The cute temperance of the conservative new calenderists …

Traditionalism has become a marketing niche within new calendarsm…

who innately understand that a large segment of its laity, expect repeated
rhetoric of reassurances by those who claim to be upholding orthodoxy by
criticising other faiths…unfortunately it does not matter what is in your
heart it matters which bishop that you follow which is your spiritual guide..

Zalalas speech at Rockdale 13 February for apostle Peter bookstore held

this event, a fringe element within the church who are berated and
constantly concerned for the modernist ecumenist direction the new
calender is headed in… when it is game over… what is crucial is to direct
a campaign on pseudo spirituality … emptiness that mixes parables and
lessons to compound the believer to reinstate his faith to a church that is
increasingly and exponentially becoming secularised and is very apparent
that it fulfils the jazabel criteria of the member of the church that was
given time to repent but instead tried to influence others to sacrifice to
foreign idols….thus a dead branch eventuates.

This form of dire legalism relies on people like Zalalas who sells dozens of
his works and audio, to say anything they want as long as they do not
renounce that the catholics have officially no baptism and apostolic
tradition succession as our holy canons teach….
His treatment is attempting to build an analogy based on the vague idea
of the prodigal son was not very appropriate and effective… obviously we
understand the concepts and the lessons on that this parable conveys,
however when we are dealing with our relationship with the church, the
prodigal son parable cannot be used in the fashion that he made it…

He interwoven this article about how a father should be compassionate to

a troubled son, but interlaces these concepts with the premise that
perhaps also the church priests cannot be judged and therefore we should
refrain from criticism…and in his zest to convey the whole philanthropic
ideal of love and forgiveness, he leaves open the idea that one should also
be indifferent and not discern between good and evil… this was my
impression. He states that the elder son is symbolic of our relationship
with our church today—yes to the Orthodox Church yes, but not to the
ecumenists that claim to be the church..
He misinterprets a passage from christ and generalises it to mean it in a
broad definition and application to our lives.. I do not think this should be
interpreted In a way where no matter what evil people do in the world, we
say ‘god they do not know what they do’ when they know in their
conscientious and as it says in the bible people are culpable knowing
essentially what is good and bad…some Romans persecuted the christians
not knowing that the christians had the true god and not a false god early
in the christian empire. John malalas chronicles recounts a christian
stating this before being persecuted by the pagan romans exemplifying
the clear context of this phrase… to automatically broad canvas this
concept to people who conscientiously know they are doing wrong and
persist in doing it, cannot be applied…
Though it is difficult to criticise Zalalas , his theology is sound otherwise…
with his reference to the western god of punishment,anselms error our
passions and sins and the eye of our soul, but he did not make example
and application to the evil of our modern day and age…… though he
makes up for it by his idea that we as humans destroy the environment
and properly distinguishing from a loving pedagogical punishment .
Unfortunately in gleaning from all his work, the diligent and courageous
concepts that he conveys and through the quality of work through
romanises , can easily become distorted when perused out of context to
the church fathers.
What is particularly not emphasised is the concept of love for justice
/righteousnes sand wisdom with meekness.. god does not negate that
movement within us, that blameless hatred for the world that is instilled in
our human nature and our condition is an essential ingredient for
discernment and to preserve real love.. because hating things of evil ,
should move a persons faculty towards loving truth and righteous no
matter the taboo, the trend or the extent of conformity that would ridicule
you..…..One is not expressing a lack of love and compassion if he hates
the world, since this instills a worldview that is christian that has a
movement to loving wisdom, justice and good things and hating vainglory
and recognises that the world is corrupt and evil[not gods creation which
we defend from mans corruption of it]…. Still in this modus operandi we
should show love ,constraint, compassion, patience and courtesy and not
have the compunction to condemn everything which god has a plan to
attempt to save.. but this does not mean we show indifference to pain,
suffering, injustice etc..in a world where if one shows his loving nature by
condemning the corporate destruction of environment is considered
hateful, fanatical etc…. When one cites controversial drugs and
procedures of quack medicine, or the evil of the opiod epidemic he will
usually be confronted with people who claim he is bigoted fanatical and
anti science when you are expressing the love and truth to save someone
from something that would disadvantage them spiritually is an act of love,
but to the world , is rather a an act of uncivil non compliance.
… Zalalas blurts this distinction, perhaps not intentionally but what is
apparent is that their is no movement or desire to declare the status of
the church since this is the profane realm where the laity are not qualified
to judge or declare.[he would render]. and as he instated,we ought not to
judge a priest in his talk… even though courage is considered a virtue…
while cowardice is a vice. It is wrong to convict a priest who is a sinner,
but the fathers and saints admonish us to flee from heretical bishops…but
the government pension is always enticing.

IT is similar to instating that a person’s overzealous attempts to be nice is

the sole arbitrary of goodness.. perhaps niceness is used as a mask to
cover up other coward deficiencies… most people know this in the civil
world and all the more appropriate in the spiritual world. Ones main
objective is to be popular and loved by all …
Is one permitted to judge his masters because they had fallen into
heresy,, absolutely…christianity does not negate a person to discern and
be as wise as a serpent… would the romans allow barbarians to conquer
the empire so to show love and compassion to them and allow the rape
and pillage as a result??
Zalalas may Beat around the bush, even though many of his theological
principles are sound in theory and the respect I accord with romanides
salvaging true orthodoxy ironically in a sea that is hell bent to destroy it.…
unfortunately many conservative new calenderists hope to recycle
concepts of ecumenism, traditionalism into redefined with compounded
acceptable parameters that conform to their political correct view…—…
like pieces of edifying content that one can dispose of to convince and
rationalise oneself,’ all is good on the home front.’. And this while they
rationalise their belonging to a church that literally has become a Uniate
one in spirit by accepting the catholics as having equal baptism to say the
least…….This essentially underpins my bias against Zalalas and so
therefore I tend to categorise what he says within the realm of his the
larger picture.
Though for different reasons god may permit people to work the periphery
in the church, unfortunately the connotation of the message can be
clouted by the broad canvas of which the theologian is spawned and or
incubated in…
We continue to forgive the people who do bad things and have
assumptions, but their comes a time when one has to divide from
someone who shows no constraint, repentance for their bad deeds and
where a continued association with them is damaging to our spirituality.

Despite this perhaps what is more prudent to his audience who may be
struggling with the ABC’s of christianity , is that orthodoxy is the true
church of christ and though Zalalas does not confess the faith in real life,
it is at least expedient and remedial that he at leasts distinguishes how
the west conceptualised god and therefore provides a narrative and
explanation to some extent how the west moved and evolved its
theological ideals into scholatisim and rationalism and eventually into
deism and atheism…and into the age of enlightenment. But unfortunately
he may contradict these ideas himself.…However Zalalas fails to speak
about the semantics and the crucial idea that the mother church has
become seduced with the same enlightenment that St nektarios was
fighting against and has made the church of christ and its commandment
reductant…. The most important saint of the modern age st Nektarios
fought against the creeping influence of the enlightenment and tried to
warn the faithful and now his fears were realised when the ecumenists
hyjacked the church of christ into a secular institution of man and where
the tenets of the enlightenment have exclusive precedence over the
genuine councils that they no longer adhere to. Man is above god and this
idolatry has become the balkward unquestionable standard and
permanent fixture that now dominates within the so called mother
church..I would claim that the audience are not given the whole story….
The ideals of christianity which he also conveys is a major area and can be
more important than blurting out to the people that you are in the wrong
church and spurt out” this is what is happening in the world.. but at the
same time, as christians the most important attribute and virtue is
discernment otherwise we cannot distinguish from the pseudo concepts
ideas and themes of the world and truth.. we can automatically associate
civil notions of things as amicable to christian standards without the
awareness that the world has its own new religious crescendo that is
diametrically opposed to christianity. .Doctors in their theories do not
recognise the existence of the souls and so formulate ideas around the
narrow idiom of materialism…Even though a doctor may on the surface
appear to have good intent , he is limited to the medicines and doses that
he subscribes, since he is under the authority of a medical council and if
this doctor tried to treat the person instead of the disease, then he may
lose his license… This is a fitting analogy in the new calendar where
priests may entertain a confession of faith, but are limited to what they
can say and practice because they are under the authority of a
patriarchate… The priest would be forced to commune a catholic , for
example even though superficially or personally he does not agree…
Idolatry is the insistence that a mans position in the world supersedes the
authority of god in heaven and instead of god being the object of worship,
instead man and his innovations and decrees are unquestionably
implemented and celebrated.…. …. we automatically follow the tenets of
the world unquestionably and in this passive and indifferent unaware state
we inhabit, we automatically assign these ideals as christian simply
because a human person holds a certain position..and therefore whatever
he decries, despite breaking canons is validated b virtue of the position he
holds.. in other words practicing papal infallibility.… what many
ecumenists think…since the enlightenment ,science has surpassed the
authority and prorogatives of god himself, in other words science and
reason which is good in itself when practiced by a dispassionate person
who intends to use it for the benefit of man], is now shaped by the vice of
man for the pursuits and love of money and gain in the world…and now
has the official pre eminence of worship in the world council of church…
They are not motivated by philanthropic deeds even though they may
market and claim that this is the case. The age of enlightenment and
secularity was based on a dualistic gnostic conviction that threw the baby
out with the bathwater to throw out all ideas about religious morality and
assign science as a form of god of idolatry itself… so man is the centre of
the universe of the enlightenment and though science is noble, their
conviction for the enlightenment is not love for the fruits science can
deliver, but for its exploitation in order to achieve profits at the expense of
people as we can see the incidence of cancer increasing every year
despite the efforts of modern science… the reason is because true science
concerns the preservation of the environment and all the bioenergy,
ecosystems that support our health… like clean water nutrition etc… that
no snake oil salesman pill can ever replace or replicate… because the
condition of man does not change, nor his role in respect to the
environment which sustains him and in turn god sustains us through the
environment which we destroy..

• We do not love the passions of people””

Zalalas renditions as abstract view of theological concepts without

enterprising real life examples in our modern time
In zalalas do not love the world— he only recycles the idea of passions
and sin….without speaking about discernment….

Dispondency ,sloth are passions and a vice of indifference in in the

church…

I am right about constantine Zalalas Talk.. listening to his podcast on do

not love this world. I reaffirmed my suspicions…, instead of speaking
about discernment, dispassion and idolatry , he merely speaks about the
passions..... His reluctance to speak about discernment dangerously
tabulates into the realm of obedience without question..... his message is
sound, but the analogy of the prodigal son was a bad example to use as it
specificates a real relationship and situation.... but many would interprete
his ideas meaning that one should show obedience to our leaders at any
cost......he regurgitates this material over and over again. many christians
believe indifference is a virtue,, but is a vice.. when one does not act upon
an evil or be moved within to express then this person is not affected by
the passions but is influenced by a love for righteousness...a person that
is indifferent to evil is actually affected by the passions , not by talking
loud and noastful or expressing with passion, but by saying nothing at all.
One can fall into a sort of pride of repeating and branding themselves
with the same information.. though general and abstract, when broadened
into a bigger picture of christian application, is verifiably unsuitable. It
therefore emphasises not dispassion , but indifference since if he does not
include discernment, people would automatically resort to a comfortable
and complacent area where one does not need to live a thorougher and
authentic christian life where orthodoxy is a praxis and hesychastic ideal
where in everything we do, it should reflect a christian ideal and zeal.. in
our view of the sciences, in our work, in our relationships and how we view
the world in general. But according to zalalas, a good christian is a
indifferent person…..moulding into a form of dualism and Augustine
predestination..

In comparing to Paul in control the tongue “ zalalas says that Paul claimed
to never have told lies and zalalas automatically interprets this idea with
—who can claim they have never criticised anyone—“” we can see clearly
observe here his reluctance to define a christian virtue in its proper
context and where the viewer may interpret that he actually speaking that
indifference is ok. Criticising is not unchristian, this is a dualistic idea…
otherwise byzantine would not discern to have a prefect to ensure the
water provisions are in place to ensure regular bathing, regular drainage
and sewerage provisions.. or to discern between good marbles and tiles to
decorate and ornamate our beautiful churches..

Zalalas says,”We find ourselves making certain statements without

thinking before we speak…
This podcast will expose and reveal the true convictions of Zalalas …. A
christian depends on the perfection of his words he says…. Does he curse,
bad mouth…”etc… finely said….
“If one can control his tongue can he even control his bodily movements
his says—
What about our fathers and saints that have confessed the faith in front of
persecution?? Of course he would not include this.. but a persons faculties
are not evil… in other words arrogance is only a mischanneling of our
faculty that needs to be shaped and re directed towards good… arrogance
is not inherently evil…. So god gave us pride for pride for god and
arrogance to resist heresy etc…. We just misplace these passions..
He adds,”The tongue can destroy peoples lives….tongue can burn down
houses mad man matches of a pyrotechnique.. tongues worse than
serpents and poisonous snakes—and repeats how evil the tongue is…..…
the tongue is almost construed as evil without revising and clarifying that
the tongue can use criticism and activism to do good , even though its
seems angry, god has instilled a good anger for a movement towards
good and justice and not evil. Eg anger against the devil by resisting and
reacting to dispel the heresies in the church….… if we did not have a
tongue how many sins would be avoided, but god gave it to us for a good
reason””?
When we curse people he says, we are cursing god… the uniform broad
canvas behind these mysterious confrontations are not detailed or
elaborated, however in our church w eactually anathematise heretics? Is
this cursing? He would say that this is not included—but this is what he is
saying and what he is preaching .. since 100 years of repeated heresies in
the church, zalalas finds solitude and virtue in indifference and not voicing
injustice because in our anglo globalized world, saying things that do not
conform and fit in are considered rude and il lmannered yet they are
important that we confess the truth … of course we do not curse people,
but what he means is discernment and enstating and confessing a
difference between a wrong and a right…. But since he does not believe in
evil, we would get to latter on, this is not a dilemma for him…
He states, that if we have nothing good to say to our shared passenger on
an airplane, lets look outside, be lost in our nice loss.””” this indifference
is astonishing and he makes it a religion. At 14.57 of control the tongue
youtube Constantine zalalas
He advocates a civil worldly view where people need to adapt and
compromise their values in order to conform to the world ,this is far from
the standards of christianity where we are obligated to speak the truth no
matter how controversial it is ….. so it is perfectly fine to be civil, social
and outgoing and enjoy peoples company while remaining true to
yourself. Of course we do not find every social occasion to change the
subject to speak of theology and speak the truth, but our interactions with
people by showing love and truth is a form of communion and confession ,
which is the community as envisionaged by the lord Jesus christ and the
archtype of the holy spirit…which we are called to emulate on earth…
Meekness——does not constitute indifference…. He does not clarify that
the faculties are not evil in themselves but that a movement towards good
and righteous is the zeal and courage in order to to speak in the face of
criticism and persecution…
Notice also many of his talks specifically cite examples of dispassion and
quiet heart with regards to the tongue.. he does not apply these ideals to
the temptations of the world where discernment is a prerequisite to
identify the fruits and benefit of a virtuous life which characteristically
require one to stand out, to be unmannered , to appear uncivil at times ,
even uncivil while we stand up and witness the truth for all to see.. .
. Is it unhumble if we criticise the greed and capitalism of our age?? No he
believes that indifference is a virtue and that if one does not have
something good to say, say nothing at all… where it pronounces that one
does not need to consult christian teaching but the simple folklaw of civi
manners.
Do not love the world, detachment to the world and st John
climacus ladder.. in podcast of zalalas titled without asceticism there is
no orthodoxy… detachment from secularism.. perseverance and humility
increase.

Zalalas mentions that if one does not fast he is cut off spiritually dead
without defining that in reality, a person struggles and with the support of
Christ’s love , they develop slowly more a zeal for the faith through a
dynamic process of working to develop and shape their spiritual
development…. He needed to define that fasting actually which clears the
person inclination toward sin , is a process inherently of the christian
struggle towards purification, enlightenment and glorification…. True that
fasting can cure illness addiction and detachment to material things…
Greed is the root of all evil. Cause it enslaves peoples hearts”… st Paul..
he states… fasting is a great perscription from fear of poverty, loss of job,
it develops bravery, courage and makes a christian adamant in his
resolve to be victorious , he learned to appease god and not his unstable
environment.. these convictions are sound…
Cowardness is a passion of the soul….Now Zalalas states some beautiful
truths about fasting and the passions and now resorts to turning his head
towards the application…. And this is where he departs from the truth…
He states that without asceticism there is no orthodoxy youtube video by
channel nicodemus Hagiorite….” Zalalas States “Another virtue is
obedience to the mother church and disobedience to my sinful
desires”””** He quickly relays a political and ecclessiastical situation
where , astonishingly his comments make out that the laity are relegated
as mere catholic spectators who have no part in their own church… the
royal priesthood that st basil calls the people the royal priesthood, are
entitled to defend their faith from monarchs and patriarchs and bishops
who depart from the canons of the church….. and obviously this virtue and
confession of the truth of the church is considered a passion or vice for
zalalas, Ironically…feeding the heart that is pre consumed with the idea
of secular hierarchal blind obedience rather than a love and zeal for the
faith and love for the lord ;not false hierarchs who depart from the faith…
This statement shows his unequivocal obedience to man, as if he were a
god or christ himself….The statement is structured in a way that renders
the hierarchs infallible and above the decrees of the church, like idols and
Demi gods and many new calendar conservatives are deluded by this
fantasy…it is equivalent to idolatry , the jazabel kind… without a doubt.
and one would be confident with this statement… because the alternative
is betrayal against christ and the saints… but the unrighteous are blinded
with a pulped up intellectualism that tries to rationalise heresy. One has to
be reminded that these hierarchs no longer affirm that christ is the only
way, despite zalalas stating to the contrary does not make the condition
and state of his mother church any better.
In 22 minute of without asceticism there is no orthodoxy he states”The
humble and the meek person does not rant and rave he says, he has full
respect for “peoples opinions and positions”… and st John does well when
he places this virtue and calls it” freedom from anger is the beginning of
this virtue and silence of the lips when the heart is agitated” quoting St
John climacus .. when we find ourselves fuming inside, “we try not to
express our feelings”… contrary to modern psychology we bit our tongue
and hold it inside”zalalas says—— eastern religions believe that people
are stuck in a vicious cycle of. Karma and that the person’s ontological
make up is an illusion that that the facilities are the cause of evil and
suffering itself .. the ego is cause of suffering…. This is the dualistic
position of eastern religions that apparently Zalalas implies when stating
that one should not express to truth and appear uncivil and ill-
mannered……Here we have the crust of the errors of this conservative
new calenderist…that borders his ideas on a morbid gnostic dualism..,
predestination and evolution .his view of the devil will explain and make
things clearer as we go along…
St John is speaking about the inner wisdom of silence in the face of
adversity and persecution, their is a certain nobleness and integrity in
silence if one were to bark and allow his passions dictate his reasons,
however it does not mean that one should repress his faculty of
expressing injustice [sloth] when he passions are rested and is able to
impartially or passionately express a truth with a sincerity and good
intention , or impart a criticism to something that is crucial to correcting a
wrong in society that leads to illumination and spirituality and most
importantly salvation.
Zalalas says “Firstly A meek person does not become angry—He lights up
at the slightest provocation:”” …”he will express his mind and speak
clearly but he will not demand that his views to be accepted”…who said to
zalalas that expressing one opinions is tantamount to demanding that he
views are imposed and heard??? This negates the whole idea of absolute
truth , relinquishing the idea towards relativeness where pluralistic
fantasies of opinions are the most honoured above the straight and
narrow gate towards christ…if one expresses a truth, does he not want
one to be persuaded and motivated and enlightened to the truth by
highlighting the error of another or should we remain like puppets in a
theatre ???obviously most social encounters do not invite the dialogue of
theological matters, but one can oblige oneself to reveal a secular truth of
injustice is a way to truly empathise and commune with a person ,
something that affects all of us..as we are all images of god working
towards becoming in his likeness.. Perhaps what is most likely the case
here is that Zalalas in context with his talks, finds this concept of
confession as adverse and fanatical and would rather people compromise
their Values in order to prioritise civiliness , without revisiting that one
can remain civil by confessing the truth…,or That one can enterprise a
spiritual development and awareness outside the catholic feudal idea that
one is confined and must accept the errors of their spiritual father through
blind obedience .. which views a spiritual father in an almost infallible
light even though he belongs to an institution that has essentially
betrayed christ for the pantheon of idolatry of other gods which hierarchs
are documented to have confessed in ecumenical meetings through the
20century…
….god gave us a heart, soul and brain to think for ourselves… we are not
serfs under a infallible papal system where we are not permitted to have
our own direct relationship with the lord and a system that dispenses
with created grace where we are captivated spiritually by another
person’s preconceptions and errors.…. The catholic priests have this
conception, but the priests in our church are only supposed to represent
god, not absolve him. The society of byzantium explored the beauty of the
transfigured world that christ created where abundantly we can
participate with the uncreated energies of the holy spirit to become
enlightened.,the art and culture reflected this theological ideal and reality
— the holy spirit cannot be confined in a feudal fashion where a person is
not permitted to become enlightened unless it is through the created
grace of the church or is legally obligated to follow the arbitrary guide of a
spiritual father… of course we must have the priests and bishops to
confess and conduct liturgies etc….but the people in orthodoxy also
comprise the church of god, not just hierachs as the cathollc follow.
Zalalas makes mention of blind obedience!!
Blind obedience and the prodigal son… he associates this with a priest
without relaying that fathers and priests can be also be in error and the
parable is applied inappropriately.***. An example… to use…. If one used
it correctly, the priests and hierarchs of the so called mother church new
Calenderists are also obliged to follow the parable as it is relevant to
their predicament where they are called by god to repent of their
obedience to a schismatic or heretic institution that has betrayed the lord
for the worship of idols.…
…. It is convenient that the new Calenderists have abolished the day of
orthodoxy where pronouncements of anathemas are called out in the
church, if this principle and concept was translated according to the
prodigal son message, it would mean that the son no longer wanted to
return to the father, but instead chose to evict the father i from his
property so that the mother church in rebellion to the lord did not need to
follow his legitimate godly rules anymore.** The arrogance of the russian
church imposition of. their standards of error are another concern…Eg toll
houses, neo gnosticism and other dualistic westernized doctrines that
reduce the church to a medieval hub of disbelivability
He considers adhering to the canons as fanatical in my opinion.. and this
is the greatest arrogance and vice of them all..
Meekness does not negate the flow of energy and faculty of a person to
experience anger against injustices of the world, it in this way god gave
the faculties to vile against the devil…This anger does not mean to
negatively create destruction and cause damage and violence and be
overwhelmed by anger that governs our reason, rather this faculty needs
to be silenced and channeled and incorporated into our expression while
not diminishing the urgency or even be seduced to refine to volume of
which we speak.. when we are struck by a concern and an imminent
issue , their is nothing wrong to express and convey every part of that
urgency and the level of importance that this injustice proportional
conveys. God gave us a tongue to convict injustice and expose the evil
doers…. indifference is evil.. the tongue is not evil.

…St Nicholas example of meekness by smacking Arius “for his heresy.—

this is a true statement by Zalalas and it is especially ironic since he
entertains double standards from a church that is complacent and
indifferent to truth by continuing to betray christ and who are not
troubled by the numerous ecumenist councils that repetitively break the
canons and commandments of the church…… Zalalas did not realise that
meekness does not negate the Flow of justice inside. And the anger
towards evil and injustice are channeled towards the good… the gnostic
dualistic idea that anger is inherently evil is not correct…. A person who
calms his anger and rechannels it for good brings energy, resistance and
resilience and armour in a persons life—this is where one gains courage
and faith… and restores true love and truth in his life.

It is unfortunate that when one shows emotion and love for justice and
passion… —[real passion directed towards good intentions without anger]
are seen as either mental, unstable by fake people who stigmatise a
person that does not fall into their narrow ideological box … simply for
expressing ones emotions… This is sessentially a vice of man who
insists on not providing compassion and empathy towards a person but
rather finds benefit to condemn and censor.
His almost dualistic convictions continue in the video,” why do we feel
empty at time”, from youtube channel argy arise ,, emptiness he says
comes from extreme outgoingness where we talk and laugh too much—
when we tell too many jokes and want to be involved with everything
,relations, institutions etc.— what fallacy! Pleasure of social communion is
not evil… this is where the sacredness of communion with people in the
secular sphere is still honourable …unless one follows a gnostic dualistic
understanding….like the name of the rose where a monk plants poison on
ancient books to avoid the evil of laughter in peoples lives..
— I find at times that speaking about the things that matter around us are
permitted unless of course, we inhabit a disposition and inclination in our
hearts ,a vice or a bad intention to gossip and speak badly about a person
for the sake of jealous and vice etc… however if we speak about genuine
communicable matters that concern our daily lives and which would
benefit us and especially where we need to check the evil and discern,
their is nothing wrong with expressing that… god allowed a freewill so that
we are not bound to limitation but to learn in freedom and not have a filter
where information is categorised as controversial, fanatic or un
conforming.. zalalas promotes the ideal that the process of love is negated
by a system and ritual of censorship and a series of social filters to ensure
content of expression more accepting and palatable for civil niceness , not
for spiritual development so to appease man…
Once a priest called someone;s enterprising and insightful views of the
world a conspiracy theory, of course the priest would also believe that the
correct christian idea that satan rules this earth for deception is also a
conspiracy theory. .
We live in an age where communications, relations and community has
become commotized and where we are bound by a grid where dissent is
politized and filtered and where truth never find a channel of expression…
so to commit to an ideal that censors expression and love under the guise
of humility is not humility but conformity…
As st Nicholas points out, the smack of Arius was a meek and humble act.
Zalalas says in fasting and dealing with thoughts argy aris video
youtubeQuote ,” that a church can be reduced to a massage parlour” he
says …do we want to be christians today or not, if we want to accept
everything a priest or a lay person, and oh you want to give holy
communion to homosexuals, if we compromise everything then the church
is no longer a hospital but a massage parlour”””Zalalas says— His
convictions are noble in this way…it seems that perhaps his personal
conviction and disposition is one where he does not accept the status quo
of his church, but still may rationalise his involvement in an ecumenists
church that no longer confesses the truth…through renovating. The
renditions of ecumenism and traditions he conveys are like modes and
modulations for mere curious and edifying content that are digestible to
the new secular feudal overlords that have hyjacked the church of
god..But we are supposed to live god with our actions [hesychasm and
through PRaxis]
We certainly do not condemn these people , but again, it is important to
identify the weaknesses…of his argument whether he failed to clarify or
has a fundamental flaw of reasoning…
PAisios called a woman a prostitute because she was not dressed well and
lost the grace of god..—he criticised ‘ “””[Zalalas relays this story in his
podcast] Paisios lost the grace of god once he claims and made
friendship with demons? can he really be a saint??
Morbid evolutionism in fasting and dealing with thoughts
Constantine Zalalas..

Without subscribing the most worse assumptions of what is said with the
finer aspects of theological reasoning, zalalas mandates that one can
thank the devil falls in to a form of dualism and evolutionism ,a zing and
zang..” when I have a thought like that I thank the devil “ he quotes
paisios saying.. and then says jokingly then you reminded me to stop
praying? It sounds simple— it works—“ we can thank him for doing his
job”zalalas says to remind us we are fallen people, god could have put
him on mars or another planet..…. That is why god put him on the earth,
so we can struggle and remind us we are fallen people… “ he put him on
earth as a trainer.. paisios was so polite he would not even call the devil
satan and would give him an affectionate nick name.””Zalalas said in
podcast.—— This reacks on calvinistic duality where god made the devil
as an accomplice to gods vengeance. So contradicting himself when he
affirmed that orthodox worship a different god and in broad day light
admits to the calvinistic retributive god.
• . Zalalas Continues,“the devil is not evil” he is not dark as he is made
out to be… the devil was created good is his essence and was made
by god… it seems that innate predestination is dominant here, that
something is not evil, by virtue of having been created by god… the
saints he says come to the point where they love the entire creation
and even the demons”zalalas maintains, even though this
contradicts the bible when a christian is supposed to hate the
world, though he loves creation and hates the sin but not the sinner
and satan is not a friend but an enemy that we should not attempt
to contact or have dialogue with…Zalalas Says that Isaac the
Assyrian speaks about that…
• zalalas continues ,“because the saints come to the point where they are
so full of loves, they love all of creation . When we have burning
love for creation and even the demons”” he does not love their
fallen nature or their evil… and by the way the devil is not evil”
according to Zalalas… the devil is not as dark as you think as he is ,
 hopefully that is what he meant. “He is not evil by his nature cause
evil does not exist in its essence…”zalalas in 36 minutes fasting and
dealing with thoughts Constantine zalalas youtube——cause
everything was created by god and god creates only good things.”
So that demons are good. He was created good in his essence, but
became evil by choice through choice or disposition.. god loves
devil, atheists, christians and atheists 100%” he adds,…Paisios one
day he was praying for the demons.. and said why cannot they
repent….. and then allowed the devil to appear and praying for the
demons and he appears and tells him and “hey man who told you
to pray for me and I do not need to repent…””[Zalalas quote.]
• obviously Paisios was struck by a wrong theological conviction to even
raise up the issue in the first place that the devils could potentially
repent and his disposition to give them affectionate nick names and
refuse to call demons evil.. ..under the wrongly assumption that
they are like people who could repent and be saved is reminiscent of
the belief of the apokatastasis[a heresy in the church] or pseudo
Nysa indulgences, created grace, toll houses and purgatory where
no matter what god’s creation does, since god created them good,
they are all gods creation and are destined to salvation.. even
though he does not overtly mean this, this literature is accepted in
the new calendar church….and st Andrews theological college that
speaks about .
• How can you love the devil where you are supposed to hate the evil of
the world? Even though we are called to love the person even when
they are sining and that creation is good
• …In false theology true healing and nature of evil in youtube argy aris
Zalalas says,”
• the passions, or the so called evil was not given to us by demons… the
demons do not have a body, they do not have a body or cellular
structure and cannot impregnate woman” evil according to the
fathers does not exist”—azaleas exclaims— it is lifeless and
without essence and did not pre exist gods creation since all
creation was created from god, evil is not part of gods
creation..everything made by god is all good.. the devil is
essentially good, the demons are good as creatures of god.
so evil lives and exists as a parsite out of the freewill of
demons and people so evil is a matter of choice.. darkness
has no essence since it is the absense of light… we cannot
blame the devil or our nature for our evil passions ,what we
call as evil passions are gifts and virtues bestowed upon us
 by the creator.. after the fall these god given virtues, these
energies that were all good were corrupt and distorted in
selfish greed and all these passions we have to deal with..
for Zalalas the devil is almost a victim of his own sinning as if god
came down to also save the devil… is exactly the convictions he is
making…the disposition of the demons is that they are producing a
real energy of evil and embody it, they are not humans who are
struggling with the passions and sins, they are the embodiment of
this negation of good and we trust in god foreknowing that the devil
even if you could repent, does not want to…The devil according to
Zalalas is also capable of good according to his reasoning and this is
the bandwagon whereby he adopts calvinistic conceptions of the
devil in a gnostic dualistic sense—the devil as gods helper for
salvation… rather the devil acts independently wanting to deceive ,
though god permits it, he does not cause it…God may permit a bad
thing from happening so that people are turned towards god and
saved. but he does not act in accordance with the devil to assist in
his plan to trick and deceive man towards damnation.. which zalalas
implies. Though evil is not compatible as dualistic competition to
good , does not mean that evil does not exist..
• Response remember that Zalalas makes no clarity to attempt to salvage
the ontology between good and evil and he is most probably a
advocate of oriegen who believes in the apokatastasis where even
the devil will be saved at the end of time,[since he believes evil
does not exist] and that the devil is like man who can repent in the
same way.. These are disturbingly bold statements and one is
begotten as to whether one can construe what he says as an
orthodox statement…. unfortunately no— it is impossible ——He
makes the devil merely a sinner without making qualification that
the devil is the great deceiver who attempts to replace the throne of
god as the object of worship himself. when Zalalas says that evil
does not exist he presumes that just because evil is not an
ontological essence in polarised duality to the goodness of god.. like
two titans of good and evil that mesh merge and compete for
control in nature, does not mean that evil does not exist…. The
negation of love and the act to negate good is evil… one has to
make a distinction , otherwise they fall into a duality of eastern
religions that believe good and evil mesh and merge to create
harmony in the world and therefore an evil act is merely a
component for the cause of a greater predestined good in the end,
no matter the devil disposition and choice of people[predestination]
 —therefore Origen conclusion permits—zalalas then would
rationalise since if evil does not exist and god never intended in his
creation , then all his creatures naturally return to salvation and
good…Apokatastastis is considered a heresy in the church… He
adds the devil is good essentially as creatures of god…. What is
astonishing to this heresy is that he does not make reservations to
salvage that even though evil has no essence or rather the belief
that evil is naturally embedded in the nature of things, he does not
mean that evil does not exist in the embodiment of the devil who
choose to rebel many of the angels in heaven to create a
alternative view of creation in his name..
• The conception of the devil as good presumes the gnostic ideal or
Calvin idea that the devil is merely an instrument of god when in
reality he is attempting to deceive man from salvation…. God
permitting the devil to act, does not preclude an assumption that
the devil is his accomplice… but zalalas believes the devil is gods
accomplice and according to this demonic reason, god then
automatically saves everything in the end of time…even though he
would not explicitly state it, he means it….by inference of his
dualistic belief. The devils actions are consistently and
comprehensively evil in his desire to replace god as the ruler of the
universe and subvert the laws of good to the laws of evil.. this is
trully an embodiment of evil by disposition and action.. and is not a
case of a human struggling, in the flesh, against sin.. remember the
devil committed an agenda and rebellion in the spirit….and the
antichrist will come to create a world that is in obedience to a
mantra of evil rules and regulations, masked by civilness and fake
philanthropy in order to conceal it… is trully blasphemous…
• He says evil exists as a parasite in the freewill of demons and people..
so if demons have a freewill like human beings, means they will be
saved in the end by repenting…so evil is a matter of choice he adds
• Zalalas contradicts himself when he begins to say the demons are
molecully different to us to strangely prove that they did not give us
the passions and then latter would compare the devil and human
beings as essentially merely sinners…he does not account that the
devil was an angel that sinned in the spirit and chose to deceive
humanity .so he has a case of symptom for the devil.
• just because evil is not ontological an essence does not mean that the
devil is not evil… even though he was an angel of god , he had
fallen and became evil and as the lord says that the devil was a
murderer from the beginning and had no truth in him..and drew the
 other angels into the fall. All the actions of the deceiver are a
negation of the goodness of god… Jesus did not come to save the
devil to save us from the devil… obviously PAisios lacked this
distinction…of understanding..
• He also over emphasises the fear of god rather than having the love of
god. Isaac Syrian espoused Apokatastasis and Zalalas makes
reference to him… it is a study within itself if these are catholic
forgeries , but they certainly would not have formed one of the
saints of the church..
• the reason is because it mentions purgatory… like pseudo
Gregory Nysa , forgeries developed from the Vatican to counter the
claims of the Orthodox Church.. st mark of ephesus exposed them in
the council of Florence.
• Zalalas says,”He is not evil is his nature cause evil does not exist in its
essence. The ontology of what is good and bad is disturbed,
therefore one subscribes to a form of evolution where god allows an
evil to thrive as having an instrument, actual purpose to fuse and
mesh evil for the purpose of the betterment of the good; evil in
itself does not produce fruits or in other words that good relies on
evil like the eastern belief of harmony so and that life to thrive and
exist needs a mixture of the two….. though evil has no essence, the
ontology of evil is negated as having an accomplice with good and
therefore this inclines the heretic to be silent when evil occurs and
identifies tragedies essentially in the same light and faculty as
secular rulers or the jesuits who justify evil as a means to a greater
good, when the fathers and the bible make it clear that one cannot
use bad or hate in order to serve the good.. god may permit and
allow a great delusion, not to use devils as accomplices but to test
the faithful whether they have a true love for justice and truth
Quote and refer to —Ephesians… but god does not do this in order
to rebalance nature and constitution to thrive as the very foundation
of its existence and material creation [gnostic dualism]
• Zalalas implies that god is responsible for the bad things that happen to
the world ,but making the devil an accomplice as revealed earlier
when zalalas thanks the devil for intervening in human kind.. they
significantly shift the ontology of good & evil and free will. Especially
the synergic interaction of the Holy Spirit in our daily lives..…the
devil deceives man to choose evil, not for the love of man and to
save him by being his accomplice as entertained by calvistts,but to
reap havoc on creation and the destruction of this world>the
destruction of this world and all its evil is not caused by god, as
 implied by zalalas statement, but by the sins of the people, of man
and the devil..deception… This is the clear implication of what
Zalalas is stating.
• Predesination of Augustine when you assign the devil as an
accomplice to god, you presume that all will be saved in the end
regardless of choice and you presume that the free will is subject to
predestination or zalalas designation of a mere , “parasite’ where
god orchestrated and intended the angels to become devils not out
of free will ,but out of necessity[calvinism] for the salvation of
people]] without free will and love —even though we know clearly
that the devil is not here to assist gods path of salvation but to
destroy it…This is to be distnguished from god, “Allowing it ,or
permitting it for the economic and salvation of the world..
• but devil is trying to deceive humanity to not have salvation.., not assist
it..
• just because the devil is not a god in the gnostic sense have an
essence , an ontology of being, does not mean the devil is not evil,
to the extent that he is negating the good of gods plan of salvation
by deceivingc man … if it were an ontological essence, it would
mean that evil had a justified cause of being of existence , where it
is natural, justified and normal… and mixes with The good and
where two gods need to be served since they formulate and
constitute creation as envisioned by the two dualistic gnostic gods
of creation…
• The devil wants to replace god as the worship of his creation by
changing and shifting what should be normal and good as evil,
hardly this qualifies him to be like a human being as merely a
disposition as a sinner… since we know that the devil cannot be
saved since the choosing to rebel against god and replace god is an
abomination to the lord and seeks to overturn the nature of
creation to become evil as its basis
• ….It is a world envisioned where man can find idolatry and worship
himself above god as being a god himself without the need of christ
the light of truth and justice. and thus they tend to define good and
evil according to human standards of convenience. He causes a
persecution so that we may loss our faith.. the diabolos is the one
that divides and distorts…Paisios thinks of him like a man but is a
fallen angel. Why?
• God always shows warnings before an evil occurrs.
• The idolatrous papal mentality has also infected orthodox who believe
that a man on earth has the keys the heaven and hell by virtue of
 being a patriarch… no man can claim to be christ or god, since if he
does not adhere to the apostolic canons that constitutes Christs
body on earth, the church of christ then designated him as a heretic
or schismatic.. but today this papal infallible persists despite errors
as high as a mountain and many decades of patience.. instead of
waiting for a return, the devil is slowly infiltrating and infecting
those inside…. The church does not stall or suspend itself from time
and space just to wait til man is validated and repents back to the
church, it continues to move..
• … The church path moves on and continues. The church does not move
from people, people move from the church… Paisios statements that
one is outside the church if one does not commemorate the
archbishop reaps of idolatry and secularity… it does not reflect on
spiritual things but proclaims man as a god who is self ordained to
shape the laws of the visible and invisible church in the political
mode that he moulds and create.. by virtue of his worldly position
he is deemd to have precedence and authority over the father
saints and constitutions of the church..
• The church does not have to be perfect, as we can see in revelations
and how in the hospital their are various members that constitute
the body of christ, but when one states that. Sin is not a sin and a
commandment is not a commandment and the church renovates,
then the process of repentance is tainted and a correction of dogma,
canons and constitution needs to be initiated.
• In, video ,” can a heretical bishop defile the church by Nicoemos
Hagiorite.. youtube video.—
• Zalalas states ,people become an authority unto themselves? No the
church has specific prescriptions located in their canons that a
heretical or schismatic bishop must be dispensed with so a person
of christ does not act unto the whims of his own lusts and itching of
ears ,but is obliged to be obedient to the decrees of the one holy
and apostolic church of god. .
• Zalalas Admits violations of canons ,…. Admits that you are not
supposed to pray and have liturgical communion with non
orthodox… despite for over 100 years these errors were never
raised for dialogue as to its illegal inclusion or even addressed but
instead have sort to build foundations from these errors , that
instead diminish with time are instead increased and increased to
the point where it has become a institution itself as promised that
they would do with the 1920 encyclical . They have essentially
replaced the decrees of the ecumenical councils for a new secular
 world councils master ,.
• Even if we show economy and love excusing the breaking of some
canons and say the church is not corrupt ,how can you explain a
purposeful , premeditated and agenda driven by the ecumenists in
the church that systemically redefines new theological realities
throughout the century beginning with the encyclical of 1920 that
specifically defined their promise to adhere to a new secular
standard of theology while recognising that the previous traditional
councils that constitutes the church as outdated, relegated,
redacted and redundant ?
• And are consciously repetitively ignoring and negating any reference to
the precedents and decisions of the previous traditional ecumenical
councils but rather now quote the new canons of the WWC which
dictates a new discourse and rhetoric of a new theological reality
and form the very basis , foundation and criteria of their decisions…
The apostates have shamelessly innovated the ecclesiology of our
church to form new theological concepts and reality consistent with
their new jazabel world master eg. the thyteira , balamond
union/confession and conferences through the century has shifted
their theology to a new world view totally negating the spirit of the
8 ecumenical councils of the Orthodox Church…which they declare
as null and void?? would the Holy Spirit witness a church to splinter
and wholesale its confession into a protestant branch theory it no
longer abides and follows the ancient ecumenical councils but has
apostatised and divided into its new master the world council of
churches that salvages all the heresies of the past like the ghost
machine in the ghost buster films and decrees that all the decisions
of the councils of the past are now outdated and wrong and our new
WWCcouncil is now the one that is right because they have secular
and political power.?? Do not the church canons specify that if
such a thing did occur, that one would be obligated and inclined as
a christian to condemn this innovation and respect the ordinances
of the traditional councils which were genuinely guided by a
orthodox spirit of collegiality and by the Holy Spirit and which were
validated by the decrees of the fathers, saints of the apostolic
church of christ…which has the genuine lineage of apostolic
tradition and succession?
• Nysa had errors Zalalas exclaims , does not distinguish that their is a
difference between papal forgeries and the genuine Nysa.
• Zalalas makes a great effort to prove that despite the breaking of
dogmas, canons and institutions their was a passage of time … I ask
 him this? What about the council of Crete?? That now solidified the
errors of the past as predicted by the encyclical of 1920
statement….? It was no surprise that this council did not raise the
issues of ecumenism in the 21st century because the ecumenists
already began a series of actions to renovate and innovate the
church that , started with 1920 that secularised the church to
purposely move away from its foundation and its base…by building
an apostate or a secular council in direct opposition to the original
and real one… so Zalalas claim that a passage of time can heal by
naming past precedents in history where the church tolerated
heresy does not make sense on two counts .1 we live in an
unprecedented time where the schisms and heresies of the past
,never superseded to demolish, redefine, negate past councils and
to formally renovate the church into a new child of the
enlightenment and the new world order.. like that which has had
happened with the ecumenists hyjacking the church into an organ of
state and the plaything of world politics and world powers.. 2 when
heresies arose if they did thrive for a little time , they were promptly
dealt with by the ecumenical councils on a local and regional level.
And previous councils decree on the subject already had convicted
the heretic of wrong doing; but imagine a time when you abolish the
landlord from the vinyard and no longer needed to abide by the
rules and therefore one can act like a legalistic jazabel , constantly
introducing new heresies every year until her excommunication
that will never happen since these pharasites know well that they
have evicted the father from the vineyard and are no longer obliged
to follow the laws of the councils because they essentially serve a
new god, a new secular council…that allows them to perpetually
and legalistic introduced falsehoods without intervention..without
consequence, while masquarading that they remain canonical with
the councils that they have formally evicted and abolished as the
standard and measure of what is acceptable doctrine and what is
falsehood.. Imagine!!!
• .. Zalals mentions in youtube video can a heretical bishop defile the
church?? Which I would predict he would think impossible> their
was a process of at least recognising the error and making the
necessary amendment with the convening council in either on the
local or regional level…despite the passage of time…
• He finds a source of legalism and technicality by citing heresy occurred
before the movement of the new calendar…calendar change where
canons were breached without a formal schism or declaration.
• Rather than instating that this movement that preceded the destruction
of the church was it cause and had been the very reason and origin
of the schism in the first place and these very facts he presents
actually justify the schism of 1924 since the events he names were
indications and warnings from god that an event was to occur and
that one needed to be diligent in the faith to identify an emerging
evil that reached its culmination and increased its frequency of error
as demonstrated by the actual schism The hypocrisy of what he is
saying is that despite admitting that his church receive and
commune non orthodox today, he accuses the church before the
schism for not making a formal decree to create a schism
prematurely as evidence that it should not have happened latter
on , even though the church provides therapy and antidote to these
canonical breaches and would have been on guard and on alert
whether these breaches constituted something more significant and
damaging to the spirituality of people and increased in frequency
and emerged to become the defacto standard and overturn the
whole church… I would say Zalalas inadvertently provided fodder for
the justification of the schism rather than argue against it… since to
translate his defence of this would be to concur that these isolated
incidents of breaches and by employing the legalistically use of
canons can be compared to the actual and purposeful destruction of
the whole church by wholesaling its enterprise into a complete
secular organisation bound only by secular decrees and mandates…
which was the initiative of the 1920 encyclical and the calender
change with its 10 point renovation plan that unanimously defined
in their mantra that the new secular enlightened dogma of the
protestant branch theory that acclaims that the hedrodox had the
apostolic tradition of the church of christ and that the Orthodox
Church they declared was only one part of it…incomplete.. thus they
violated the nicene creed and confession of faith. •
• what hypocrisy.. since the cause for the 1917 anglican receiving
orthodox incident he cites at this stage of video was caused by the
same movement that was slowly infecting the church and began the
schism and of which became , I repeat became in essence embodied
with the new calendar movement..…Hippocrite, while people
remained viligent and patient with hierachs showing that they took
good measures of patience to not prematurely make a pre emptive
formal declaration of schism and hoped to endure and persist with
the faith in the struggle until these modulation and parasites behind
the scene suddenly broke out from the trenches in guerrilla warfare
 and coup de tat the church—thus they instigated the schism
because they forced to redefine and renarrate the church into a
secular institution…. The laity had no choice and looked to their
hierarchs who were persecuted for standing up to the faith.. …..
What Pharsitical Hippocrisy!!
• Zalalas love for for legalism by stating that the old would be without
grace if they were convicted of this event of canonical breaches is
totally legalistic , since the powers that be were pushing this
direction and the people cannot be blamed but applauded for
walling themselves off from the a heretical bishop in collusion to this
movement that was not initiated by the people but by politics and
hierarchs.. and the powers that be, who were responsible for those
examples of breaches Zalalas provides, finally attacked with a coup
de tat of the church and effected the schism.… on top of that …
here is another filter, the ecemenists have made those errors the
standard rule and redefined these errors as theological truths within
themselves…while persecuted anyone bound by the councils of the
apostles, saints and fathers of christ before then… I would say who
are the real fanatics????
•
• . The 1917 incident was before the encyclical of 1920. That made a
promise that the church of christ is the branch theory…. So zalalas
is making excuses for that a boat that is wounded and is slowly
infiltrated by heresy , while some conservatives are waiting for an
announcement, even to the most skeptical, the council of Crete
represents the ecumenists a confirmation and validation, a
certification that they have fully aborted their adherence to the
original councils of their church and now abide by a new theological
defined standard set by secular and worldly principles……The key is
that they officially dogmatized the heresies they introduced since
the schism of 1924…in the wolf in sheep clothing guise of acting like
a genuine council that was official and formal. but merely was a
theatre. the council of crete also shows their will never be an official
condemnation of ecumenism, rather it is declared to be the new
standard and dogma of the ecumenists..and so those old
calenderists , like cyprian synod of resistance were awaiting an
official council to condemn heresy of ecumenism , suddenly found
that the council officially accepted and incorporated it as a new
theological reality ….
The deceiver has planted a trap for the ecumenists where many believe
there needs to be a council that validates their heresies as heresies,
despite knowing very well their exist aheresies and are increasing in
nature, makes them self condemned hypocrites since they rigged the
election with black ops and ensured that by fixing the councils along
secular lines and by mandating a abortion from the original councils, their
can perpetually set back the technicality of an official condemnation
since they no longer adhere to the criteria, measures and canons and
foundations of the original ecumenical councils that were truly guided by
the Holy Spirit..,All the while , the heresies become bolder and increase
and those inside, thinking that they can hide away from god, act as if
nothing is wrong in the church of god and condemn those who keep the
faith as heretics or schismatics while affirming the hedrodox as equal heirs
of the church with a recognised baptism…. You do not get better than this
people..…since the pharasites too acted on technicalities while the spirit
of the law evaded them…They were infact blinded because they had no
love for justice and truth and so the lord sent a great delusin..
These individual instances that he cites does not apply to worldwide
apostasy that is occurring now…
The greatest enemy is the secularisation of the church” he admits this—
however zalalas fails to cite that this is the apostasy where the
ecuemenists, like the deceiver, do not want to repent since they actively
seek to redefine god hcommandments and allowing the idol as an object
of worship……. How can the Holy Spirit live amongst them????? Of course
we show economy to the individual and personal relationship of people
with christ since christ can save whom ever he wishes, but if they
arbitrarily pledge continual ignorance, they cannot build their spiritual
development on a technicality that they are not condemned since they
had rigged the councils for themselves and subverted the church canons
to conform and become defined by a world secular body, which is
unprecedented in history…..… we have many instances of history to
demonstrate that schism was instantaneous.. this is an argument the
archdioceses can apply if we were in 1930, but not after their active, and
continual involvement negating the commandments of faith but
conforming and adhering to the secular standard for now the last 100
years… but this time it was a different beast since a heresy was
considered no longer a heresy so a schism had to happen… as it
represented an apostasy…..a coup de tat of the church…..St basil
prophetically applied his first canon to this event in the history of the
church that no even the crusaders attacking constantinople could
penetrate and no even the gates of hades can destroy the church..
Zalalas admonishes people to not condemn bishops, even though the
Orthodox Church does not have a catholic papal structure and people are
liberal to follow the canons and not abide a feudal lord that believes
themselves as god themselves on earth..
Zalalas is insistent to allow himself to selective interpret ion the bible
instead of the consensus of collegiality of the church which proclaims the
antidotes and medicines or canons that are recommended to use . Zalals
presents and quotes bibilical verses to try to rationalise and justify for this
abomination in history…. And ironically confirms that one is actually
justified in cutting off or walling off from heresy..Like god working the
periphery. showing to the elect the fools who we can laugh at…
Zalalas says,”Angel to the church Sardis.—.Quote you are alive but dead—
he states … those who are defiled in garments and are not worthy—Is a
reference to the personal sins of a bishop does not mean that you should
follow a bishop who is heretical.. he interprets it wrong by elaborating that
this also means doctrinally and ethically
To the church of thyteira I know your works faith patience..but you allow
this dangerous woman jazabel to who calls a herself a prophetesss and
teaches and seduces my servants to cause sexual immorality and eat
things sacrificed to idols… one bishop lost his first love and the other was
lukewarm.. “the church did not act like a military court martial but gave it
time to repent” When reading the actual passage of what he is referring to
revelations 2-18-29 , this principle can only be applied centred on this
pertinent point “ I have given her time to repent of her immorality she is
unwilling” revelations 21…is the ecumenical church wanting to repent of
its bad deeds of ecumenism where it affirms that their is more than one
way to salvation other than christ, where all gods are permitted to be
worshipped… the irony that he would use this quote is ironic since jazabel
represents the pantheon of religious idolatry reminscient of what the
modern ecumenist movement is involved with and has been for many
centuries.. and not only is the so called mother church not wanting to
repent, it is increasing its errors and turning idols as foundations of
worship within themselves… To the point of ……….jazabel who promotes
sexual immorality and eating of food sacrificing to idols… so too in the
conference in Canberra in 80s all world leaders joint together declaring
that all idols lead to salvation**….How demonic..! But as Zalalas claims,
satan is a friend…. almost.. Now the church tolerates sinners who are
weak, ailing and seek repentance and forgiveness, but not jazabel who is
obviously judged by god since he sees her increasing her errors and he
had given time, as indicative of the passage, to repent of her errors.
Zalalas states that a hospital with only healthy patients , what sort of
hospital would it be.. I would at least state that at least the ailing
members admit they are sick and not pretend they are healthy and lead
others to believe that they are really healthy with deceptions and
falsehoods whom are constantly reminded, do not need the perscriptions
and medicines of christ like the passage in the bible about shows JAzabel
disposition to trully be..
Zalalas then at 2.42 video ,” Can heretical bishop defile the church
legalistically bypasses the principle of the argument by stating, “in order
to maintain keep healthy members externally that they excommunicate
members who are too weak and are unable to conform to the church
standards….JAzabel is not weak but is growing stronger in her persistence
to deceive others… she is a heretic not a sinner… Zalalas adds that ,” The
Orthodox Church provides long term therapeutic disclipline[he means love
contrition and dispensation ]—Zalalas provides an escape from the
obvious implication of jazabel message, which especially indict members
who are unwilling to repent, it does not state in the passage that it will ex
communicate members who are not willing to repent from weakness due
to their weakness in constitution , their lukewarm and lack of zeal of faith
and this is consistent with new calendar heretics who are worshiping idols
and increase their errors by giving offering and sacrifices to these idols—
how literal do you want it to be??? So the passage justifies the old
calenderists and the canons while Zalals meant this to be an apologetic
for his ecumenical church, but instead further justifies the old calendar.
Declaration to wall off and declare schism is justified to those who have
entered into this abomination where a new facility and chasm had been
officially opened, post 1920 encyclical that categorically and arbitrarily
and unanimously restores past heresies as legitimate doctrines
according to the new principle and paradigm of their measure…which is
set by secular authorities in politics.…. Not only are these members ailing
or need the church as medicine and therapy, but seek to change the
dogmas and teaching of the church to lead astray and jeopardise people
salvation… zalalas interprets the actions of the old calenderists, that he is
referring to as people who are throwing out ailing members who are
wanting repentance ..when clearly the passage speaks about heretics who
seek not ever to repent but rather are intent to renovate the
church….Amazing …error !—a the vanity of the mind subjects the
ecumenist to fantasy and rationalisms by redefining the passage of
JAzabel as not an idolators but merely a sinner who is permitted to
renovate in the church and justify to remain within the church because
she had set the new rule herself that her sacrifices no longer constitute a
breach of gods commandments and laws.. all this is fashioned by the
ecumenists and zalalas under the pretext that they are merely ailing
members who are seeking repentance…and should not be prematuely
removed from the church…. The ecumenists allow the jezebels to even
thrive and gain positions, and are the leaders of the church while the laity
are considered peasants unworthy to talk or. express. In other words that
jazabel who wants to change the doctrines of christ and salvation is only a
sick member who is permitted not only to remain in the church but to
actually thrive and increase her errors to such a demonic scale that that
the worshipping of other idols is now permitted… which is the very
foundation of the church is that it is only through christ one can achieve
salvation and christ left the elect with the mysteries and the church on
earth…
Now at 3.38 speaks about those who are an authority unto themselves
acting completely hypocritically since jazabels are numerous in the new
calender who are permitted to shift and change their interpretation of the
bible according to their lustful wiles and itching ears… and has not only
made them sparse but made them leaders who are permitted to speak
about idolatry on an official level..and infect the other members.. which is
consisrent with their agenda for the last 100 years.

Zalalas states,”The church never acted as a military court martial…it

condemn and spiritually execute their members in a few days??[what an
exaggeration] he continues,” their are times where wise and holy people
people fell in heresies and delusions and god who searches the hearts did
not find them unworthy of his mercy…NOTICE the liberal notion of
Woodstock love in employed without the intrinsically notion of truth that is
attached to it namely, that god does not allow heretics to remain in the
church to alter doctrines, it ex communicates them…— how he dis
includes the word repentence in the formula. that god searched the heart
and did not consider them unworthy, even though these supposed holy
people were preaching a heresy and have arbitrarily ignored gods calling
for mercy, since not only have they remained unrepentant but sort to
distort the commandments —hardly qualifies them as members of the
vine…But this conviction is based on revisionist history that seeks to
include the Vatican forgery of Nyssa’s works as well as incorporating the
heretical oriegen…
A heretic distorts the commandment of the faith , he is not only a sinner
not listening to god but the whims of his own passions and deceptions..his
heart is not even clean for uncreated knowledge and the holy spirit to
enlighten the person…when someone creates a heresy, god does not wait
and permit and allow numerous members to be polluted with his rendition
of heresy while trying to search for his heart, since he is already
influenced and failed to repent , the person rather would be ousted and
only then through the searching of his heart with god can he return to the
church so that he does not spread the poison and pollute the other
members… but Zalalas is content that in the ailing church , it is perfectly
fine that the heretic remains in the church to redefine what is good and
what is evil and what is true repentence and what is not.. and
communicate and spread this poison to other members.. He states that
god shows mercy and allow him to spread this heresy to other members
all while god attempts to search his heart and reform him…if he desires to
—no the heretic already went through this process and only when outside
the search can he search for god and his conscious to correct and repent
of his error . Zalalas also disrespects orthodox ecclessiology where their is
a consistent episodes of history in the church where consistently heretics
are ousted for their ideas.. He would lead one to believe that never in the
church did a heretic cause a schism in the church where a a church would
literally cut themselves and create a new church because of that heretical
bishop.. why did this not happen? Because in the orthodox world there
existed no secular competing organism that was hell bent to subvert and
hyjack the church and reform it into a secular institution of academics who
are free with the whim of their passions to distort and renovate the
dogmas of the church according to the fashion and political motive of the
day …as had happened in with the 1920 encyclical.. Rather councils in the
ancient church dealt with the heresy in the church and the canons and
their therapies were perscribed and administered today the ecumenists
do not want the medicines of the canons but rather are prefer the cup of
indignation….. So they can find all the examples they like based on the
weak argument of the passage of time and how the filoque was not
condemned for many centuries or the schism with the west was not
confirmed until much latter. When these events posed different obstacles
for the empire at the time . The franks introduction to innovations and
changes in the structure of Rome exarchate posed many problems where
the franks introduced innovations within the church. The church showed
economia , mostly because the roman people who were now enslaved
under the franks and their ellite corporations did not entertain these
heresies.. but a emanation and projection of the canonical standard with
the protection of the emperor ensued where certainly local regional
churchs in italy preserved the faith from the tyranny and the political
realm that was dispelling around them , however the the romans never
accepted these innovations introduced by the franks but instead used
political diplomacy to sort it out.. today the political expediency is also
the validation of those heresies… the emperor as the representative of
god on earth was able to emanate his influence in italy until 1071 when
Bari was lost and obviously this was around the time the Heretics of the
west condemned the orthodox as heretical….St mark of Ephesus firmly
called the catholics heretics…….despite the catholics producing forgeries
in his name to try to obliterate the historical record of the Orthodox
Church that they hoped to dsesimate . At this time their was no world
wide Hyjacking of the church of god to have effected the schism that
eventuated in 1924… where all the minor events occurring before this all
added up and culminated into the events latter on..
Zalalas adds ,”The orthodox church does not have a human head, the
head of the church tree and fruits is christ you are divine and you are the
branches…” he states .. no the church he worships in has a human leader
with a secular structure which arbitrarily and unanimously and
unequivocally ignores the canons and constitutions of the church…HE
contradicts also because a orthodox christian is required to stand up for
his faith , even against hierarchs who produce heresy.
A dead branch may not kill the vine , but will infect the other branches”
Nicholas..
But better it turns out that Zalalas conviction that a dead branch can still
remain on a vine is contradicted by the very passages of the bible that he
quotes.

zalalas “It is another thing that the church adopt heretical and false
teaching that will ultimately make it a dead branch , like Protestantism
and catholicis and a totally different matter for the mother church to have
tolerance for people or local church who may hold onto unorthodox or bad
teachings… eg Filoque…. 587 AD> Synod…Their are theories that the
filoque came and was forged much latter when the franks coup de tat the
roman exarchate.
Response wow, it is breathtaking the hypocrisy of this person. Orthodoxy
formally accepts the baptism of catholics and protestants as valid within
the church. So here is. a question, would not this dead branch of which
zalalas admits it to be, affect the other branches of the vine??? and
especially when christ repeatively states that bad branches are cut off??
Additionally ,the new calender has grafted itself into this dead branch of
protestantism and catholicism.

He makes a reference to catholics and prostestants as dead branches.

Those very dead branches that the ecumenists believe are alive and are
grafted onto… While they believe the vine as not the source of life that
emanates and nourishes the other branches.
His reference to dionysius ? does not elaborate on his brand of heresy or
background to his life…

Bible Passages about Vine and Branches, in contradiction to

Zalalas. Showing that the bad branch is cut off before it affects
the other branches…
He states that a dead ,broken , withered branch does not kill the vine and
yet it is clear in the bible that a dead branch is cut off…WOW !! it can get
regrafted and pruned , but not without producing repentance and fruits.
What the idolatrous archdioceses mandates is that the dead branch does
not need the vine to exist and while producing thorns, claims to be
creating fruits… the dead branch has world secular power of validation
and authority and prince and principalities acclaim its canonicity, not
because it is adhering to canons of the church of christ but because they
are adhering to the canon of secular politics and syncretistic and
pluralistic ecumenism.

His statement against the old calender claim that the new calender lost
grace is explained by stating that the breaching of canons happened long
before 1924 when the split occurred by a mason bishop and thereby trying
to make the point that as a result, people did not schism back then….
Obviously the instances before 1924 exemplify the patients of the elect
and does not condemn them at a time when the heresy was slowing
infiltrating and it did not make itself fully known until in 1920 , when it
was perceived how it was an unprecedented attack against the church
with a 10 point plan of renovating the church and accepting branch
theory.. , The faithful did not immediately cause a schism but the schism
that eventuated latter was a culmination of all the violations and the
rightful conviction that it sought to seed itself and become a dead branch
of the vine and therefore the conditions specifically fulfilled the criteria for
St basils canon of walling off to save the church from more divisions…….
The witnesses of the true elect identified that by the time of 1920
encyclical instances of heresy was creeping in the church within the
church was about to be renovated and still the faithful were adamant to
wait and see and not convict and allowed decades to accomodate for
provision of repentance until the old calenderists made a timely and
necessary decision florinities and matthewittes—, where they had no
choice since this was not a heresy but a facility and system that would
redefine heresy as legitimate doctrine and a church forcible ripped from
its canonical and ecumenical foundations into a apostate secular
foundation by the intervention of state and politics via coup de tat and
persecutions ..
We saw jazabel offering sacrifices to idols and did not repent and
prophecy of the apostasy ensued……it was fully reasonable for people to
await repentance.. Zalalas finds a technicality that because the fanatics,
he would call them, did not immediately condemn the heresies creeping in
the church officially [ and was not caused by the people] then this is a
good working template and precedent to apply to the events of heresy to
compare post 1920 division between old and new calendar. And the
canonical breaches before the schism/// one cannot find a comparison or
paradigm to compare the two…. The technically driven Zalalas wants to
be find a quick legal technicality and excuse the numerous jazabells in his
church….by trying to introduce an innovation of rationalism himself,
ironically misinterpreting ecclesiology to demonstrate that the church
always had a tolerance to heresies to such an extent and level that he
would make us believe that their were no ecumenical councils or regional
councils that would apply the canons accordingly. Then on top of that
believe that people should have tolerated and ignored the canons of the
church when the authorities ,decided to turn the church into a secular
organisation as an incubator to resusitate all the heresies inaugurated
since the beginning of the church as legitimate doctrines to educate and
indoctrinate.…… and to allow the deception to deceive people into
damnation is deemed more prudent to Zalalas than the church becoming
a military martial .” As he terms it…
Employing technicality and the pharisaical desire to assert blame, he
contradicts himself since that seed and cause that had contributed to
ecumenism and encyclical of 1920 originated before 1924 and was the
very seed of operation that was conspiring to reform the church into a
secular entity that the church and the people condemned anyway.. He
completely ignores the process by which the old calenderists salvaged the
church from the dead branch, that their was a process and a economia…
already accounted for in the process and where zalalas hypocritically
cites that because the laity presumably, did not immediately and
fanatically suppress the heresy on an official level[how could they], then
this supports the view that the 1924 schism should not have officially
been mandated.. .. .even though it is totally reasonable with the church
tradition that the church employed economia until it became a rotten
branch in the church that had to be cut out….. he arbitrarily ignores this
very fact and is eager to want the audience to believe that his leaping
technicality is applicable despite the various stages and developments of
ecumenism during this time——Despite the obvious distorting and
ignoring of circumstances and stages that led to the schism of 1924
where the heresies increased to intolerable levels and still more time and
patience was added for repentance and eventually a decision had to be
made…10 years after when it was observed that they meant to subvert
the church from its foundation.
The apparatus for dealing with heresies were fully in place before 1924
schism whereby it is never comtemplated that one would cut off and form
another administration and church even when in the face of emerging
sporadic breaching of canons etc…… but when these structures and
facilities of the church have been deprived to engage in the task that they
are made to do, namely to ensure that their is a division between state
and politics and where their is a facility to ensure that the church and the
fathers Crete autonmous and independent ecumenical synods to protect
the faith that are free from political influence, then this revolution to
subordinate and relegate, make redundant the church foundation must
have consequences which are defined and prescribed remedies with the
canons of the church…. Zalalas systemically ignores this …
IT / does not occurr to Zalalas that this event literally secularized the
new calender as a dead branch , there was really nothing more to argue….
The encyclical was a statement to sell off the body of christ to a political
body…
He references a serbian accepted communion from an anglican cleric at
the time— and how that this event did not cause a schism Does he
actually believed that this event was severe enough to cause such a
extreme decision as to divide the church ???—He obviously does not
understand the therapeutic discipline of the church even though he
contradicts this idea even though he repeats it. That internal canonical
measures regulated these affairs . When you take away the powers of the
church to defend itself and then impose new laws in contradiction .. this is
an act of rebellion that demands action…—He also fails to see the synod
deatt with canonical breaches with synods which was the legal and
canonical structure consistent with the ecclesiology of the church but
when you take the synod away and power of the bishops who are
enlightened by the holt spirit from convening a synod and making
decisions to defend orthodoxy. Then obviously one can see the context
and perspective by which the events of 1925 showed themselves and how
it was very prudent to cut the dead branch of these apostates…but they
probably cut it first..
The state church was adamant to renovate the church and condemned
the genuine defenders of the faith as graceless totally from the venue of
the political platform and made the church a department of the political
state like a fief of a feudal lord that can be transacted owned to the
highest bidder….…they were the persecuting fanatics…
well he is obviously wanting to forget about the economical principle of
the church and suddenly change the standard to suit his agenda of trying
to foster a defeated and senseless argument that a formal schism should
not have affected latter on..
• The examples Zalalas makes how canons were violated before canons…
he states quote…”
• In 1863 holy synod of serbian church permited holy eucharist to a
Aanglican cleric…
• In 1809 ecumenical patriarchate decreed at times of great need or
extenuating circumstances, the mysteries of armenians are
acceptable..
• In 1893 old calender jerusalem Syrian orthodox can take communion
from anglican clerics..
•
In 1920 patriarchate welcomed James darlingto and allowed him to bless
the faithful”…
Ecumenical patriarchate participated in world councils of church’s and
taught that hedrodox worked in the same vinyard as the lord” Response
… .here he raises the encyclial of 1920 where it was only at this point it
can be perceived where all these instances of heresy mentioned were
leading to…an a unprecedented apostasy called ecumenism when all
heresy is emptied out of the ghost cupboard from all the heresies
condemned in the ecumenical councils through the centuries and every
falsity is revalidated as acceptable doctrine according to their new
church , world council of churches that will bring one to the one world
church and antichrist. I would prefer to be outside a institution that is
actively seeking this ultimate union…. These events need treatment on
their own accord and detail. But none of these events can be compared to
the movement to arbitrarily abolition the church as an organism and
obliterate its convening theological synodal function to form theological
decision without external influence…. the rulers of the world and their
minions now set out to reduce the church to a department of state..
making reductant its innate function and role to ensure the canonical
spiritual security of the faithful…

. It only adds to the cause the true orthodox who awaited sensibly without
taking any rash judgement or direction and that a schism eventuated as a
culmination of all the heretical instances of the past and amalgamated
into a new venue for its total reception and acceptance… .. Their is no
doubt they upheld the apostolic constitution of st basil that permits a
walling off. To save the church was a justified action with this
unprecedented event of apostasy of the 1924 schism which was not
perceived before..
In reference to all the examples presented by zalalas regarding all the
instances of the church before the schism violating the canons—— In the
realm of politics, many things could be presented and individuals can be
admonished and the violation extinguished, however when that poisoned
sets itself in stone and jazabel is seen to be the one deceiving the
members in a organised and systemic way officially in the church and was
subsequently promoted to the highest rank a and drew up the new
canons of the church herself along secular lines,[ that demand one
sacrifice to fallen idols ]!! then a falling away from the schismatics is
absolutely justified & necessary and the miracle of the cross above
Athens exemplifies and validates the movement of the old calendar in the
eyes of the lord…
…The encyclical of 1920 sparked off events where it was perceived that
an official subjugation and coup de tat of the church was in order by a
mason to redefine the canons and override the authority of the
ecumenical council, then action was permitted and justified to such an
extent that one is obligated as a true orthodox chiristian to adhere to the
canons of the church in order the preserve the faith from further division.
Not follow the orders of an occultism and devil worshipper— for example…
St basil canon 1.. who could imagine that a church be permitted to be
reduced to an organisation along secular lines and foundations and still
act as if it is a church….this is a mystery of apostasy , the mystery of
abominations and the lord gives enlightenment to the ones that love
righteousness rather than nominal orthodox who became complacent with
the faith and are content that it becomes a political entity of a
organisational division of the pope.

Zalalas argument is simplistic and deceptive as it does provide detailed

information relaying the events of the time, but merely en states a
pharasitical argument of arbitrary, western legalism.

Zalalas inadvertently admits that JAzabel is in charge of the mother

church….

He states that a Dead Branch can exist on the Vine, here are bible quotes
that contradict his statement.
John 15:2

"Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every
branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.

John 15–2:6
As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no
more can ye, except ye abide in me. 5 I am the vine, ye are
the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth
forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
Romans 11:17-24
Some of the tree's branches were pruned and you wild olive shoots were
grafted in. Yet the fact that you are now fed by that rich and holy
root 18 gives you no cause to crow over the pruned branches. Remember,
you aren't feeding the root; the root is feeding you. 19 its certainly
possible to say other branches were pruned so that i could be grafted in.
20 Well and good. But they were pruned because they were deadwood, no
longer connected by belief and commitment to the root. The only reason
you're on the tree is because your graft "took" when you believed, and
because you're connected to that belief-nurturing root. So don't get cocky
and strut your branch. Be humbly mindful of the root that keeps you lithe
and green.

22 The moment you become deadwood, you're out of there.

If they don't persist in remaining deadwood, they could very well get
grafted back in. God can do that. He can perform miracle grafts. 24 Why,
if he could graft you - branches cut from a tree out in the wild - into an
orchard tree, he certainly isn't going to have any trouble grafting branches
back into the tree they grew from in the first place. Just be glad you're in
the tree, and hope for the best for the others.
Matthew 3:10

Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that
does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

John 15:2
Every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every
branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit.

John 15:1-27

“I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in me

that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear
fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit. Already you are clean because
of the word that I have spoken to you. Abide in me, and I in you. As the
branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can
you, unless you abide in me. I am the vine; you are the branches.
Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart
from me you can do Psalm 1:1-6

Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands
in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; but his delight is in
the law of the Lord, and on his law he meditates day and night. He is like a
tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season, and its
leaf does not wither. In all that he does, he prospers. The wicked are not
so, but are like chaff that the wind drives away. Therefore the wicked will
not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the
righteous;

..

Zalalas referencesGregory of nyssa as an example of someone who was

accepted by christ despite his heresies… what he is referring to are the
numerous renovations and forgeries of the catholics that st mark of
ephesus has cited at the council of florence.

• The church recognised a schism or heresy immediately and was ratified

by a council.——
• we have a letter showing that when charlemagne crowned himself
emperor, the emperor of Constantinople issued a decree of schism…
effective immediately. Even though a relationship politically
remained.
•
•
“Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ has destroyed the power of the devil. He
came into the world precisely for this reason. If one is "in Christ" he is led
out of temptation and delivered from the evil oneAccording to st Andrew
Greek Orthodox Church “

• The letter goes on to say that in the eyes of the byzantine emperor,
pope Leo 3 in annointing Charlemagne, separated the papacy from
the whole body of the church and he created a schism. Thus
nicephorus the emperor considered the issue of the relations
between the two churches primarily political and on this ground he
prevented his patriarch from entering into any official
communication with the pope.
•
The love of many has grown cold… the love of christ the bride groom has
been replaced by the adultress loves of this age…. The love that steals the
soul of the creator” his convictions remain…. Thought the conclusion and
the natural placement is lacking… to abide within a secualar entity
following false idols, seecret socieities, revisionist thinking is not a place
to rear and develop your spirituality… obviously it is a environment that
spoils the rotten fruit and where grace has departed….does not the holy
spirit guide people to truth?, certainly people can interact with him as it
blows where it wills, but is the truth emanating the truth of christ?
Zalalas though diligent and active in defending the tenets of orthodoxy,
does not have the zeal to condemn conferences like volos where he even
entertains some of the revisions…. What is shocking is that he does not
fully comprehend that these are the defacto ecumenical councils the
ecuemenists sold out the church to and become conformed to the whims
of the world when we are not even permitted to co operate and interact
with heretics in the theologian conference realm.. it is an outrage that
orthodox would be even seen in these conferences.
•
• I would love to commend his efforts and his works. That try to educate
about ecumenism and the renovation of our times, however he
incorporates ,rationalises many of its tenets…where they become
external modes of empty edifying fodder that is not acted on with
the Praxis but becomes a curious feature that has no real
ontological zeal of faith and resistance…nor understand one cannot
be in control in a network and worldly organisation that constantly
engineers new ways to deceive its members.. and this is only being
lenient…
I have in the past showed allot of compassion to these peripheral orthodox
conservatives, however in this paper treatment I have opted to take a
more strict approach towards theology, one that placates and justifies the
old calender and one which addresses the reason why those who know in
the church , do not identify what is going on.. and make that move.. how
can they tolerate a ecumenist hierarchy who have obviously betrayed the
faith and left us to the wiles of secular atheistic conferences of fools,
clowns and medievalists who are given free season to attack orthodoxy as
an outdated religion….. where is the honor and integrity.
• zalalas makes a strange contradiction , giving a prophecy about how in
the end days sermons a true orthodox one would be hard to find…
will be very elusive in those days.. and then he relays .. we now
have thousands of sermons on the internet with the touch of a
button and can be illuminated for years to come without needing to
be infected by new age theologies… unforauntaely one has to be
careful to choice which video to watch on the internet especially
when he has stated the warning about random internet personalities
making all sort of claims…. What about church? in the real sphere
and spatial space where the true orthodox reside and are resisting
against ecumenism and have preserved their traditions..it is obvious
that zalalas is rationalising the infection of heresy within his church
that he entertains the internet rather than old calender….since it is
impossible that a true sermon can be made in a new calender , he
desperately seeks to hold on through the internet with a broad
stroke of the canvas of relativity….many have legitimised
ecumenism and are totally happy to worship in an environment that
is not mandated by the lord..

Zalalas is content that though the church is political animal of the archy,
he still accepts the saints that are produced within….despite them no
having a confession of faith of the 8 ecumenical councils…

Zalalas by using the idea that before 1924 calendar change schism, many
canonical breaches had been made is totally arbitrary and
disproportionate.. which presumes that these sporadic instances of
heretical breaches before official schism should be acted on immediately
with a schism as remedy… Thus in order to demonstrate this technicality,
flags totally in the face of orthodox tradition and ecclesiology and
contradicts what he also says, that if the seed of heresy is not checked ,
but instead grows, fosters and eventually commits to killing of the branch,
then and only then is an action justified. These catalyst events were a
culmination of the events that happened in the past where a pattern was
identified and where not only the frequency events had increased but also
became an official standard. Also where heresy became the standard
fixture of operations where secular authorities decided to unanimously
renovate the church into a secular institution and by doing so declared
that a new age of ecclesiology had commenced where it was not just a
calendar change, but a 10 point process of change and thus a
commitment as enshrined and defined in their new master of the age
mantle, the encyclical of 1920 that they will abolish their adherence to the
previous councils and embrace a new age of ecclesiological reasoning and
as we can see that commitment was kept was absolute precision where
not only have they ignored and abolished their adherence to the
constitutions of the body of christ, they have invented a new
ecclessiological reality that systemically redefines theological concepts
along complete and unequivocal secular lines of determination. I would
say that these canons were applied prophetically as fathers and saints
knew close to the end times many will depart from the faith.
The Palamas council rejected the enlightenment of the protestants and
now it was a defacto foundation to the new brave new world new world
order entity of a enlightened church that places reason as an idol before
the lord in his own temple…
Zalalas is the epitome of the conservative new calenderists who instead of
making evaluation and observations drawing to the inevitable conclusio,
have to built up innovations, adaptations and renovations, ironically, like
their mother church masters, in order to rationalise what is essentially a
blasphemous commitment …This is the conviction that they uphold
staying in the church where the patriarch is considered infallible and
above god and his church, until a so called official condemnation even
though they will never be ex communicated because they changed their
master…
…. In the vanity of their minds, since council of Crete , this fully
demonstrates and made clear that the mother church will never repent…
The demonic reason of Zalalas is that since technically their is no
conviction or ex communication [even though they misinterpret orthodox
theological and are already convicted from previous council] their will
never be one because the mother church no longer abides by the decrees
of the 8 ecumenical councils and so does not need to measure its actions
against these canons anymore.. but rather, it measures its existence and
actions according to a new ecclesiological reality as stated in their new
declaration of the encyclical of 1920 .
It does not recognise the idea that the mother church had broken virtually
every canon of the previous canons but instead in order to remain
canonical, merely only needs to commit to the decrees of the world
council of church to absolve Themselves from the crime of introducing a
heresy that not even the blood of the martyrs can obliterate. . so they
technically remain canonical not for keeping the apostolic canons of the
apostolic constitutions but because they keep the canons of world politics.
… The mother jazebel has a new master….simple……. So zalalas
commitment to remain is run on a technical and arbitrariness that is
against the spirit and fronima of the church….

http://saintandrewgoc.org/home/2016/3/22/rcoohrb033cylvxbd5fvafosijsfs
g

Paisios thanks the devil..