"Orthodoxy and the Kingdom of Satan" by Father Spyridon Bailey

Lazuli Waves

Woodpecker
I haven't read this book, but it looks interesting. It's by a Russian Orthodox Priest named Father Spyridon Bailey. He has a great YouTube channe: https://www.youtube.com/user/orthodoxstephen/videos

Here is the table of contents of the book:

orthodoxy and the kingdom of satan.JPG

From an Amazon review:

...his so-called Zionist analysis falls into antisemitic drivel (see Rothschild's seemingly being behind everything).

Description from Goodreads:

The signs of our age point to the nearness of Antichrist. Assessing the evidence of a corrupt world, Father Spyridon, a Greek Orthodox priest, draws together the different strands that reveal how the institutions and international organisations are preparing humanity for the end.

The first half of the book deals with the United Nations, the arms industries, banking, the Freemasons, and the various secret elite groups hat control our world. He then gives a clear explanation of the means by which we are being attacked and manipulated through television, education, culture and philosophy. Finally he presents the prophecies of various Orthodox saints who told us what else we should expect.

Father Spyridon's warnings will comfort some and anger others, This is a book that many will try to dismiss, while others will find in it comfort and confirmation of what they already suspected was happening. Written in a sober style, Orthodoxy And The Kingdom of Satan is a wake up call for all those who believe that time is running out. "It's Later than you think" we once heard, and the hour may be later than we dared imagine.
 
I’m about 15% of the way through it. It’s very red pill on the UN, media, fakeness of Western democracy, etc. I wish he would cite his sources and use more direct quotes, though. But even in the first couple chapters it’s jarring to see Alice Bailey’s ten point plan explained and then look at the modern world and realize just how totally dominated by that plan we’ve become. I recommend the book.
 

DanielH

Robin
I’m about 15% of the way through it. It’s very red pill on the UN, media, fakeness of Western democracy, etc. I wish he would cite his sources and use more direct quotes, though. But even in the first couple chapters it’s jarring to see Alice Bailey’s ten point plan explained and then look at the modern world and realize just how totally dominated by that plan we’ve become. I recommend the book.
Thanks for the update, I appreciate it!
 

Lazuli Waves

Woodpecker
I’m about 15% of the way through it. It’s very red pill on the UN, media, fakeness of Western democracy, etc. I wish he would cite his sources and use more direct quotes, though. But even in the first couple chapters it’s jarring to see Alice Bailey’s ten point plan explained and then look at the modern world and realize just how totally dominated by that plan we’ve become. I recommend the book.
I'm very interested in it. I'm currently reading the bible from beginning to end for the first time, so that's going to take me a while. Too bad he doesn't cite sources as that would make his arguments stronger.
 

Aboulia

Robin
Just finished the book today, as others have said, it would be nice for cited sources, but the overall trajectory seems correct as far as I can tell.

It was nice to see the chapter on Ecumenism, and his chastisement of both the Ecumenical patriarch, and a list of things the Latins would have to repudiate to be in communion with the Orthodox faith. (listed below)

A) the filoque
B) created grace
C) papal infallibility
D) baptism by sprinking and it's separation from chrismation
E) the use of unleavened bread in the liturgy
F) the refusal to give Holy Communion to children
G) the dogma of the immaculate conception of the Theotokos
H) the belief in purgatory
I) the belief in the superabundant merits of the saints
J) the compulsory celibacy of the clergy
K) the legalistic interpretation of "original sin"
L) the juridical character of the mystery of confession
N) the Uniate which has been the cause of so much suffering for the Orthodox people

Some of those are tied together, if created grace was repudiated then "L)" would be immediately solved, and if "K" was reverted back to the Orthodox understanding of Ancestral sin there would be no need for "G", nonetheless it's a nice reminder showing how far apart the two faiths really are.

The chapter on Banking is fantastic, provides sound reasoning to never use digital currency whenever possible.

Education ... -"The true nature of tolerance is not the respect for different beliefs, but the insistence on moral relativism"

He really hammers home the purpose behind the LGBT gender activism. It's just to further confuse and distort things and to have everything treated as equal. Satan is the god of equality, of placing things where they do not belong, and distorting what things are.

All in all it's a great book would recommend 8.5/10 (needs sources and numerous spelling fixes for 10/10)
 
It was nice to see the chapter on Ecumenism, and his chastisement of both the Ecumenical patriarch, and a list of things the Latins would have to repudiate to be in communion with the Orthodox faith. (listed below)

A) the filoque
B) created grace
C) papal infallibility
D) baptism by sprinking and it's separation from chrismation
E) the use of unleavened bread in the liturgy
F) the refusal to give Holy Communion to children
G) the dogma of the immaculate conception of the Theotokos
H) the belief in purgatory
I) the belief in the superabundant merits of the saints
J) the compulsory celibacy of the clergy
K) the legalistic interpretation of "original sin"
L) the juridical character of the mystery of confession
N) the Uniate which has been the cause of so much suffering for the Orthodox people

Some of those are tied together, if created grace was repudiated then "L)" would be immediately solved, and if "K" was reverted back to the Orthodox understanding of Ancestral sin there would be no need for "G", nonetheless it's a nice reminder showing how far apart the two faiths really are.
It is interesting that Fr. Spyridon brings up created grace, because it's not commonly taught in the Roman Church. CCC 1997 defines grace as “a participation in the life of God”, and there is no mention of it being created. There are about two places a Roman Catholic might hear that grace is created: in the Summa Theologicae, or in Orthodox polemics.

Other items on the list are even more troubling. For example, if we insist that mandatory clerical celibacy separates a Church from the Orthodox faith (as 1 Tim 3:2 might imply) then we are no less heterodox than the Latins. Not to mention that the Latins adopted the practice of mandatory priestly celibacy centuries before the schism. Orthodox saints and fathers in the West had no problem with it, and the East did not see it as a Church-dividing issue.

Likewise, asking the Roman Church to condemn teachings from our mutual saints and fathers, such as purgatory or hereditary guilt for original sin, seems problematic. The false ecumenism of modern times, where people pretend reunion is a piece of cake, is no good. But to assume whatever has been popular in the Orthodox Church since Vladimir Lossky is dogma, means that St. Augustine and others were not in communion with the Orthodox faith. It requires us to assume that the West was heterodox long before the schism, casting a shadow of doubt over canonizations and the authority of the Church itself.

That’s actually one of the things that seems problematic about Roman Catholicism, the tendency to pick a single strand of patristic thought (for example, purgatory), and insist that it’s THE tradition of the Church, ignoring other Church fathers who spoke of the toll houses, etc. It troubles me to see Orthodox going down the same path.

There are very serious reasons for the split; and inventing new ones, asking the Latins to reject their own Orthodox past, does not seem like the solution.
 
Top