“There is no such crime that he would not risk, at least under pain of the gallows” - the well-known phrase of Karl Marx about a capitalist aiming for a 300% profit. So for the Patriarch of Constantinople there is no such crime, if only to triple his flock (now the CP belongs to a little more than 5 million believers). “Even if under pain of the gallows” (sometimes literally), the ecumenical patriarch is always ready to take risks for this. In the 20th century, the Patriarchate of Constantinople (it is often called Phanar, the district of Istanbul where the patriarchate is traditionally located) gained a reputation as the "Trojan horse" of the Orthodox world.
A lot has already been said about the illegal issuance of autocephaly to Kyiv. Istanbul Patriarch Bartholomew for the first time in church history provides "independence" to a hierarchy that does not exist. It's like issuing a civil passport to a person who has not even been conceived yet. And it is symbolic that Bartholomew at the same time officially allowed the so-called "second marriage for the priesthood", that is, in church language, he fell into "adulterous heresy."
So we can say that the future "autocephalous Ukrainian Orthodox Church" will be the fruit of heretical adultery. Everything seems to be there: Orthodox churches, and humble parishioners in them, and bishops at the head, and "sovereign independence" - and there is no one to grant independence. It so happened, and in order for “autocephaly” to still come into being, you will have to rape someone a little, and copulate with someone in an unconventional way. So what, Bartholomew and the Kiev authorities will say, "we are all born in sin." But there is original sin, and there are personal, unrepentant sins, they bind the sinner hand and foot. So the Phanar, a serial criminal of church laws, is following the suicidal path of schism.
Patriarch Bartholomew, President Petro Poroshenko, Poroshenko's wife
After the release of the Tomos (decree) on Ukrainian autocephaly, according to the plan of Patriarch Bartholomew and President Petro Poroshenko, a “Constituent Assembly” should be held, the members of which will conceive a new religious organization. The composition of this meeting is known in advance - these are representatives of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church Kyiv Patriarchate (UOC-KP) and the dwarf "Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church" (UAOC), as well as a small number of defectors from the Moscow Patriarchate (MP).
The most notable of the defectors is Archimandrite Kirill (Govorun), former head of the Department for External Church Relations of the UOC-MP. It is not without reason that he is assigned the role of "the ideologist of autocephaly." The archimandrite began promoting the idea of Tomos back in 2008. But it is unlikely that he ever had a serious influence on the adoption of historical decisions. Archimandrite Kirill is an intellectual and aesthete, and also a "collector of theocracies", as he called himself on his page on Facebook. Rather, he is one of those “freethinkers” whom the revolution generated by them quickly processes from humanitarians into humus.
Archimandrite Kirill (Govorun)
The Moscow Patriarchate did not want to believe in Tomos until last day, until the last meeting of Patriarchs Kirill and Bartholomew, held in August 2018. The head of the UOC-MP, Metropolitan Onufry (Berezovsky), spoke about the actions of the Phanar as follows: “Today great country Byzantium became Turkey, and the faith there is now not Orthodox. Today, Orthodox believers there can be counted on the fingers. Those who have brought their homeland to the point where it has turned from an Orthodox power into a Muslim state want to command us and teach us how we should live. They also want to bring our Ukraine to the state to which they brought their Motherland. Therefore, there is no moral or canonical right to appoint exarchs here and interfere in our affairs,” he told Inter TV channel.
Anathema of the patriarch on all Greeks
The Patriarchs of Constantinople committed the most terrible betrayals against themselves, that is, ethnic Greeks, and against the Russian Orthodox Church, the main pillar of world Orthodoxy. The point of no return, in my opinion, was the anathema proclaimed in 1821 by Patriarch Gregory V of Constantinople (1745–1821). In fact, he excommunicated from the Church ... the entire Orthodox Greek people. To be absolutely precise, the Ecumenical Patriarch in 1821 twice anathematized fellow believers. The first anathema was addressed to the Greeks, who inhabited only the province of Ugrovlachia, where there were the most massive demonstrations against the Turkish invaders. But the Turkish Sultan and Sheikh-ul-Islam (the head of religious affairs in the Ottoman Empire) did not like her text. The Sultan ordered the Patriarch to excommunicate all Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Empire from the Church. And Gregory V obediently carried out the order... 
Patriarch Gregory V
You can say as much as you like that the Patriarch of Constantinople excommunicated from the Church under the pressure of the Sultan, that by doing so he tried to save the Church itself and the lives of the clergy, but only one fact remains indisputable: the Phanar betrayed his own people. And he did this when the Christian world was ready to come to the aid of the fraternal Orthodox people. The liberation struggle was prepared by the Filiki Eteria (Friendly Society), a patriotic secret organization that was founded in 1814 in Odessa. The desire for liberation was common to all Greeks. The uprising began in February 1821, when Prince Alexander Ypsilanti, the son of the Wallachian ruler, entered Moldova with a small detachment, fought against Napoleon as part of the Russian army, had the rank of general and was at the head of the Filiki Eteria. A few years later, Greece was recognized as an independent state under the protectorate of the great powers (Protocol of London).
Well, Patriarch Gregory V himself, despite the betrayal of his people to please the Sultan, was hanged, in his full hierarchal vestments, at the gates of the patriarchate. The sultan appointed the deaf Metropolitan Eugene of Pisidia as the new patriarch. Heading to the Sultan's palace for a label, Metropolitan Eugene passed through the gate, on which the body of Patriarch Gregory still hung. The result of this anathema was the creation of the Greek Orthodox Church, independent of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Agree, then the Greeks had convincing grounds for the autocephaly of their Church. Even without the Tomos of the Ecumenical Patriarch.
Killer of the Russian Patriarchate
Exactly 100 years later, the Phanar commits a terrible betrayal of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC). By the beginning of the 1920s, the patriarchate had already been recreated in Russia, for the first time in 300 years, Patriarch Tikhon was elected, but for several years the atheistic power of the Bolsheviks had been in charge in the country. The newspaper Izvestia (No. 124 of June 1, 1924) publishes a report that “the ecumenical patriarch removed Patriarch Tikhon from the administration of the Russian Church” and even “banned him from serving.” This was a signal for the start of a joint action by the Phanar, the GPU and the Renovationists against the Russian Orthodox Church, for the complete destruction of Russian Orthodoxy. In 1921, the Bolshevik leader set the same goal as the Turkish Sultan in 1821, and this goal was achieved in communist Russia by the same means as in the Ottoman Empire. But Patriarch Tikhon, unlike Patriarch Gregory V, anathematized only the godless torturers of an Orthodox country.
Shortly before this publication in Izvestia, on April 17, 1924, at a meeting of the Synod in Constantinople, a decision was made to send a special mission to Russia. It followed from the message of the Phanar that the ecumenical patriarch "reduces the manifestations of Russian ecclesiasticism to the Living Church." Two weeks later, on May 6, the Patriarch of Constantinople, speaking before the Synod, called on Patriarch Tikhon "to voluntarily renounce the patriarchate and immediately retire from the Church Administration." At the same time, the Synod of the OOC decides that the commission in its work should “rely on church movements loyal to the Government of the USSR.” But the most monstrous thing was that the Phanar officially demanded the abolition of the patriarchate in Russia, that is, in fact, the physical liquidation of the 1000-year-old Church!
Patriarchs Bartholomew and Kirill
On June 6, Patriarch Tikhon received extracts from the minutes of the meetings of the Synod in Constantinople from the hands of the representative of the Phanar, Vasily Dimopulo. On June 18, Patriarch Tikhon sent a letter to Ecumenical Patriarch Gregory VII, where he pointed out the non-canonical intervention of Constantinople in the affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church. The patriarch wrote: "The people are not with schismatics, but with their legitimate and Orthodox patriarch." After this letter, Patriarch Gregory VII severed relations with Patriarch Tikhon. Thus, with the help of the Phanar, the GPU managed to achieve external isolation of the ROC, which was fraught with a danger to world Orthodoxy. On June 10, a “pre-conciliar meeting” of the Renovationists opened in Moscow, which made a decision to liquidate the institution of the patriarchate in Russia. According to the GPU, the meeting was attended by "156 priests, 83 bishops and 84 laymen." 126 GPU secret informers, or about 40% of the meeting, were sent to this meeting.
But the terrible betrayal of the Phanar and this time did not bring him either a flock, or pieces of silver, or the favor of the Sultan. And you don’t have to be a seer even now, in 2018, to predict: a church organism is not born in a test tube with foul-smelling Phanariot secretions.
Not judge, Yes Not judged you will,
for how court judge, so you will judged;
and whatWith a measure you use, it will be measured to you.
Gospel of Matthew (ch. 7, verses 1-2)
As the deadline approaches Great Pan-Orthodox Council on the island of Crete Orthodox people, spiritual and temporal, there are more and more questions regarding the appropriateness upcoming event, date picker and persistence Patriarch of Constantinople in the implementation of this idea. This topic occupies a central place not only in church circles, but is also actively discussed in the central Russian media.
And this is not surprising, because last years role Russian Orthodox Church in all its fullness (clergy and flock) and activities in the life of our country has increased markedly: church property is returned by the state, the number of restored and newly erected churches is growing.
Disputes over positions did not have time to subside in the press Bulgarian and Antiochian Churches regarding participation in the Pan-Orthodox Council, which caused a nervous reaction in Phanar(the name of the Istanbul quarter in which the Patriarchate of Constantinople and the Patriarchal residence are located), another piece of news spread around the world: the Turkish authorities decided to return the status of a mosque to the Hagia Sophia Museum. This provocative decision was made, as they say, to spite the Christian and, above all, the Orthodox world. It seemed that the reaction should have followed immediately, but this did not happen. The United States, the "main culprit" of Istanbul's decision, is silent, the "Christian" West is silent, and the Local Orthodox Churches are silent along with the Phanar. But in recent publications on this topic, indignant questions and direct criticism began to be addressed not to the Turkish authorities, but Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, for some reason he is silent and does not turn to Local Orthodox Churches with a call to support him in maintaining the existing status quo of Hagia Sophia.
The question is logical, but at the same time we will try to understand why the Archbishop of Constantinople, who has the "primacy of honor" over the rest of the primates of the Orthodox Patriarchates and Churches, so persistently promotes the idea of convening a Pan-Orthodox Council ("the match will take place in any weather") and does not use his status, to lead the entire Orthodox ecumene in the struggle to protect the pan-Orthodox Christian shrine and preserve its current status quo?
Let's try to understand how the status of the Archbishop of Constantinople and New Rome changed throughout history. In the IV century AD. he receives the title of Ecumenical Patriarch, or "first among equals" (primus inter pares), which until that time only the Pope had.
The transfer of the capital of the Roman Empire by Emperor Constantine the Great from Old Rome to New Rome on the shores of the Bosphorus (in the place of the ancient settlement of Byzantium), as well as the equalization of the titles of the Roman and Constantinople bishops caused a chronic rejection of the Pontiff, who instead sent his legates to the Ecumenical Councils, at which fateful decisions for all Christianity were made, aimed at combating the heresy that arose in the empire. The unwillingness of the Popes to share seniority in the "list of honor" (diptych) with the Patriarchs of Constantinople served as one of the reasons for the "Great Schism", or the 1054 split of Christianity as the body of Christ into the Western (Latin) and Eastern (Orthodox) Churches. Since then, in Rome, during the services of the Roman Catholic (Latin) Church, the Catholic clergy have ceased to commemorate the names of the Eastern Orthodox Patriarchs, and the Eastern Orthodox Patriarchates have excluded the commemoration of the names of the Popes in their litanies. Thus, in the Byzantine era, the Archbishop of Constantinople and New Rome single-handedly occupied the first place in the diptych with the title of "Ecumenical Patriarch". This status meant only his presidency by historical seniority of honor among all the Orthodox First Hierarchs of the ancient Patriarchates: Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem, but did not give any power advantages to the “first among equals” over them. The ancient Christian principle was still in effect: one diocese, one bishop.” The Ecumenical Patriarch could not give orders to the Local Primates of the Orthodox Patriarchates, since they were all considered equal.
In the era of the Ottoman Empire, the padishahs raised the status of the Patriarch of Constantinople, endowing him with special powers with a special title of "Head of the Orthodox Faith" (rum millet bashi). Now the Ecumenical Patriarch answered with his head to the padishah for the loyalty of all the above Patriarchates on the territory of the Ottoman Empire. The Greek uprising of 1821 against the Ottoman authorities caused the execution by hanging of Patriarch Gregory V of Constantinople.
In 1589, Patriarch Jeremiah II of Constantinople, who was in Moscow, having received a refusal to his proposal to become the first Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus', was forced to agree with the election to the Patriarchs and enthronement in the Assumption Cathedral of Metropolitan Job of Moscow, thereby approving by a special letter (albeit together with other Eastern Orthodox Hierarchs) Moscow Patriarchate. The material and political assistance of the Grand Duchy of Moscow, the Tsardom of Russia, and later of the Russian Empire and its Greek-Russian Church helped the Ecumenical Patriarch in many ways to maintain his status before the Sultan and the Ottoman government (the Sublime Porte). The collapse of the Ottoman Empire after the defeat in the First World War led to the loss of the commanding status and power prerogatives over the rest of the Patriarchs of the Orthodox East. Moreover, the Patriarchate of Constantinople immediately fell under the influence of Western states, first Great Britain, and then the United States. This circumstance largely determined the decision of the Patriarch of Constantinople to switch from the Orthodox (Julian) calendar to the Catholic (Gregorian) one. True, the secular Turkish authorities refused to recognize for the head of the Church of Constantinople the old Ottoman title of Ecumenical Patriarch with his commanding prerogatives, bestowed on the rum millet bashi by the Ottoman sultans in relation to other Eastern Orthodox Patriarchates.
At the end of World War II, I.V. Stalin decided to use the church theme in his foreign policy. The increased authority of the USSR on the world stage, the share of the Russian Orthodox Church in Orthodox world and the weakening of the influence of the Patriarchate of Constantinople in it gave the Soviet leadership reason to believe that the Moscow Patriarchate should have moved from the fifth place according to the diptych (after the Church of Jerusalem) to the first. To this end, the Soviet government actively supported the Pre-Council Meeting in Moscow of the heads of all the Autocephalous Orthodox Churches or their representatives scheduled by Patriarch Alexy I (Simansky) for September 1947 to prepare for the "convening in 1948 (the 500th anniversary of the independence of the ROC) of the Ecumenical Council to resolve the issue of conferring the title of Ecumenical to the Moscow Patriarchate".
The United States of America, which took the Patriarchate of Constantinople under its protection, began to develop countermeasures to neutralize the plans of the Soviet leader. Using the ancient principle of "divide and rule" and frightening the Greek primates of a number of Orthodox Churches with the theomachic power of Moscow, they tried in every possible way to disrupt the convening of the Ecumenical Council and the idea of transferring the Ecumenical Patriarchate to Moscow. As a result of these efforts, the Patriarchs of the Churches of Constantinople, Alexandria and Jerusalem, who were traditionally headed by ethnic Greeks, did not come to the Pan-Orthodox Conference convened in Moscow in July 1948.
Thus, the “Stalin project”, utopian from the historical and church-canonical point of view, inflicted the deepest wound on the unity of the Orthodox world after the “Bulgarian schism” of 1872, as a result of which an insurmountable wall of distrust arose between the Greeks and Slavs. It could not be overcome even after the elimination of the 73-year-old schism Bulgarian Church and its return in 1945 to the bosom of Ecumenical Orthodoxy.
All these circumstances have constantly influenced and continue to influence the behavior of the Patriarchs of Constantinople, whose status the Turkish authorities have deliberately belittled since the time of President Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, trying to reduce his Patriarchal powers to the implementation of purely ecclesiastical functions. Even in modern times during a visit to Turkey by the hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church, official Ankara deliberately overestimated the status of Russian representatives and belittled the position of the Phanar. It should be noted that representatives of the Local Orthodox Churches often jokingly call the First Hierarch of Constantinople "Patriarch of Istanbul" behind his back and try to challenge the legitimacy of his unique and exclusive honorary title of "All Holiness".
Such an attitude on the part of fellow believers causes a corresponding reaction from the Ecumenical Patriarch, pushing him to consolidate his leadership in the Orthodox world and even to ecumenism in violation of the instructions and teachings of the Fathers of the Orthodox Church.
One should also keep in mind the deplorable situation in which the Patriarchate of Constantinople still finds itself. This is, first of all, the small number of the Orthodox flock in Turkey, dependence on the financial and political assistance of the United States of America, from where mainly American Greeks come to work in the Phanar on a rotational basis.
These considerations should be taken into account when evaluating the steps currently being taken by Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople for an objective and unbiased assessment of the course he has taken to hold a Pan-Orthodox Council in Crete "by all means".
The Ecumenical Patriarch is the primate of the Church of Constantinople. Historically, he is considered the first of equals among the primates of all. What does this mean and how this story developed, we will talk a little later. Now let's find out who is the Ecumenical Patriarch. So, on October 22, 1991, this title was awarded to Bartholomew I (in the world Dimitrios Archodonis), who is also His Divine All Holiness the Archbishop of Constantinople (the old name of the city of New Rome).
Patriarch
This title was formed when the city of Constantinople became the capital. The first Ecumenical Patriarch Akakiy (472-489) was titled after the Fourth (451, Chalcedon). Then, in rules 9, 17 and 28, the all-imperial jurisdiction of the bishop of New Rome was proclaimed, which in importance took the second position after Rome.
By the end of the 6th century, the role and title are finally accepted in both civil and ecclesiastical acts of the Byzantine Empire. But the papacy of Rome did not accept the 28th canon. It was only in connection with the union at the 7th Ecumenical Council (1438-1445) that Rome finally placed the Patriarchate of Constantinople behind itself in a second role.
Patriarchate in Rus'
But in 1453, Byzantium fell after the siege of Constantinople by Turkish troops. At the same time, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople was able to maintain his position as the leader of the Christian world, but already existed under the Ottoman Empire. Nominally, he remained the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, but was very weakened and exhausted in material terms, until the patriarchate was established in the Russian state (1589). During the reign of Boris Godunov, as is known, Job (1589) became the first patriarch in Rus'.
After World War I, the Ottoman Empire ceased to exist. In 1923, Constantinople ceased to be the capital, in 1930 it was renamed the city
power struggle
At the beginning of 1920, the Patriarchate of Constantinople in its ruling circles began to form the concept that the entire Orthodox diaspora of churches should completely submit to the Patriarch of Constantinople. Since it is he who, according to the assembly of the Greek elite of the so-called Phanariotes, from now on has the primacy of honor and power, therefore he can interfere in any internal affairs of other churches. This concept was immediately subjected to repeated criticism and was called "Eastern papism." However, it was de facto approved by the practice of the church.
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I: biography
Bartholomew is a Greek by ethnic origin, who was born on February 29, 1940 on the Turkish island of Gokceada in the village of Zeytinli-keyu. After graduating from high school in Istanbul, he continued to study at the Chalcedon Theological School and was ordained a deacon in 1961. Then he served two years in the Turkish army.
From 1963 to 1968 - while studying at the Pontifical Oriental Institute in Rome, then studied at the University of Switzerland and Munich. Then he taught at the Pontifical Gregorian University, where he received a doctorate in theology.
In 1968, the ordination to the presbyter took place, in which Patriarch Athenagoras I participated. In 1972, already under Patriarch Demetrius, he was appointed to the post of manager of the Patriarchal Cabinet.
In 1973 he was consecrated Bishop Metropolitan of Philadelphia, and in 1990 he became Metropolitan of Chalcedon. From 1974 until his enthronement as a patriarch, he was a member of the Synod and a number of synodal committees.
In October 1991 he was elected as the Ecumenical Patriarch of the Church of Constantinople. The enthronement took place on November 2 of the same year.
Bartholomew and the Russian Orthodox Church
After enthronement, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I visited the Russian Patriarch in 1993. After the schism in Russia in 1922 (when Constantinople showed its sympathies to church criminals, and not canonical church) this meant a thaw in their relationship. Moreover, a split occurred again in the Russian Orthodox Church, supported by the Ukrainian authorities, then the self-proclaimed Kiev Patriarchate appeared, headed by Filaret. But in this moment, Bartholomew I supported the canonical Metropolitan of Kyiv, His Beatitude Vladimir (Sabodan).
In 1996, a sharp conflict arises with the Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church. Moscow did not recognize the church structure of the Patriarchate of Constantinople in Estonia as canonical. The name of Bartholomew for some time was even excluded from the diptychs of the Russian Orthodox Church.
Meetings
In 2006, a conflict situation arose in the Sourozh Diocese of the MP in the British Isles. As a result, Bishop Basil, its former administrator, was accepted into the bosom of the Church of Constantinople, but just as soon left from there at the desire to marry.
In 2008, in honor of the 1020th anniversary of the baptism of Rus', President of Ukraine V. Yushchenko waited for Patriarch Bartholomew's approval for the unification of Ukrainian churches into a single local church, but did not receive it.
In 2009, Patriarch Kirill of Moscow officially visited the residence of the Patriarch of Constantinople. During the negotiations, many important issues were discussed, while Bartholomew promised not to interfere in the church situation that had developed in Ukraine.
Then, in 2010, there was a return meeting in Moscow, where the theme of the Great Pan-Orthodox Council was discussed. Bartholomew also urged the doubting believers of Ukraine to return to the canonical church.
The relationship of Patriarch Bartholomew with the Roman Catholic Church
In 2006, Bartholomew invited Pope Benedict XVI to Istanbul, and the meeting took place. Ecumenical Orthodox Patriarch in conversation, he grieved that the two churches had not yet united.
In 2014, the meeting of the Patriarch and Pope Francis took place in Jerusalem. It was regarded as private, the conversations were mainly in an ecumenical direction, for which he is now very much criticized.
The surprising fact of this meeting was the fact that Pope Francis, as a sign of humility, kissed the hand of the patriarch, who, in turn, politely and tolerantly answered with a cross-shaped kiss.
Ecumenical patriarchs: list
Patriarchs of the latest period:
- Dorotheos of Prussia (1918-1921);
- Meletius IV (1921-1923);
- Gregory VII (1923-1924);
- Constantine VII (1924-1925);
- Vasily III (1925-1929);
- Photius II (1929-1935);
- Benjamin (1936-1946);
- Maxim V (1946-1948);
- Athenagoras (1948-1972);
- Demetrius I (1972-1991);
- Bartholomew I (1991).
Conclusion
Soon, in June 2016, the Great will be held where one of the important issues will be discussed - the attitude towards others Christian churches. There can be many different disputes and disagreements. After all, now all the Orthodox brethren are concerned about the holding, as it is also called, the Eighth Ecumenical Council. Although such a definition of it would be incorrect, since no church canons will be discussed at it, because everything has long been decided and in no case is subject to change.
Last Ecumenical Council passed in 787 in Nicaea. And then there was still no Catholic schism, which occurred in the Christian Church in 1054, after which the Western (Catholic) with its center in Rome and the Eastern (Orthodox) with its center in Constantinople were formed. After such a split, the Ecumenical Council is already a priori impossible.
But if he wants Catholic Church to unite with the Orthodox, then this will happen only if she repents and lives according to the canons of Orthodoxy, and it cannot be otherwise. This also applies to other churches, including the schismatic Kyiv Patriarchate, which, for its part, is also waiting for recognition and unification.
List of apostles, bishops and patriarchs of Antioch with years of reign: Contents 1 Early period 2 From 331 to 358 archbishops Arians ... Wikipedia
The list includes the Orthodox ("Greek") bishops and patriarchs of Alexandria (see Patriarch of Alexandria, List of Coptic Patriarchs). Years of government are given in parentheses. Contents 1 Bishops of Alexandria (42,325) ... Wikipedia
Main article: Patriarch of the City of Jerusalem and All Palestine Contents 1 Jewish Bishops of Jerusalem 2 Bishops of Aelia Capitolina ... Wikipedia
List of popes buried in St. Peter's Basilica. marble slab at the entrance to the sacristy in St. Peter's ... Wikipedia
List of popes buried in St. Peter's Basilica. Marble slab at the entrance to the sacristy in St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican Note: Only in 384 ... ... Wikipedia
Bishops of Jerusalem No. Name. years 1 Apostle James, brother of the Lord until 62 2 Simeon, son of Cleopas 106 107 3 Justus 111 ??? 4 Zacchaeus??? ... Wikipedia
This term has other meanings, see Intercession Cathedral (meanings). This term has other meanings, see St. Basil's Church. Orthodox Cathedral Cathedral of the Intercession Holy Mother of God that on the Moat (Temple of Basil ... ... Wikipedia
Wikipedia has articles about other people with the name Joachim. Joachim III Ἰωακεὶμ Γ΄ Μεγαλοπρεπής Patriarch Joachim III ... Wikipedia
Fourth Council of Constantinople Date 879-880 Orthodoxy is recognized Previous Council Second Council of Nicaea Next Council Fifth Council of Constantinople Convened by Basil I Under the chairmanship Number of participants 383 bishops ... ... Wikipedia
Constantinople (Ecumenical) Orthodox Church
Eusebius of Nicomedia (338/9-341)
Proclus (434-446) (He began his Church career as a cell-attendant at John Chrysostom. He was known as a moderate church leader and a supporter of compromises. He was the author of more than 20 sermons, 7 epistles and other writings).
John II Cappadocian (518-520) (Confirmed the decision of the Council of Chalcedon and anathematized the distributor of the Eutychian heresy (Monophysitism). He died in 520).
Anastasius (730-754)
Constantine II (754-766)
Nikita I (766-780)
Anthony I Cassimata (821-834)
St. Ignatius (secondary) (867-877)
Nicholas II Chrysoverg (979-991) (Before the patriarchate he was Metropolitan of Adrianople. Known for his letters).
In 991-996. - the throne is vacant.
John IX Agapit (1111-1134)
Khariton Eugeniot (1178-1179)
Maxim II (1215) (Residence in Nicaea. Prior to becoming patriarch, he was abbot of the Akimites monastery in Constantinople. He was known as a great saint of women from the Nicene court gynoecium, thanks to whose patronage he became patriarch).
Methodius (1240) (Before the patriarchate, he was hegumen of the Nicene monastery of Iakinf. He was known for being a knowledgeable person, but in fact he was not very educated. He ruled the Church for only three months).
Mitrofan II (1440-1443) (Before the patriarchate, he was the metropolitan of the city of Kyzik).
Gennady II (for the third time) 1464-1465
Simeon I of Trebizond 1465
Mark II Xilokarawi 1466-1467
Dionysius I 1466-1471
Simeon I (secondary) 1471-1475
Raphael I 1475-1476
Maxim III Christonim 1476-1482
Simeon I (for the third time) 1482-1486
Nifont II 1486-1488
Dionysius I (secondary) 1488-1490
Maxim IV 1491-1497
Nifont II (secondary) 1497-1498
Joachim I 1498-1502
Nifont II (for the third time) 1502
Pachomius I 1503-1504
Joachim I (secondary) 1504
Pachomius I (secondary) 1503-1513
Theoleptus I 1513-1522
Jeremiah I 1522-1546
Joannicius I (illegitimate) 1524-1525
Dionysius II 1546-1556
JoasaphN 1556-1565
Mitrofan III 1565-1572
Jeremiah II Tranos 1572-1579
Mitrofan III (secondary) 1579-1580
Jeremiah II (secondary) 1580-1584
Pachomius II Batista (illegal) 1584-1585
Theolept II 1585-1587
Jeremiah II (for the third time) 1587-1595
Matthew II 1596
Gabriel I 1596
Meletius I Pigas m/bl 1596-1597
Theophan I Karikis 1597
Meletios I, m / bl (secondary) 1597-1598
Matthew II (secondary) 1598-1601
Neophyte II 1602-1603
Matthew II (third time) 1603
Raphael II 1603-1607
Neophyte II (secondary) 1607-1612
Cyril I Lucaris, m/bl (Patriarch of Alexandria) 1612
Timothy II 1612-1620
Cyril I Lucaris (former locum tenens) 1620-1623
George IV (not recognized) 1623-1634
Anfim II 1623
Cyril I (for the third time) 1623-1633
Cyril II Kondaris 1633
Cyril I (fourth time) 1633-1634
Athanasius III Patellarius 1634
Cyril I (fifth time) 1634-1635
Cyril II (secondary) 1635-1636
Neophyte III 1636-1637
Cyril I (sixth, times) 1637-1638
Cyril II (for the third time) 1638-1639
Parthenius I the Elder 1639-1644
Parthenius II the Younger 1644-1646
Ioanniky II (not recognized) 1646-1648
Parthenius II (secondary) 1648-1651
Ioanniky II (secondary) 1651-1652
Cyril III Spanos 1652
Athanasius III (secondary) 1652
Paisios I 1652-1653
Ioanniky II (for the third time) 1653-1654
Cyril III (secondary) 1654
Paisius I (secondary) 1654-1655
Ioanniky II (fourth time) 1655-1656
Parthenius III 1656-1657
Gabriel II 1657
Parthenius IV 1657-1662
Dionysius III Vardalis 1662-1665
Parthenius IV (secondary) 1665-1667
Clement (not recognized) 1667
Methodius III Moronis 1668-1671
Parthenius IV (for the third time) 1671
Dionysius IV Muselimis 1671-1673
Gerasim II Ternovsky 1673-1674
Parthenius IV (fourth time) 1675-1676
Dionysius IV (secondary) 1676-1679
Athanasius IV 1679
Jacob 1679-1682
Dionysius IV (for the third time) 1682-1684
Parthenius IV (fifth time) 1684-1685
Jacob (secondary) 1685-1686
Dionysius IV (fourth time) 1686-1687
Jacob (for the third time) 1687-1688
Callinicus II Acarnanus 1688
Neophyte IV Philaret 1688-1689
Kallinikos II (secondary) 1689-1693
Dionysius IV (fifth time) 1693-1694
Callinicus II (for the third time) 1694-1702
Gabriel III 1702-1707
Neophyte V (not recognized) 1707
Cyprian 1707-1709
Athanasius V Margunius 1709-1711
Cyril IV 1711-1713
Cyprian (secondary) 1713-1714
Kosmash 1714-1716
Jeremiah III 1716-1726
Paisius II 1726-1732
Jeremiah III (secondary) 1732-1733
Seraphim I 1733-1734
Neophyte VI 1734-1740
Paisius II (secondary) 1740-1743
Neophyte VI (secondary) 1743-1744
Paisius II (for the third time) 1744-1748
Cyril V 1748-1751
Paisius II (fourth time) 1751-1752
Cyril V (secondary) 1752-1757
Callinicus III 1757
Seraphim II 1757-1761
Ioanniky III 1761-1763
Samuel I Khantziris 1763-1768
Meletius II 1768-1769
Theodosius II 1769-1773
Samuel I (secondary) 1773-1774
Sophronius II 1774-1780
Gabriel IV 1780-1785
Procopius 1785-1789
Neophyte VII 1789-1794
Gerasim III 1794-1797
Gregory V 1797-1798
Neophyte VII (secondary) 1798-1801
Kallinikos IV 1801-1806
Gregory V (secondary) 1806-1808
Callinicus IV (secondary) 1808-1809
Jeremiah IV 1809-1813
Cyril VI 1813-1818
Gregory V (for the third time) 1818-1821
Eugene III 1821-1822
Anfim III 1822-1824
Chrysanthes I 1824-1826
Agafangel I 1826-1830
Constantius I 1830-1834
Constantius II 1834-1835
Gregory VI 1835-1840
Anfim IV 1840-1841
Anfim V 1841-1842
German IV 1842-1845
Meletius III 1845
Anfim VI 1845-1848
Anfim IV (secondary) 1848-1852
German IV (secondary) 1852-1853
Anfim VI (secondary) 1853-1855
Cyril VII 1855-1860
Joachim 1860-1863
Sophronius III 1863-1866
Gregory VI (secondary) 1867-1871
Anfim VI (for the third time) 1871-1873
Joachim II (secondary) 1873-1878
Joachim III 1878-1884
Joachim IV 1884-1887
Dionysius V 1887-1891
Neophyte VIII 1891-1894
Anfim VII 1895-1897
Constantine V 1897-1901
Joachim III (secondary) 1901-1913
Hermann V 1913-1918
locum tenens
Prussian - Dorotheus 1918-1921
Caesarea - Nicholas 1918-1921
Meletius IV Metaxakis 1921-1923
Gregory VII 1923-1924
Constantine VI 1924-1925
Vasily III 1925-1929
Photius II 1929-1935
Benjamin I 1936-1946
Maxim V 1946-1948
Athenagoras I 1948-1972
Demetrius I 1972-1991
Bartholomew 1991-
Used materials of the book: Sychev N.V. Book of dynasties. M., 2008. p. 863-871.
