[MarMema]

Where was the snub? Because he didn't go to Cuba and do the politically correct thing?

Since when does the fact that he is a Patriarch make him liable for all the world's presecutions and hardships?

So every place he goes he has to seek out and speak in front of the cameras about some persecution taking place there?

I don't think so. The problem of prisoners is that of the Cuban people and Castro, not Bartholmew. The problem of consecrating a new Orthodox church belonged to Bartholomew.

[cyborg]

Ah you think Castro would have allowed him to speak to dissidents? He's not liable for all the world's hardships but he's going into a country and meeting with a brutal dictator. Cuba is 85% Roman Catholic but Castro is allowing Orthodox Churches to open in Cuba. Why is that? I don't understand why you can't see the reasons that people find this meeting to be just plain dictator butt kissing.

[David1]

Where was the snub? Because he didn't go to Cuba and do the politically correct thing? No, because he did not go and do what was the decently correct thing. Since when does the fact that he is a Patriarch make him liable for all the world's presecutions and hardships? He personally went and visited a tyranny. The Patriarch holds a very high moral leadership post and he should speak out for human rights when he is visiting a dictator. That is the moral thing to do for a man of his position. And he squandered this. At least he should have met with the dissidents which he failed to do. So every place he goes he has to seek out and speak in front of the cameras about some persecution taking place there? Yes, if he visits a tyranny. Instead of kissing up to tyrants he should speak up for the persecuted people.

[Polybius]

Where was the snub? Because he didn't go to Cuba and do the politically correct thing?

Well, actually, according to Europeans, the Politically Correct thing is to fawn over Castro.

It seems that the Patriarch was very Politically Correct.