According to the National Herald, in Istanbul the 79 year-old Patriarch Bartholomew is set on removing the 91 year-old Archbishop Demetrios of the US Greek Archdiocese, who has already refused to leave three times. The Patriarch is also set on removing the Cypriot Archbishop Gregorios from the Greek Archdiocese in Great Britain and Ireland. He is also aged 91 and has faced several problems with a flock that is dying out. At the end of 2018 the Patriarch visited the Archdiocese incognito in order to study the situation. He now wishes to divide the Archdiocese into two. The new bishops may be Greek from the USA. A similar situation prevails in Australia where the 83 year-old Archbishop Stylianos, a virulent critic of Patriarch Bartholomew, is ill. Here too the Archdiocese may be divided into two or even three. Such changes will ensure the required total control of Patriarch Bartholomew over his Greek Diaspora.
‘Tell the people: Although I have died, I am alive.’
St John of Shanghai
Foreword: The War
Forty-five years ago I was told by one who could have known better that, as I had been waiting for years to join the Orthodox Church, I now faced a choice: I could either join the Greek Church of Constantinople or the Church of Russia; it was all the same. But only to him was it all the same, as, in spite of, or rather because of, his great intellect, he was spiritually confused. He lived in an alien compromise, washing his hands before the critical choice. I joined the Russian Church because, since the age of twelve, I had known through revelations to my soul that my destiny was most definitely in the Russian Orthodox Church. However crippled it may have been after 1917, I was destined to share in that agony, indeed, although it seemed foolishness to the Jews and to the Greeks alike, only by sharing in that agony could I hope to find my own salvation. I sensed even then that what he had told me was somehow untrue. At best it could only have been a delusion. It was not all the same – and recent very sad events have shown this to all absolutely clearly. Let me explain:
The Church is not to be found in a people who believe that it is a chosen people. Many Hebrews believed that they were the chosen people, but they stoned the prophets and crucified the Son of God. To this day many of their descendants reject Christ, some considering themselves superior to the rest of humanity. Then the Western European elite came to believe in their ‘exceptionalism’ (that is, their claim that they too were above God) too, all in order to justify their organized barbaric aggression. So a thousand years after Christ, they too fell away from the Church, rejecting the Holy Spirit and seizing control of the Church in the West in order to justify their conquistador power-grab. So, like pirates, they began persecuting us ordinary Christians and conquering the rest of the world by fire and the sword. Then their secularist descendants, in turn the Portuguese, Spanish, French, British, German and finally American elites, did exactly the same, demanding world hegemony (‘globalism’), also rejecting Christ because they consider themselves superior to the rest of humanity. (Hence their anti-Semitism: the other ‘chosen people’, the Jews, were rivals to them, therefore they had to be eliminated). In the Church there has now come the turn of certain Greeks, telling us that only they are Christians, that God speaks only Greek, and, as one very well-known Cypriot archimandrite told me, even that their pagan ancestors had prepared the way for Christ! Many Russians fell victim to the same delusion, in the same way believing in themselves instead of believing in God, taking communion only once a year. So they lost everything and overthrew the God-appointed Christian Emperor in 1917. Only through the blood of the New Martyrs and the tears and sweat of the New Confessors did repentance eventually begin to come to them.
All these ‘chosen peoples’ failed to understand that salvation comes only from the Heavenly Jerusalem of the Church of Christ through the Mercy of God and the Holy Spirit – not from some earthly ‘Jewish Rome’ of some mythical ‘chosen people’. For this reason, once I had chosen the Russian Church, I was to spend the rest of my life at war, in tireless battles, in unceasing strife, in the trenches, on the Western Front, fighting for real Christianity, for the real Russian Orthodox Church, together, of course, with many others. We all fought against the narrow-minded, nationalist delusions and impurities of those who had lost the big picture, who could not see the wood for the trees. They told us that only Russians could be Orthodox, that only their own exclusive little fragments of the great Imperial Orthodoxy, which had not undergone the blood, tears and sweat of others, could be right, that God’s Church needed ‘saving’ or ‘reforming’ (naturally, by themselves!). Some of them even persecuted and took to court as a common criminal the greatest saint among them all, St John of Shanghai. Little wonder that the Lord sent me to a military Church. I never sought any of this; it was all imposed on me. My soul would have died had I not taken part in this spiritual warfare. My life has been unceasing warfare in four battles, all fought beneath the Protecting Veil, which my patron-saint saw and which is the only reason why I am still alive.
My first battle was to take part in the struggle to help free that small part of the Russian Church Diaspora in England, which was dependent on Moscow, from spiritual impurity. After nine years, by 1983, I realized that I would fail in this. It was a task quite beyond me, with my very feeble abilities and from my modest, provincial, rural background; the enemies were invested with the strength of a personality cult, with all the authority of men and their city establishments, they had no time for a ploughman’s grandson. I was knocking my head against brick walls. So I left into exile, seeing my limitations. I understood that it would take far-reaching political changes inside Russia and indeed the departures or deaths of some outside Russia before this battle could be won (I did not know then that this would mean twenty-four years). Victory was inevitable, but only God Who created time, could in time bring the victory. My battle had been premature. By myself I could do nothing. It was good for me to know this.
My second battle was to take part in the struggle to help free that small part of the Russian Church Diaspora, which was dependent on Constantinople (Rue Daru), from spiritual impurity. I fought in Paris and thought that this battle was winnable. It was – almost. However, after six years in 1988 there came a turning-point when I saw that I would fail in this battle too. The intrigues of freemasons in high places meant that I could not help win this battle – all my friends were in low places. I knew then that this Paris group would eventually (I did not know then that this would mean thirty years) disappear into spiritual irrelevance. Those who had betrayed the Tsar and made him and his Family into martyrs had also betrayed the Church. So I left, having understood that here too it would take far-reaching political changes inside Russia and indeed the departures or deaths of some outside Russia before the battle to bring even a part of this group home to the Russian Church could be won. Victory was inevitable, but only God Who created time, could with time bring the victory. My battle had been premature. By myself I could do nothing. It was good for me to know this.
My third battle from the first day of 1989 onwards was to take part in the struggle to help free that part of the Russian Church Diaspora, which was dependent on New York (ROCOR), from spiritual impurity. Here there was a much greater chance of success, for the contaminating Protestant disease of ‘super-correctness’ (as another disciple of St John of Shanghai called it), with its ignorance, phariseeism, extremism, sectarianism, old calendarism, psychological (not theological) deviations of convertitis and Cold War money, had many opponents in the USA itself and even more in Western Europe where I was fighting on the Front. And above all, my Diocesan Archbishop supported me and I supported him. The ever-memorable Archbishop Antony of Geneva, a spiritual son of and the European successor to St John of Shanghai, was in effect the first real Orthodox bishop I had met. We had an identical understanding of the Church. By myself I could do nothing, but now I was far from being alone; I was simply one of very many, a little cog in a large machine. I did not know then that this struggle would take eighteen years, for only in 2007 did the Church win the day. I was taking part in our first victory, together with millions of others, in the Church of the New Martyrs and Confessors, to which I had always belonged in spirit. Only geography had ever divided us.
After the Three Battles
Once this battle, in which I had played only a tiny role, eventually from my provincial home-town, had been won by the many, especially by the bishops who had been inspired by the grace of God, I knew that the two other houses of cards where I had earlier lost the day would fall in their turn. I just did not know that it would take another twelve years. Between 2007 and today, in 2019, I have seen both these first lost battles won. History won them. What I knew in the past, that they would be won only in God’s own time, has come to pass. What we have fought long and hard for has been obtained. Thus, we now at last have for our Diocese of the British Isles and Ireland a bishop, pleaded for during over four decades. He is Orthodox, understanding the local language and people, not phyletist, venerating the local saints and not denying them, missionary-minded like us, encouraging us and not destroying us, not under the control of laypeople, in good health, and who will be resident here in just a few weeks from now.
Secondly, the Russian Orthodox Exarchate of Western Europe, awaited for over three decades, was at last established in Paris only a few weeks ago. This means that our House will be built on rock, not on sand, and that the ‘Euro-Orthodox’ fantasy of the Paris Brotherhood is now dead. The future Local Church of Western Europe will be authentically Orthodox. For what we have sought for and fought for since 1988 now is. There is now a real Orthodox Exarchate for Western Europe, with many regional dioceses and young bishops, hundreds of parishes and several monasteries, venerating the local saints and not denying them, the foundation of the new Local Church. Led by Metropolitan John in Paris, who bears the name of our missionary father in Christ, St John of (Shanghai and) Western Europe and so continues in the tradition of Archbishop Antony of Geneva, it will of course need much more time to develop. It consists of the generally newer Russian Orthodox parishes of Western Europe, in many dioceses and with many bishops. However, alongside it and complementing it, also stand the two (Western European and German) dioceses of ROCOR, with their five bishops, two of them younger and active. This consists of the generally older, more integrated, Russian Orthodox parishes of Western Europe, a few of them until recently under Constantinople, but now at last come home. The two parts need each other and hopefully their bishops will meet regularly in order to help each other in their own joint Synod.
However, in this Year of the Lord, 2019, there is the last mystical battle (last for me) in the series of mystical battles in this Hundred Years’ War, which for a century has so deformed Church structures in the Diaspora. This battle is also against spiritual impurity, against masonic ecumenist and modernist intrigues. However, this last battle is the battle inside the Russian Lands, inside historic Rus’; it is therefore not a local battle for English, French and American Rus’ in London, Paris and New York, for part of the small Russian Diaspora, it is a general battle which concerns the whole Church. This is taking place today in the Ukraine, but it affects all. For the Church is the mystical centre of the world and it is the Ukraine which is now the mystical centre of the Church. And this is why we have come here now, sent to fight from the Western Front to the Eastern Front. All will stand or fall by their attitude to what is happening in the Ukraine today, to this battle between Christ and Satan. Whose side are you on?
The Fourth Battle
The internal administrative centre of the false Orthodoxy against which I fought in all our four battles, was formed in Istanbul a century ago. It came into being only because of the long-planned overthrow of the restraining protection of Imperial Tsardom. However, the Western disease which had overthrown the Christian Emperor and so the Christian Empire and then brought that centre into being had already infected Russia and elsewhere before that. For the disease contaminated all nationalities, including many in the Russian Lands and from there in the Diaspora. The disease came to be called renovationism and the renovationists were keenly supported from Istanbul. Today it has become crystal clear that the whole of the supposed Orthodox world has now to side either with real Orthodoxy or else against real Orthodoxy. The time of reckoning has come; the time of compromise is over. No-one can stand by any longer with the indifference and conceit of Pilate. Even though this battle is of exactly the same nature as the series of three battles which we fought in the Diaspora before this one, now it is not the Diaspora, but the Ukraine which is the sword that divides. The battlefield has changed to the Ukraine, but the battle is the same one; it is the battle for spiritual purity, for canonicity, for real Orthodoxy.
Gradually, over the last two months, one Local Church after another has decided to side with spiritual purity, canonicity and real Orthodoxy and so support Metr Onufry and the Church of God of the Ukraine. The rest of the Russian Church with ROCOR was the first to support him wholeheartedly. The Local Churches of Serbia, Bulgaria, Antioch, Poland, the Czech Lands and Slovakia, Cyprus, and unofficial but spiritually free (= non-political) voices in the Churches of Greece, Jerusalem, Alexandria and Georgia, followed. So far, thirteen out of eighteen Athonite monasteries have joined us. And a few days ago the episcopate of the basically Carpatho-Russian OCA (Orthodox Church in America), which had dithered for several weeks and where some had for years even been threatening to desert the Church for Istanbul, decided the same. This is their spiritual victory and our very great comfort after decades of spiritual slumber, of wandering far from the Church with American phyletist delusions. It means that the little OCA is maturing, at last deciding to accept its destiny, abandoning its eccentric spiritual isolation and so finding its positive identity by returning to its roots under St Tikhon. Inspired by the breath of new life, it can at last begin to play a significant and fulfilling role as one of the component parts of the future, united, much larger, multinational Russian Orthodox Churches of the three continents of the New World, of the Americas and Oceania.
This leaves the episcopates of only two Local Churches, the large Romanian and the tiny Albanian, not politically free and sitting on the fence, paralysed like Pontius Pilate ‘for fear of the Jews’. They are silent, neither supporting nor rejecting, awaiting instructions from above on whether to support the petty nationalism of the phyletist schism of Constantinople or not. The false church in the Ukraine, founded by the US-backed separatists in Kiev, is officially under a certain Sergei Dumenko. He is actually a Vatican- and US-approved puppet-layman, therefore both pro-Uniat and pro-LGBT, and not a metropolitan, His false church has been seen to be without grace, without sacraments, without the Holy Spirit. His church is that of ‘the Ukrainian god’, as one Ukrainian minister has put it. His enthronement in Kiev six days ago was ignored by all the Local Churches. His so-called ‘Church’ is only a regime-manipulated charade of empty rituals, just another small ultra-nationalist organization – an absurd anachronism in this global world. It is supported by teams of police-backed Nazi bandits who intimidate and beat up Christians, because Nazis have no concept of the meaning of the word ‘Christian’. And these anti-Christian men of violence are directly supported by an alien and corrupt political regime in Kiev, supported by alien and corrupt regimes elsewhere, and, to their eternal shame, by Greek ‘bishops’ in Istanbul.
Afterword: The Victory
The decadent, self-appointed, Paris-School ‘theologians’ from the past slip away one by one. With them their secularizing ideologies from the past, Ecumenism (anti-Orthodoxy; against the Father), Modernism (anti-Sovereignty; against the Son) and Liberalism (anti-People; against the Holy Spirit), slip away into spiritual irrelevance. Their books of intellectual fantasy-philosophy are ready for the dust of forgotten library shelves. Those who frustrated, wasted, impeded and persecuted us for so many decades are leaving the stage and we are beginning to see the future clearly now. For the New Orthodox World (N.O.W.) is taking shape. The New Orthodox World (NOW) is led not by anachronisms, relics from the past in cities of empires which have not existed for centuries, but by vibrant and missionary multinational Local Churches, Autonomous Churches and Exarchates worldwide. These are not narrow and corrupted nationalist museums for State rituals, flag-waving and cultural nostalgia or the playthings of disincarnate but very aggressive, politicized and politically correct, liberal intellectuals, but living organisms, cleansed to prepare us all to meet the King before He returns in all His glory. And in the New Orthodox World, NOW, there is the Heavenly Jerusalem of the Church of Christ, awaiting Him and resisting the Enemy of Mankind, who comes before Christ in order to create disunity, disorder and distress among us.
The death-threat which I received three years ago, sent me because the pen is indeed mightier than the sword, did not stop me or deter me for a single second. In a dream, come to me after receiving that death-threat, I opened my front door and saw an agent on my doorstep. He at once fired his revolver at me, but the bullet rebounded off my priest’s cross, killing him instead of me. He fell to the ground and his corpse was dragged away to a waiting car by his colleague, who in fear and astonishment uttered powerless curses. I left and hid in a secret and remote place where I could not be found. I was rescued by the prayers of one who long, long ago had also taken refuge in such a place and I was taken to a faraway land. I have never paid any attention to dreams, especially such dramatic ones, but I remembered this one. However, I only really understood its meaning and symbolism on my first day here. It means that, like all of us, I will die when God decides, not when men decide, for though man proposes, God disposes. It means that the bullet rebounds, for if men want to kill the truth, they kill only themselves (exactly as they have done for the last one hundred and five years, with their atheist wars, one after another). And those who try to kill the Church in the Ukraine are committing spiritual suicide; indeed, their death-bearing bullet has already lethally rebounded onto themselves.
Victory has been ours in the Diaspora, because we have been willing to die for the Church of God and our enemies have not – because they are inherently attached to this world and so fear death which is of this world. Victory is ours in the Ukraine, because we are willing to die for the Church of God and our enemies are not – because they are inherently attached to this world and so fear death which is of this world. This is why we shall win this last battle now – because we do not fear death, for we believe and we know that Christ is the Life-Giving God, Who rose from the dead and freed the captives in hell. They, however, have only heard of the Risen Christ as a theory and symbolic myth for their heads. They believe it not in their hearts. Therefore their heads, like their lives, are full of the philosophies and works of death. But we do believe and we know and we tremble in awe before the Living God, Who is the Great God, Who works wonders and Who is with us, so that none is against us. Let the dead bury the dead. As for us, we shall not die, but live, and we shall declare the works of the Lord. The Lord is our Enlightenment and our Saviour, whom then shall we fear?
Archpriest Andrew Phillips
Kiev, 1-8 February 2019
Having taken on the schismatic, the defrocked, the anathematized, the non-consecrated and the plainly criminal in the Ukraine, the Patriarchate of Constantinople has isolated itself from World Orthodoxy. So far seven of the fourteen universally recognized Orthodox Churches, the Churches of Russia, Antioch, Jerusalem, Serbia, Poland, Cyprus and the Czech Lands and Slovakia, have condemned the actions of Constantinople outright. The Church of Bulgaria is almost certain to do the same and various individual bishops in the Churches of Georgia and Greece have already spoken out against Constantinople, as has the latter’s own Metropolitan Kallistos (Ware). Only the Churches of Romania, Alexandria and Albania remain strangely silent, sitting on the fence for the moment.
So it is still looking like thirteen against one in the World Orthodox Church. Meanwhile in Moscow, the Russian Church is preparing an Inter-Orthodox meeting on the situation in February. What is to be done? The first thing which has to be admitted is that this whole situation has come about through individual bishops in Constantinople involving themselves in geopolitics, seeking power and money above the Kingdom of God, which they have not sought first. Their gross disobedience to the Words of Christ in the Gospels has led to their disobedience to the canons and thus to division. The solution must surely lie in returning to the Gospels and the Apostolic Canons, to the pre-Constantinople age of the Church, to Jerusalem.
For the past position and role of the Patriarchate of Constantinople in the Church only ever came about for secular reasons in the fourth century, because that city was then the capital of the Roman Empire. And this was later betrayed and ended ignominiously in 1453. Since Constantinople has for long not been an Orthodox city or the capital of anywhere, let us return to reality. Since Constantinople is irrelevant and has been for over 550 years, the Church today should surely return to the spirit of Jerusalem, which is the source of Constantinople and indeed of all Patriarchates, Councils and all apostolic succession. If this is done, then we can hope to see, instead of petty nationalist politicking, worldliness and infighting, the Oneness, Holiness, Catholicity and Apostolicity of the Worldwide Orthodox Church. For this we pray to the Holy Spirit, Who inspires the prophets and the New Jerusalem.
There are those so deluded by secularism, the ways of the world, that they believe that to solve the present crisis in the Ukraine, caused by the love of power and money of Greek politicians in Istanbul, all we have to do is to come to a compromise. They present the crisis as a political disagreement between Constantinople and Moscow, or even an ethnic dispute between Greeks and Slavs, or that it was caused by Moscow’s refusal to attend the 2016 meeting in Crete (which, they forget to mention, was in fact caused by the refusal of three Non-Slav Churches to attend a dictatorial meeting).
These people, some Anglicans among them, see Church life as a continual compromise. Not really believing, because it is all an intellectual game for them, they forget that in dogmatic matters, that is, in matters of principle concerning the salvation of the soul, no compromise is possible. There can never be any compromise between Good and Evil, Truth and the Lie, White and Black, Light and Darkness, God and Satan. Today there is only one choice, the way of the Russian Church or else the Lie. All who have a conscience must decide.
St Laurence’s Prophecies
St Laurence of Chernigov (Feast: 11 January) said that during ‘the little freedom’ (which we now know to be the period since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 and which continues to this day – Ed.), ‘churches and monasteries will open and be restored, but all manner of false teachings will appear, through demons and secret atheists (Catholics, Uniats, self-consecrated Ukrainian schismatics). These will join battle against the Russian Orthodox Church and her unity and catholicity in the Ukraine. The schismatics will be supported by an atheist government’ (Washington – Ed.).
He added that: ‘We must resist the invasion of ‘the civilized world’, that is, dark demonic forces, which will try and penetrate into spiritually undefended areas. They will seize church buildings from the Orthodox and beat up the faithful. Then the Metropolitan of Kiev (unworthy of his name) with his supporting clergy will shake the Russian Church to the foundations. The whole world will be astonished at his iniquity and stand in fear (just as we do today – Ed.). But he will go to eternal perdition like Judas. All these assaults of the evil one and false teachings will disappear in Russia and there will be One Orthodox Church of All Rus’.
‘Kiev, without the great Russia and separate from it, is anyway completely unthinkable. Kiev has never had a Patriarch. Our enemies in Poland so much disliked the word ‘Rus’ that they changed the name of this area to Little Russia and then to ‘the Ukraine’ (meaning ‘the borderlands’), so that we will forget the name Rus and so forever be torn away from Orthodox Holy Rus. In those who have erred or fallen away from Orthodoxy there is no grace of the Holy Spirit, salvation or obtaining of the Kingdom of Heaven’.
‘To break away from the Church is the greatest and unforgiveable sin, for it is the sin against the Holy Spirit’. Towards the end of St Laurence’s life the head priest of the Kiev Caves Lavra, Fr Kronid, said that self-consecrated schismatics and Uniats had disappeared. But St Laurence answered: ‘The demon will enter them and they will attack the Orthodox Faith and Church with Satanic malice, but they will suffer a shameful end and their followers will bear a heavenly punishment from the Lord and King of Hosts’.
‘Then all heresies and schisms will vanish from Russia. The Church will not be persecuted. The Lord will have mercy on Holy Rus because it suffered the terrible period before Antichrist. A great host of Martyrs and Confessors shone forth there, beginning with the highest levels of the clergy and society, the Metropolitan and the Tsar, the priest and the monk, the child and the babe in arms and laypeople. They all beseech the Lord…’.
‘You must be quite clear that Russia is the portion of the Queen of Heaven, She cares for it and intercedes for it especially. The whole host of Russian saints with the Mother of God will ask that Russia be spared. The faith will prosper in Russia and there will be rejoicing as before (though only for a short time, as the Dread Judge will come to judge the living and the dead). Even Antichrist himself will fear the Tsar of Rus. But all the other countries will be under Antichrist’s control and suffer all the horrors and torments described in the Holy Scriptures’.
There used to be three ecclesiologies (teachings as to what the Church is), but last month we saw the birth of a fourth. What are these ecclesiologies?
- Orthodox Ecclesiology (‘Christianity’)
This is the ecclesiology of the Holy Trinity, Unity in Diversity. It is the ecclesiology of the Family of Churches, which together form the Body of Christ, of which obviously Christ is the Head. In practical, that is, incarnational terms, this results in the existence of a family of Churches, like those described by the Apostle Paul in his letters to the Corinthians, the Ephesians, the Thessalonians, the Philippians, the Romans etc. Their differences and problems are regulated by Councils. Indeed, this conciliarity, in theology and history called Catholicity, is one of the four basic signs of the Church, together with Oneness, Holiness and Apostolicity. Therefore, a ‘Church’ which does not have this Catholicity is not the Church, certainly not the fullness of the Church, as it is deficient in one of the Church’s four essential qualities.
- Papal Ecclesiology (‘Papocaesarism’)
Papal or Roman Catholic ecclesiology asserts that the Church is centralist and imperialist. There is only one Pope, Who as the Vicar of Christ is the Head of the Church. This is the ecclesiology of centralism, which cannot survive without the Pope, Who is Infallible, as He is the source of the Holy Spirit on earth. This is the ecclesiology of the Crusader, the Inquisitor and the Conquistador.
- Protestant Ecclesiology (‘Caesaropapism’)
As a reaction to centralist Papism, this says that you can make your own church, everyone is a pope, everyone is the head of their own church: ‘Make it up as you go along: we are all popes now’. If you disagree, you go off and start your own church. Inevitably, and from the very start, this leads to small, weak and divided groups being taken over by States, kings, princes, presidents and politicians, a process known as erastianism, whereby the State controls the Church. Inevitably, and from the very start, this has led to State Churches, phenomena like the Church of England, the Church of Scotland, the Church of Norway. These are all State-controlled organizations, which inevitably end up adapting their doctrines to the demands of the secular State.
- Phanariot Ecclesiology (‘Eastern Papism’)
This power-grabbing ecclesiology, which has been a century in the making in the Diaspora has just now been born in all its fullness in the Ukraine. It is in effect not Orthodox ecclesiology, but a mixture of Roman Catholic and Protestant ecclesiologies, Papocaesarism and Caesaropapism. On the one hand, it is centralizing Papism: all must be gathered together under the Patriarch of Constantinople, who is the ‘Eastern Pope’ (not ‘Western Pope’). On the other hand, it gives what it calls ‘autocephaly’, in reality only a diminished autocephaly or minor measure of independence, to any Church within any nationalist organization or ‘State’ – even though that ‘State’ may be new, temporary, artificial and tyrannical or even already have an authentic Orthodox Church on its territory.
In other words, this new imperialist/nationalist ecclesiology is a combination of the worst of both the Papal and the Protestant worlds. It is a pastiche of authentic Trinitarian Orthodox ecclesiology. On the one hand, it is centralizing, able to exploit its new ‘churches’ as subservient cash cows. On the other hand, it provides a measure of independence to pseudo-autocephalous entities, but no protection for them from the local dictatorship, even in dogmatic questions. For the local ‘State’ can demand and force changes in doctrines in accordance with its own demands, which subordinate Christ to its nationalism. Thus, Phanariot ecclesiology does not affirm Local Churches, it only affirms, Protestant-style, the right of ‘States’ to have their own ‘Churches’. In other words, it merely uses Protestant-style nationalism to increase its own power base. Therefore, this is a double heresy.
After the collapse of the USSR, the main enemy of the USA will be the Russian Orthodox Church.
Words attributed to the US political geostrategist, Zbigniew Brzezinski, confirmed by Samuel Huntingdon (Chapter 6 of ‘The Clash of Civilizations’)
The Ukrainian State under the US-imposed puppet Poroshenko has set up its own State-Church for its xenophobes. Now these violent hooligans, unemployed and unemployable because of their criminal records, are arriving in busloads, supported by the police and local authorities, and try to occupy the churches of the faithful, beating up those who oppose them.
Over fifty churches have been occupied and so deserted by the faithful in this way over the last five years. Priests are being summoned to the secret police and ask why they do not go over to the State-Church. Their homes are searched and ransacked. But all this is done under the protection of the US-financed Patriarchate of Constantinople. So that is all right. It is all ‘canonical’. And, amazingly, there are still those who attend churches under the Patriarchate of Constantinople, once more become the enemy and persecutor of the Church.
The holy Elder Iona of Odessa prophesied all this eight years ago. He told people then to go to church because there would come a time when they would not be able to. However, he said that this period would last only six months, as all would end in ignominy. Quite simply, the people would boycott the churches taken over by the thieves. If so, then there would be no support, financial or spiritual, for the uncanonical Istanbul ’Church’ in the Ukraine.
Now it has been revealed that of the twelve members of the Synod in Constantinople, five refused to sign the agreement (‘Tomos’) to found this new phyletist Istanbul Church on the territory of the multinational Russian Orthodox Church in the Ukraine. They have duly been sacked from the Synod.
Thus, the ‘unifying’ Council of Kiev last December has not only divided the Ukraine into Christians (those with Metr Onufry of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church) and Non-Christians (those with the State-Church of Poroshenko and his ex-Communist oligarchs who have become Ukrainian chauvinists). More than this, Patriarch Bartholomew has divided his own Church. And beyond that he has divided the whole of the Orthodox Church, ensuring unless he repents that his name will go down in history with other unprayed-for apostates, like Arius and Nestorius. A tragedy.
So far, seven Local Churches, some 85% of the whole Orthodox Church (the Russian Church, the Serbian (although threatened by US support for Montenegrin and Macedonian chauvinism), the Bulgarian, the Patriarchate of Antioch, the Polish and the Czechoslovak), have sided with Orthodoxy.
The American game, dictated long ago by the dead Russophobe Brzezinski, quoted above, is to force the seven other Local Churches, the Romanian, the Georgian and the Greek-controlled Churches to side with Constantinople. In fact, these Churches are divided into Russian-supporting Orthodox and a motley group of Istanbul-supporting apostates – ecumenists, liberals, semi-Uniats, Greek phyletists, LGBT-supporters etc.
The next stage in the present American program is to foment Ukrainian-style separatism in Belarus, thus removing that territory too from the Russian Church. Then they want the nationalistic Patriarch of Romania, who was chosen and imposed by the US ambassador in Bucharest, will grab Moldova from the Russian Church, though the price of US support will be Romanian support for Constantinople. US meddling is also trying to get the Georgian Church, under its ailing Patriarch, to support its puppets in Constantinople.
The US also counts on the ethnic support of the poor, Greek-controlled colonial Churches (Greece, Alexandria, Cyprus, Albania, Jerusalem), on the principle that ‘blood is thicker than water’. But this support of petty nationalism will all cost US-taxpayer dollars. And the bankrupt US is in condition to do this. Nor are the Ukraine-supporting but Brexit-divided UK Establishment and bankrupt France, now ridden by nine weeks of popular and violent riots against its Rothschild President.
What will the outcome be? If this planned US assault on the Church of God and its planned Protestantization (= secularization), like the successful assault on Roman Catholicism in the early 1960, is successful, then we are talking about the end of the world. In that case, we are indeed witnessing the last years of human history. Do we despair? No, because there is a far more likely and also very optimistic outcome. This is that the lame duck of Constantinople will disappear with all its decadence, Uniatism and new calendarism into the dustbin of anachronistic history.
Then the Church of Greece, supported by the Orthodox remnants of Constantinople, will take over the Greek Diaspora, enabling long overdue inter-Orthodox co-operation in the Diaspora. Then the apostates in the other Local Churches will disappear into the sink-holes of secularism, like the two apostate bishops of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, Alexander Drabinko and Symeon of Vinnitsa.
Then the whole Church will be cleansed, purified of money-minded careerist apostates and crypto-Papist/Protestant ecumenists. They can leave with their dollar salaries from the US secret services. Good riddance. The Church will be healthier without them. Then the 220 million-strong Church, only one in thirty-five of the world population, can begin in earnest its real mission to the 7.5 billion of the Non-Orthodox world, a mission which has only just begun.
After the falling away of the see of Constantinople from the Orthodox Church and today’s Tomos, we are starting to see how the fashionable tendencies it has long represented are also being rejected. These are freemasonry, modernism, renovationism and dreamy, pseudo-theological intellectualism (philosophy). Thus, this ideology of semi-Orthodox intellectuals, both clerical and lay, is at last being rejected, also in Moscow and Saint Petersburg where they mainly live. This is because such tendencies are now clearly associated with the uncanonical ecclesiastical invasion of the Ukraine by the US-run Phanariots.
Thus, Orthodoxy is at last being cleansed from generations of Protestant-style, modernist philosophers, especially Russians, from Solovyov to Bulgakov, from Berdyayev to Afanasyev, from Schmemann to Yannaras, from Clement to Zizioulas. For it is their ideologies which have led directly to Ukrainian autocephalism. They are what leads directly to the break-up of the Orthodox Church, as Brzezinski and his heirs in today’s US State Department, like Hitler before them, so much desire in their ‘divide and rule’ policy. For the heresy against the Church preached by the modernists is not a theory, it leads to the destruction of the Church.
Nationalist ‘Churches’ in the EU and the USA, in Belarus and Moldova, and anywhere else, is what the modernists and their US sponsors want. This is what Poroshenko and the Phanariots have created in the Ukraine. But the faithful there do not attend their conventicles. Why? Because they give no faith, no spiritual food, they are dead. This nationalism is associated with crude Russophobia. This is cultivated by the phyletists only because they reject the obvious numerical predominance, multinational nature, piety and faithfulness to the Tradition of the Russian Orthodox Church. They want power for themselves.
Lacking humility, they cannot accept the reality of Church life. Russophobia is only their self-justification for this. Of course, we are not talking here about the promotion of some sort of Soviet imperialism or Russian nationalism, which we, like all Russian Orthodox, also naturally wholly reject. We are talking about the rejection of Orthodoxy itself, which has been kept so faithfully precisely by the Russian Church above all. This is why the eight undecided Local Churches (outside the Russian, Serbian Bulgarian, Antiochian, Polish and Czechoslovak Churches) will sooner or later have to choose who they are with: Christ or Belial?
Will the other Local Churches (essentially Greek, apart from the US-influenced Romanian and Georgian Churches) side with the Phanariot modernists or will they remain faithful? In other words, will they recognize the Poroshenko-Phanariot pocket ‘Church’, under US pressure, or will they recognize the faithful and canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church under the Confessor Metropolitan Onufry? If they choose the to do the latter, then the US will form Macedonian and Montenegrin ‘Orthodox Churches’ and many more. ‘Divide and rule’ is after all the Protestant disease which the Americans understand and spread so well.
Just like the former see of Rome, the see of Constantinople is now ceasing to be an Orthodox Church. The process of apostasy is the same: Hildebrand and Bartholomew. Gathering to itself a motley group of freemasons, LGBT activists, schismatics, phyletists, dissidents, ecumenists, modernists and Russophobes, it wars with the spiritual enemies of Orthodoxy, whose last bastion is the Russian Orthodox Church. Their greatest fear is the resurrection of the Imperial, that is, multinational, Church of Rus, of New Jerusalem, of the Orthodox world, of the Orthosphere, of Orthodox Civilization. Their hearts are elsewhere.
Orthodox Civilization stands for everything that is not petty and provincial, that is not Ukrainian-style nationalist ‘Churches’, without spiritual life and monasticism, which wave flags and chant to their Caesars like the Jews of old: ‘Glory to the Ukraine’, ‘Glory to the EU’ and ‘Glory to the USA’, instead of ‘Glory to God’. The support of US/EU globalism and liberalism for petty nationalism is only because nationalism is defenceless before their Eurosodom and Gomerika. What is the way ahead? The clearest course of action is to summon a Church Council, like that in Moscow in 1948, held to condemn ecumenism.
Such a Council might not initially gather all the Local Churches, some of which are still fence-sitting ‘for fear of the Jews’. However, its decisions, like those of other Local Councils in the past, the Palamite Councils, for example, could easily come to be accepted in due course by the whole Church. The agenda would have to include:
- The condemnation of the absurd US-recommended, State-run ‘Unifying Council’ (sic), held in Kiev on 15 December 2018, and of its decisions.
- The condemnation of the century of ecclesiological heresies, canonical crimes and modernist liturgical aberrations of the Phanar (all of which were present at its Crete meeting in 2016).
- In the light of Constantinople’s apostasy, the long-overdue review of the archaic Church Diptychs.
- In the light of Constantinople’s apostasy, the discussion of the future close co-operation of the six Local Churches (the Churches of Russia, Greece, Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria and Georgia) directly concerned by the Diaspora.
- The condemnation of worldly phyletism and Protestant autocephalism (Schmemannism) and the formulation of the ecclesiological principles for the granting of Autonomy within a Local Church and, above all, for the granting of Autocephaly by all the Local Churches together, thus cleansing the Church of secular nationalism.
Since the collapse of the Soviet Empire, the Western Empire, centred in Washington, has been possessed by its ‘New World Order’ hubris. There are actually people there who are so deluded that they believe that history has already ended, with the triumph of ‘the West against the Rest’! Such atheist and Non-Christian ‘neocons’ have clearly never read or understood the Bible. In reality, history will end very differently – with the Apocalypse, caused by Western technology with its idolatrous, Babel-like conviction that it is greater than God. Thus, since 1990, the Western Empire has been trying to subjugate not just parts of the world through invasion and colonization, a process that began 900 years before with the Papist invasion of England in 1066, but the whole world, to its total control.
This Trotskyite control obsession began by trying to take over the Muslim world, first in Iraq and Afghanistan and then in the CIA-mounted ‘Arab Spring’, which has led to widespread torture, humanitarian disasters and millions of deaths and refugees. These disasters spread from Iraq to Egypt, from Libya to Syria, from Tunisia to the Yemen, blood-soaked by British bombs, and led to the immigration crisis in Western Europe. The latter, to the consternation of the extraordinarily stupid globalists (e.g. locally, Cameron and the British Establishment), cut off from the real world of ‘the plebs’ in their elitist bubble, has backfired. Quite predictably, but unpredictably for their stupidity, it led to Brexit and other similar anti-globalist liberation movements all over the EU, and in the USA led to Trump.
The globalists’ attempted takeover of the Islamic world has thus failed in bankruptcy, both financial and moral. However, it has also resulted in reinforcing Iran, the centre of Shia Islamic resistance to the Western Empire and its military and economic terrorism, and alienating ordinary Europeans and Americans. Moreover, since the 1980s now heavily polluted China has undercut the Capitalist West to become the world’s workshop and the world’s Black Country, as once England’s heavily polluted Black Country was in the 19th century the world’s workshop. So it has become powerful. And, since 2000, the Russian Federation has slowly been restoring itself as the pre-1917 centre of Christian Civilization and so becoming powerful once more, growing in spiritual and so moral authority.
Thus, through its own greed, incompetence and control freakery, the now bankrupt Western world today faces three centres of resistance to itself. Today, it is fighting against reality and rivals on three fronts: against the uncorrupted Islamic world, the Chinese world and the Christian (Orthodox) world. Having lost its wars against the Islamic world, where it has reached stalemate and uncontrollable chaos, and too weak to take on China directly, despite its attempts to create dissidence among China’s Muslim Uyghur minority and in Tibet, to mount provocations by aggressively sailing its warships off the coast of China and to use the soft power of Hollywood and consumerism, it has decided to take on the revived Christianity of the Russian Federation as the softest of the three targets.
Thus, two Civilizations, the Christian (Orthodox, centred in Russia), and the Anti-Christian (Atheist, centred in the West) face each other. As usual, the Anti-Christian Empire, like the pagan Roman Empire of old which it imitates from its Capitol, White House and Senate, has adopted the policy of divide and rule and used the relentless lies of its propaganda machine of fake news. This has ranged from using the particularly stupid and amateur underpaid British Secret Services, with their Litvinenko and Skripals (sic!), trying to invade Russia from Georgia and murdering 2,000, and mounting a $5 billion coup d’etat in the Ukraine, barefacedly stating that the Russian Crimea, which by an internationally observed referendum massively and rejoicingly voted to return to Russia, has been annexed (sic!).
It has also used the new regime in Kiev to shoot down a civilian airliner and accused Russia of doing the dirty deed (sic!), stealing the gold reserves of the Ukraine and sending it arms, spies and mercenaries instead (sic!), accusing Russia of threatening to invade the Baltics, Poland and even Sweden and Norway (sic!). Generally, it has relied on the State-controlled Western media and the incredible ignorance of brainwashed Western peoples about reality to tell lies like Goebbels. ‘If you tell the lie often enough, they will believe it’. Of course this anti-Christian world has found enough ‘useful idiots’, whether stupid, ignorant, deluded, naive or simply evil, to believe their shameless lies. For the West the Christian world has to be destroyed from inside. Over the last century the West has done this in two ways.
Firstly, it overthrew the legitimate government in Russia through its local traitors (Milyukov, Rodzianko, Alekseev, several Romanovs et al in 1917, Gorbachov and Yeltsin in the 1980s and 1990s, and today any naïve Westernized dreamer and intellectual or any corrupt oligarch (= thief) (like Navalny and the host of others it keeps in luxury in London, New York and Tel Aviv). Secondly, it dispatched there genocidal maniacs it had long harboured in its bosom in order to dismantle the Christian Empire. However, a third technique has been to undermine the much weaker other Christian countries outside the Christian Empire, attacking the Empire through the soft underbelly by diluting their Orthodoxy, imposing their anti-Orthodox calendar and recruiting their traitors to its ecumenist syncretism.
The centre of the traitors, external to the former Empire, has always been in Istanbul. The centres of the traitors, internal to the former Empire, has always been on its various peripheries, in the Paris emigration and in Crestwood in New York, in the Polish western Ukraine, in the Baltic States and also in the much secularized cities of Saint Petersburg and Moscow, where one can find intellectual traitors like Hovorun, Drabinko, Kochetkov, Kurayev and Mitrofanov, to name but a few. Through its spies, the West has always sought out and found the weaknesses of such individuals and ruthlessly exploited them, especially through flattery and money. (‘Every man has his price’). We can this see today in the apostasy of Phanariot Istanbul and in the other small Local Churches, where today silence reigns in shameful cowardice.
Incredibly to anyone with a grasp of reality, the Phanariots actually believe in their Greek megalomania that they are at the centre (sic!) of the Christian world and should rule over it by Divine right. Flattering its delusions of grandeur and thirst for money, all the while mocking its fantasy behind its back, the Western evil Empire uses the Phanariots for its evil ends. Thus, today the Phanariots have staked everything in a very high risk game in the Ukraine, where their long history will end in ignominy and bloodshed. All Christians (Orthodox) must now choose. A century of compromise through weakness is over. We have to decide whose side we are on. With the faithful or with the traitors? With the Saints of the Russian Orthodox Church or against them? 2019 promises to be a year filled with events.
Metropolitan Daniil of Vididn to glasove.com: The assembly in Ukraine is uncanonical
“I will answer you in the words of one of the archbishops of the canonical Church, with which he responded to the invitation of Patriarch Bartholomew to attend this assembly: I am firmly convinced and confess that I remain faithful to the One Orthodox Church, and my presence at this council contradicts the first Psalm of David, which reads as follows, “Blessed is the man that hath not walked in the counsel of the ungodly, nor stood in the way of sinners, nor sat in the seat of the pestilent. But his will is rather in the law of the Lord, and in His law will he meditate day and night.” What could be the outcome of a council that is convened in violation of the canonical order and involving persons outside the Church? In my opinion, this Council will not heal the division among the faithful people in Ukraine, but will deepen it. In this whole mournful situation there is a comforting thing – the desire of Orthodox people in this country to preserve the unity of the Holy Orthodox Church, and that this finds a response and support across the entire Orthodox world.”
This is what Metropolitan Daniel of Vidin says in an interview for glasove.com on the occasion of the assembly on December 15 in Ukraine convened by the Patriarch of Constantinople. The date for its conducting was announced by President Petro Poroshenko, who informed that an autocephalous local Orthodox church in Ukraine would be established at the assembly. Poroshenko said the council would approve its statutes and choose a primate to obtain from the Ecumenical Patriarch tomos (testimony) of the autocephaly.
Why is the position of the Holy Synod of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church concerning the schism crisis in Ukraine being protracted?
The Holy Synod is a collective, conciliar body of governing, and decisions are taken by a majority, in accordance with the Statutes of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church. Considering this question, the Holy Synod appointed a commission to examine more thoroughly all documents related to the Church crisis in Ukraine and only then to come up with an opinion. At the discussions during the synodal sessions, there were metropolitans, including myself, who wanted a position to be expressed, but as I already said, the Holy Synod is a collective body. At the same time, everyone bears a personal responsibility for his own voice, both before God and before God’s people. Why do we think we need to express a position? Because the Church is one and conciliar, as we confess in the Symbol of the Faith. In this sense, the dispute in Ukraine is not just a dispute between two local Orthodox churches. It affects the entire Orthodox Church.
What is your personal opinion on this question and why do you think it affects the entire Orthodox Church?
This affects the whole Orthodox Church because inter-Orthodox relations are affected. It violates the millennial Canon Law of the Church, one of the basic principles of which is the principle of the boundaries of Church jurisdiction. These limits are clearly defined and generally recognized. Each autocephalous Church has the right to self-governance within its boundaries and does not have the right to extend their jurisdiction in other local Churches. Here we will list only rule 2 of the Second Ecumenical Council, and rule 8 of the Third Ecumenical Council, which prohibits the individual local Orthodox Churches to extend their jurisdiction beyond the bounds of their area.
In your opinion, has Patriarch Bartholomew crossed the limits of his jurisdiction?
We definitely deem so. Since his Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew has been at the lead of the Constantinople Patriarchy, (i.e. from 1991 until now), he has always acknowledged that the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is under the jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate in an indisputable way, with a number of letters and documents endorsed with his signature. Now he suddenly states that the Kiev Metropolis was never given under the full jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate.
It is pointed out that in the famous document of 1686, by which the Constantinople Church entitles the Moscow Patriarch to ordain the metropolitan of the Kiev Metropolis, there was a requirement that the name of the Patriarch of Constantinople be commemorated. And this also is considered as a sign of recognition of the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople over the Kiev Metropolis. It is another question how legitimate these claims are, but they are only declared today – three hundred years after the act in question was issued.
At the same time, the Church rules define periods of limitation for disputes over the right to jurisdiction over certain territories. For example, rule 133 of the Carthaginian Council sets a three-year statute of limitation. If a Bishop believes that another Bishop has entered a part of its territory, he has three years to file a claim. Rule 17 of the Fourth Ecumenical Council and rule 25 of the Fifth-Sixth Ecumenical Council provide a limitation period of 30 years in which disputes over jurisdiction over certain parishes can be settled. And in our case, a few centuries have passed.
In terms of Canon Law, these disputes are inadmissible. Here’s an example: in 1917 The Patriarch of Constantinople, German V, writes the following to the bishop of the Georgian Church after its self-proclamation for autocephalous: “I do not know and cannot know a self-contained Georgian Church, since for more than one hundred years, the Orthodox Georgians have been under the rule of the Russian Church. Your separation and formation of an autocephalous Church is only possible with the consent of your church with the Russian one (…) We cannot interfere in your internal Church matters, but advise you fatherly, to listen to the voice of your pastor, and in this way to bring this issue into the river-bed of the salvific Church canons.”
The claim of the Patriarch of Constantinople that his rights are infringed, (as the Kiev Metropolitan does not commemorate his name during Divine Services), is untenable, but is used as a formal occasion for the document from 1686 to be repealed. But this situation has not been contested for 300 years.
For three centuries the Orthodox people in Ukraine have lived in complete unity and have been an integral part of the Russian Orthodox Church. Since then, Kiev Metropolitans have been members of the Holy Synod of the Russian Church, and have elected, and have had the right to be elected as Patriarchs.
During all these 300 years, the Ukrainian believers have recognized Moscow’s Patriarch as their spiritual primate. Can someone after some 300 years come from outside and say: I am your father? Who’s going to follow him and who’s going to believe him? How can one proclaim himself as the spiritual father of a people, when the people know, remember, and honor the fathers who have begotten and brought them up in the faith? The sacred canons are categorical in this regard.
But for the people outside, it is not clear why Ukraine, after being an independent country, does not have its own independent Church?
Let’s first see what the Orthodox people and their canonical hierarchs in Ukraine say, because that is essential. The hierarchal council, convened by the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in reference to these events on November 13th of this year, in which 83 hierarchs participated, expressed an explicit position against the encroachment of the Constantinople Patriarchy into her canonical boundaries, as it stated that “the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is self-governed, endowed with all the rights of independence and autonomy that are today necessary for the fruitful service of God and of the people of Ukraine.”
The Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UOC-MP) has over 12,000 parishes, which is more than the two schismatic groups, (the Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Kiev Patriarchate (UOC KP) and the so-called Autocephalous Ukrainian Orthodox Church), combined.
Therefore, in his letters to the Bulgarian Patriarch and to the primates of the other local Churches, Metropolitan Onuphry correctly expresses his perplexity as to why no one takes into consideration the appeal of thousands of members of the UOC to Patriarch Bartholomew asking autocephaly for these schismatic groups not to be granted.
Why is the voice of a group of people being taken into consideration selectively before the voice of the canonical Church and its flock? Indeed, all canonized saints of the twentieth century in Ukraine urge their spiritual children to preserve sacred the unity of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church with the Russian one.
Let’s look at another side of the issue. Who are those who insist on autocephaly? The state authorities first of all. As Metropolitan Onuphry rightly notes, the authorities only hear the voices of those groups that burn Churches, profess nationalism, call for hatred, and cry “death to Moscow.” Why are their voices and demands for autocephaly the only ones to be heard?
It is obvious that these same state authorities are preparing to take matters into their own hands. Why is the opinion of the only recognized canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church not taken into account? What makes the opinion of groups whose leaders have been deprived from their spiritual dignity and excommunicated from the Church more trustworthy?
Could an analogy be made with the schism in the Bulgarian Orthodox Church 20 years ago?
Yes, to a great extent. As the schism in the Bulgarian Orthodox Church was inspired and supported by the state authority, the same is happening in Ukraine. In our country, the schism was overcome, thanks to the Orthodox Council of 1998, convened at the initiative of the BOC in Sofia.
At that time, the Ecumenical Patriarch acted quite differently compared to today. Can we talk about a double standard?
Actually, at the 1998 council, the Ecumenical Patriarch posed the question of the resignation of Patriarch Maxim, but then our predecessors, (hierarchs with spiritual experience and valor), opposed him and said, “We have called you here to heal the schism, not to deepen it.” So the parallel between the schism in our country and the one in Ukraine is completely relevant.
At the moment, the UOC MP is in the same position as the BOC was then. In our country the schismatics also tried to rob the Church’s identity, to despoil shrines, to usurp property of which they were not entitled. And most grievously, destroying their moral appearance, and killing the people’s faith. Because we know how they ended, and what their deeds in the faith were. The same is happening in Ukraine.
In 1992, the former Metropolitan of Kiev, Philaret, was deprived of his dignity for his falling into schism and due to proven moral transgressions in personal aspects, and later excommunicated by the Church. So his removal was laid down legitimately, for good reasons due to a number of canonical violations. And in its decision from October 11th, in complete contradiction with the sacred Canons, the Patriarchate of Constantinople restored that man.
Finally, what should be the position of the BOC in your opinion?
Three metropolitans of the Holy Synod came out with a statement on the situation in Ukraine, in which, proceeding from the experience of the Pan-Orthodox council from 1998, which overcame the schism in our country, we proposed in this case to proceed in the same way and for the matter to be offered for a Pan-Orthodox discussion.
For a Pan-Orthodox council to be convened?
This can happen in different ways. First, resuming the dialogue between the Patriarchate of Constantinople and the Russian Orthodox Church, in view of the ROC’s decision to end Eucharistic communion with the Patriarchate of Constantinople. The resumption of dialogue between the two churches, with the participation of representatives of the rest of the local churches, is a way the wound in Ukraine can be healed. In the end, any decision concerning the Local Orthodox Churches cannot be accepted and permanent without their consent and support.
A “unification council”, convened by the Patriarch of Constantinople will be held on December 15th in Kiev. What do you think will be the result of it?
I will answer you in the words of one of the archbishops of the canonical Church, with which he responded to the invitation of Patriarch Bartholomew to attend this assembly: “I am firmly convinced and confess that I remain faithful to the One Orthodox Church, and my presence at this council contradicts the first Psalm of David, which reads as follows, “Blessed is the man that hath not walked in the counsel of the ungodly, nor stood in the way of sinners, nor sat in the seat of the pestilent. But his will is rather in the law of the Lord, and in His law will he meditate day and night.”
What could be the outcome of a council that is convened in violation of the canonical order and involving persons outside the Church? In my opinion, this Council will not heal the division among the faithful people in Ukraine, but will deepen it. In this whole mournful situation there is a comforting thing – the desire of Orthodox people in this country to preserve the unity of the Holy Orthodox Church, and that this finds a response and support across the entire Orthodox world.”
Is there a political pressure on the Synod of BOC to tilt the scales for one or another solution – from the Russian or American side? Or, from the side of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, which expresses certain interests?
I can categorically say that during the discussions in the Holy Synod, the Metropolitans express their own views. So the debates and decisions are made on the basis of the conceptions and conscience of each of the hierarchs.
This is not a direct answer. Is there any political pressure, in your opinion? From the Russian side or from the Americans (through the Bulgarian government), which is in fact the instigator of the actions of the Ecumenical Patriarch?
I can only testify for myself. I can categorically state that nobody has put any pressure on me. In view of the progress of the situation, at this time, it is necessary for all Orthodox Christians to increase our prayers for the preservation of the unity of the Holy Orthodox Church in Ukraine, and in the whole world.
Interviewer: Yavor Dachkov
The new ‘Metropolitan’ of the graceless State Church in the Ukraine, the US ‘divide and rule’ stooge ‘Epifanij’ Dumenko, ordained by a defrocked and anathematized married bandit ‘Patriarch’ from whom he accepts his orders, awaits his papers in Istanbul on 6 January. He has already promised to force the faithful to adopt the papist calendar and then unite with the Uniats, like the Phanar and the Vatican. All this has cost the US taxpayer, who loves freedom and democracy, a bribe of $25 million to set up this farce. But the new Poroshenko nationalist ‘Church’ duly exists with several hundred adherents and at least two church buildings which imitate the rites of the Orthodox Church.
In the city of Vinnitsa in central Ukraine, civil servants paid by the Poroshenko regime, have been told that they must, by Sunday rota, attend the only church under Dumenko there, as it has been deserted by the faithful. Other faithful are being ‘interviewed’ by the dreaded CIA-trained Kiev Secret Police, the SBU, to find out why they refuse to attend. Poroshenko, the founder of a nationalist Church by bloodshed, is indeed worthy of the bloodthirsty tyrant Henry VIII. Thirty years ago, under the Ukrainian Communist Party, if you went to church, you lost your job. Today, under the Ukrainian Fascist Party, if you do not go to the ‘right’ church, you will lose your job. How times change!
Just today the Ukrainian Parliament has ordered the Ukrainian Orthodox Church to change its name to ‘The Russian Orthodox Church in the Ukraine’. This means that all the over 12,000 churches must be re-registered – which will give the Kiev regime the chance to take them away from the faithful. Persecution is intensifying under US aegis. Perhaps the Ukrainian Parliament could also order the Patriarchate of Constantinople to change its name to ‘The Patriarchate of Istanbul’? And perhaps, in reply, in Moscow a Synod could change the name of the Patriarchate of Moscow, which is associated with the Soviet period, to ‘The Patriarchate of New Jerusalem and All Rus’?
However, there is a serious side to all this provincial buffoonery, which is worthy only of a Balkan farce. The clownish attempt by Istanbul to kidnap the faithful of the Russian Orthodox Church because it has virtually no flock of its own has an alternative. If it wanted faithful for its fictitious empire, why did it not set out to convert Turks – or any of the other 7.5 billion people in the world who are not Orthodox, rather than concentrate on the 216 million who are? Of course, in fairness, we must ask the same question of the 13 canonical Orthodox Churches (there are no longer 14). Why are they not also engaged in mission with the 7.5 billion? This is the real shame.