius stood virtually alone against the onslaught of heretical teaching ravaging the larger Church of his day – begetting the familiar phrase, "Athanasius contra mundum", that is, "Athanasius against the world".

 

Athanasius wrote to the Biblical Church Fathers, "May God console you! ... What saddens you ... is it the fact that others have occupied the churches by violence, while during this time you are on the outside? It is a fact that they have the premises – but you have the Apostolic Faith. They can occupy our churches, but they are outside the true Faith. You remain outside the places of worship, but the Faith dwells within you. Let us consider: what is more important, the place or the Faith? The true Faith, obviously. Who has lost and who has won in the struggle – the one who keeps the premises or the one who keeps the Faith? True, the premises are good when the Apostolic Faith is preached there; they are holy if everything takes place there in a holy way ...

 

"You are the ones who are happy; you who remain within the Church by your Faith, who hold firmly to the foundations of the Faith which has come down to you from Scripture and Apostolic Tradition. And if an execrable jealousy has tried to shake it on a number of occasions, it has not succeeded. They are the ones who have broken away from it in the present crisis. No one, ever, will prevail against your Faith, beloved Brothers. And we believe that God will give us our churches back some day.

 

"Thus, the more violently they try to occupy the places of worship, the more they separate themselves from the Church. They claim that they represent the Church; but in reality, they are the ones who are expelling themselves from it and going astray. Even if true Orthodox Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ."

 

Other Patristic Testimony to The Abysmal State of the Church at the time Of the Arian Heresy

 

Cappodocia: Saint Basil says about the year 372: "Religious people keep silence, but every blaspheming tongue is let loose. Sacred things are profaned; those of the laity who are sound in the Faith avoid the places of worship as schools of impiety, and raise their hands in solitude, with groans and tears to the Lord in Heaven." Four years after he writes: "Matters have come to this pass: the people have left their houses of prayer, and assembled in the deserts, – a pitiable sight; women and children, old men, and men otherwise infirm, wretchedly faring in the open air, amid most profuse rains and snowstorms and winds and frosts of winter; and again in summer under a scorching sun. To this they submit, because they will have no part of the wicked leaven." Again: "Only one offense is now vigorously punished an accurate observance of our fathers' traditions. For this cause the pious are driven from their countries and transported into deserts."

 

Moscow Patriarchate Owns Hotel That Helps Offer Abortions

 

Posted By Hieromonk Enoch on Monday, March 26 | 3/26/2012 10:52:00 PM

 

Moscow Patriarchate Owns Hotels That Helps Offer Abortions

 

Probably one of the worst things I've seen.  Was it not enough for the Ecumenical Patriarch to say

aborting children (like 'retarded' kids) was alright; must the Moscow Patriarch now own

hotels (which are described as 'great spiritual centers') which help people get abortions? Can this wake some people up to what the MP is? Not a Church, but a Soviet creation of a Schism, which in turn

got big, and now is a money making machine bent on political power and compromise to the nth degree.

 

Article date March 9th, 2012

 

The Hotel "Danilovskaya" built "for the reception of travelers" in the buffer zone of St. Daniel

Monastery in 1988, the 1000th anniversary of Christianity in Russia. Above the main entrance

of the hotel is the logo and the Patriarch stated that the property belongs to the Moscow Patriarchate.

The hotel hosts ROC conferences and receives delegations and guests from the hospitality

peculiar to Russia, according to the site of the hotel . The "Danilov" Conference hall is

decorated with the emblem of the Patriarch and many icons.

 

Among other surgeries offered is "virginity restoration" surgery. This fits right in line with the Patriarchate's general objective of offering a facade of the truth.

 

____________________________________________

 

 

World Orthodoxy: 62% of American Orthodox are pro-abortion

 

As Orthodox Christians in the United States seek a new unity out of ethnic fragmentation, they must grapple with the fact that many who say they cherish the faith nevertheless ignore its teachings and practices.

 

"They see the Orthodox Church in an unorthodox way," said Alexei Krindatch, research director of the Patriarch Athenagoras Orthodox Institute at the University of California-Berkeley, who conducted an

indepth study of Orthodox Christians in the United States.

 

He spoke in Ligonier at a national conference of Orthodox Christian Laity, church activists from

across all ethnic jurisdictions. They welcomed this year's call from the patriarchs of all of the Eastern European and Middle Eastern Orthodox churches to begin forming united Orthodox churches

in places such as North America and Australia. The patriarchs instructed all Orthodox bishops in

North America to begin meeting together to deal with the issues of their own regions. Groups such as Orthodox Christian Laity want to help the bishops along that path.

 

Orthodox Christians have a high sense of identification with their faith, Mr. Krindatch said. Eighty-seven percent said they couldn't imagine being anything but Orthodox, compared to 70 percent of

Catholics who felt the same way about their church. But although more than 70 percent of Orthodox identify themselves as conservative or traditional -- wanting no or slow change –

many also consider key teachings of the faith optional.

 

Mr. Krindatch found that 60 percent believed they could be good Orthodox Christians without going to church every Sunday -- and they attended less frequently than Catholics or evangelical Protestants.

 

More than a quarter believed it was unnecessary to give time and money to either the church or

to help the poor. Another study found that 62 percent of Orthodox Christians believed abortion

should be legal in all or most cases.

 

Metropolitan Jonah, national leader of the Russian-rooted Orthodox Church in America,

reacted strongly to the abortion findings, telling the assembly, "If 60 percent of our people support abortion, then we have failed miserably in our teaching."

 

YOUR GRACE, HOW COULD IT BE OTHERWISE?  THE PEOPLE LEARN FROM THE CHURCH LEADERS

WHO FAVOR ABORTION AND EVEN SUPPORT FORCED ABORTIONS

___________________________________________________________

 

 

Moscow Patriarch Head in Ukraine: Abortion Should Be Legal.

 

Posted By Hieromonk Enoch on Thursday, April 19 | 4/19/2012 02:30:00 PM

 

Of course, it seems this is turning out to be par for the course of the World 'Orthodox' Patriarchates and their organizations. If the excuse is that it will go underground, how is this different than the saying we shouldn't be against Satanic child-sacrifice; because if we outlaw it, it will go underground. Surely the point of the law is to protect innocents against horrifically mangled and butchered deaths, not to make platitudes about how abortion is evil but to support its continued legal existence in ones own country,  as Met. Vladimir does. But, then again, the Moscow Patriarch is running abortion services; after all, why interfere with the money train?

 

 

The head of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church – Moscow Patriarchate does not support a prohibition of forced abortion and believes that the church should be governed by the laws and morals.

FAVORS FORCED ABORTIONS - WOW

 

Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine Vladimir is against a legal prohibition against abortion, because he believes that it will only lead to the fact that the operations would be covert. He stated this in an interview with the First National .

 

 

THIS IS AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE – YOUR FUTURE AND THE FUTURE OF OUR

CHILDREN DEPEND ON IT.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HTSwUig2-0&feature=related

 

Home Page

http://www.celticorthodoxchurch.com

   

THE ERROR OF EASTERN ORTHODOXY

THE NEO ORTHODOX DENY THE BLOOD ATONEMENT OF CHRIST

http://www.celticorthodoxchurch.com/SALVATION.html

 

 

 Home page: http://www.celticorthodoxchurch.com