This time (because in Article from «...the Aryan's bottomless mouth...(about Kythera)» I do not start with surprise) I am surprised, amazed in front of the new Text Mr Andriopoulos (PA).
The surprise concerns two parts of the text.
Α) The theologically and rationally unjustified demand of the writer from the bishop, to denounce the writings in his favour, but also those against the Ecumenical Patriarch, of an anonymous columnist.
B) The theologically and legally groundless indirect threat against the anonymous columnist.
Also in Second reading on my response to the PA's «Phaesaius blind...», does not deal with any reference to any of my arguments that I made in his ridicule (it didn't fit), but with what really serves this rhetoric of division and slander, and that is the statement that
Γ) «He probably has little support among his flock... What he writes, in fact, reveals who Seraphim of Kythera has a relationship with. Certainly not with the Church of Greece, to which he belongs. The only thing worthy of comment is what Mr. Daskalakis writes about you, the locals, who are the flock of Seraphim of Kythera: «It is sad that I did not find any Kytherian voices protecting the bishop, except a few. Instead of reacting as one fist the faithful of the diocese, because their bishop has been targeted by dark centers, they keep silence»... Finally, I did not see any enthusiasm from the locals for the ...imaginative «miracle» that the cleric of the Metropolis Pavlos Kalliikas «revealed» (16.4.2022)..»
Α) Let us imagine a bishop all day long reading articles, watching TV and radio and answering everyone's questions, having to fend off the insults and slanders of every self-appointed «avenger» and being drawn into dialogue and controversy with every layman, even if he is of «noble» origin, being dragged and led by third parties. .
When he will shepherd a flock. When he will pray. When he will minister.
If it were up to me, I would ask every layman, every prelate, every bishop of Kythera to tell me whether he renounces the Fathers of the Church, St. Nicodemus the Athonite, Basil the Great, St. Chrysostom, St. Paisios, St. Ephraim of Katounaki and many other saints who spoke against heresies, ecumenism and pan-religion, etc.If they consider that they act and work the word of the Gospel, if they honor worthily and not unworthily the episcopal throne, if they are the exception to the rule that does nothing but alienate the faith. The fall of the fortress that the workers of darkness may enter in and lead souls to perdition. And the bishop of Cypher, I imagine without fanfare and fireworks, would reply «God knows».
B) Reading the article of «Porphyritis» I do not find that there is anything objectionable enough for the e-crime service to move and act to reveal the name of the author (I smell bluff).
On the contrary, I find that the self-appointed protector of the «wronged», indirectly slanders the author for committing a criminal offence, which tarnishes the reputation of the anonymous person, who is certainly for some people anonymous.
It is based on verses such as
«Bartholomew the Dialogue«, blaspheming and blaspheming Jesus Christ, tears His Church, dialogues with all heretics and irreligious and crushes those who resist the Orthodox». And the PA continues to call and accuse: «I urge - and ask - you now to repudiate this shameless anonymous text in its entirety. If you do not, you leave us room to believe that you condone it, if you have not instigated it, which I do not want to believe...I have initiated the process of disclosing the anonymous ’Porfirite« through the cybercrime prosecution.»
I think the Ecumenical Patriarch who « blasphemy because of and for the sake of Jesus Christ...» as the anonymous columnist says, is committing a major ecclesiastical and theological offence. But under Greek law - if I am not mistaken - blasphemy has been decriminalized. So the anonymous columnist is not chastising the Ecumenical Patriarch somewhere for breaking the law. So where is the criminality?;
If you can accuse Christ freely and unstatedly, can't a third party confirm it?;
The anonymous author also states that the title «You blind fool....», PA was inspired by looking at himself in the mirror. If a layman, even if he is a «ruler» , can characterize a bishop of the Orthodox Church with this despicable characterization, insulting the entire congregation - and even if he ends his writings with the typical «With Respect»- and even for matters that do not concern faith and doctrine but disobedience (always for the PA) to an ecclesiastical authority, let alone cannot a second layman blaspheme the «franchisee» on the same issue? What immunity of characterization and judgment does an officiating bishop have that a bishop does not?;
In conclusion, I don't see anything objectionable that will attract the curiosity of the Cybercrime Unit.
His Eminence of Kythera, in every letter or writing, uses with love and humility a mild and unifying word. Much milder than the Holy Fathers when circumstances demanded it. St. Mark the Noble called «tramps» and «scoundrels» heretics and their followers, in a letter to the Bishop of Euripus Theophanes. Bishop Seraphim, however, uses to a great extent , milder phraseology, without giving a controlling tone to his letters.
On the contrary, I caught on the internet an abominable text of the PA. I think it is steaming and contains expressions and characterizations that smear the hypocrisies of bishops , heads of dioceses , with this mud being hurled at the flock of these dioceses. Vulgar insinuations , which not only do not refer to Orthodoxy but also to any Christian heretical confession .
St Nicodemus of Mount Athos and the Rudder are also blasphemed.
I quote the link as I am ashamed to reproduce such vulgar expressions and thoughts (Link).
«Freaky sun, serene earth»
This gentleman, the PA teaches children. Beyond the theology he teaches (I shudder to think) , he is called upon to teach values , to mould personalities.
If this was not really said, I humbly apologise. It is the duty of the author of these abominable expressions to repudiate them, or at any rate, if they are not true, to deny them.
Otherwise, there is perhaps (I will probably consult my legal advisors so as not to do anyone any harm) a significant legal issue and misdirection.
Is the Ecumenical Patriarch who distributes offshoots aware of these aberrations? The Ministry of Education? The parents?;
C) The non-participation of the people in ecclesiastical matters is characteristic of the modern Greek. .
Not only the people of Kythera-Antikythera. The new Greek is indifferent to matters concerning his soul. He is only concerned with what concerns his pocket, colic, well-being or even material survival.
And so it becomes an easy target for the lynch mobs of faith. To the sowers of deception and maliciousness.
Also the PA , tries to turn the faithful and newspaper readers of the diocese of Kythera against the bishop by stating that «He probably has little support among his flock.» as well as the bishop and the congregation against the writer, who finally finds that the neo-Hellene is indifferent to matters of faith and not especially the Kytherians. Seeds of division and upheaval with the purpose of cultivating fruits of hatred against the bishop.
Also who «Saints are alive and have no need of brilliant clergymen»if not St. Nicodemus the Athonite and all the newly-consecrated saints who spoke out against heresy, maladies and errors? I do not see any imitation and honor in these saints by many church primates and false laymen even «rulers».
On the contrary, insults , profanity, name-calling, name-calling and insults (see previous link).
Ap. Paul recommends: «Let not the word be spoken out of your mouth, lest I proceed out of your mouth.» (Eph. 4, 29) and below emphasizes: «Let bitterness and wrath and anger and anger and crying and blasphemy be kindled against you with all malice.» (Eph, 4, 31).
Instead of our mouths uttering «honeymoon honeymoon speeches good reasons»is it possible that the «pammy», as John of Sinaiticus calls it, can be uttered as blasphemy?;
Mr PA has clearly targeted the bishop of Kythera. He has made a profession, a hobby and a daily occupation of provocations, ridicule and attempts to frame him. I am not in a position to know the exact motives. Is he being groomed by those in charge of the Church? I don't know. Is he paying off patriarchal trophies? I cannot say for certain. Are his actions and his «noble» speech a figment of my imagination? Is it a mental compulsion to relieve some ideology? I am not an expert.
Surely many in the governing church would like to «axe» the wood called the bishop of Kythera. And they are trying. It's hard, because wood endures.
That's why they send the junk to slowly gnaw the wood, create strife, leave impressions, smear names, confuse the flock, and when the time comes, then the «axe» will strike.
What psychological or dialectical analysis can achieve a depth measurement of the mystery, the motives of the persecutor of the bishop? Abyss of the human soul.
What drives the «Lord of the Throne» to act as a thought police and speech police? As a vigilante of conformity , not to the Tradition of the Church, but to the dictates of the evil-doers?;
What springboard causes these mental ejections and plunges?;
I can't judge. I'm not sure about Mr PA. Until a few days ago I didn't even know him.
But what I am now sure of (for the persecutor) is that we will now walk the rough path together. «Hand in hand. And where it comes out.
«For God is with us and not with you»
Aristides Daskalakis
