Metropolitan of Constantinople. Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople: history and significance

Sacred Tradition tells that the holy Apostle Andrew the First-Called in the year 38 ordained his disciple named Stachy as bishop of the city of Byzantion, on the site of which Constantinople was founded three centuries later. From these times, the church originates, at the head of which for many centuries there were patriarchs who bore the title of Ecumenical.

The right of primacy among equals

Among the primates of the fifteen autocephalous, that is, independent, local Orthodox churches that now exist, the Patriarch of Constantinople is considered “preeminent among equals”. This is its historical significance. The full title of the person holding such an important post is the Divine All Holiness Archbishop of Constantinople - New Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch.

For the first time, the title of Ecumenical was awarded to the first Akaki. The legal basis for this was the decisions of the Fourth (Chalcedon) Ecumenical Council, held in 451 and securing the status of bishops of New Rome for the heads of the Church of Constantinople - the second most important after the primates of the Roman Church.

If at first such an establishment met with rather severe opposition in certain political and religious circles, then by the end of the next century the position of the patriarch was so strengthened that his actual role in solving state and church affairs became dominant. At the same time, his so magnificent and verbose title was finally established.

The patriarch is a victim of the iconoclasts

The history of the Byzantine Church knows many names of patriarchs who entered it forever and were canonized as saints. One of them is Saint Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople, who occupied the patriarchal see from 806 to 815.

The period of his reign was marked by a particularly fierce struggle waged by supporters of iconoclasm, a religious movement that rejected the veneration of icons and other sacred images. The situation was aggravated by the fact that among the followers of this trend there were many influential people and even several emperors.

The father of Patriarch Nicephorus, being the secretary of Emperor Constantine V, lost his post for promoting icon veneration and was exiled to Asia Minor, where he died in exile. Nicephorus himself, after the iconoclast emperor Leo the Armenian was enthroned in 813, became a victim of his hatred for holy images and ended his days in 828 as a prisoner of one of the remote monasteries. For great services to the church, he was subsequently canonized. Today, Saint Patriarch Nicephorus of Constantinople is revered not only in his homeland, but throughout the Orthodox world.

Patriarch Photius - recognized father of the church

Continuing the story about the most prominent representatives of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, one cannot help but recall the outstanding Byzantine theologian Patriarch Photius, who led his flock from 857 to 867. After Gregory the Theologian, he is the third universally recognized father of the church, who once occupied the See of Constantinople.

The exact date of his birth is unknown. It is generally accepted that he was born in the first decade of the 9th century. His parents were extraordinarily rich and versatile educated people, but under the emperor Theophilus, a fierce iconoclast, they were subjected to repression and ended up in exile. There they died.

Struggle of Patriarch Photius with the Pope

After the accession to the throne of the next emperor, the infant Michael III, Photius begins his brilliant career - first as a teacher, and then in the administrative and religious field. In 858, he occupies the highest position in the city. However, this did not bring him a quiet life. From the very first days, Patriarch Photius of Constantinople found himself in the thick of the struggle between various political parties and religious movements.

To a large extent, the situation was aggravated by the confrontation with the Western Church, caused by disputes over jurisdiction over Southern Italy and Bulgaria. The initiator of the conflict was Patriarch Photius of Constantinople, who sharply criticized him, for which he was excommunicated by the pontiff from the church. Not wanting to remain in debt, Patriarch Photius also anathematized his opponent.

From anathema to canonization

Later, already during the reign of the next emperor, Vasily I, Photius became a victim of court intrigues. Supporters of the political parties opposing him, as well as the previously deposed Patriarch Ignatius I, received influence at the court. As a result, Photius, who had so desperately entered into a fight with the pope, was removed from the throne, excommunicated and died in exile.

Almost a thousand years later, in 1847, when Patriarch Anfim VI was the primate of the Church of Constantinople, the anathema was lifted from the rebellious patriarch, and, in view of the numerous miracles that took place at his grave, he himself was canonized. However, in Russia, for a number of reasons, this act was not recognized, which gave rise to discussions between representatives of the majority of the churches of the Orthodox world.

Legal act unacceptable for Russia

It should be noted that the Roman Church for many centuries refused to recognize the honorary third place for the Church of Constantinople. The pope changed his decision only after the so-called union, an agreement on the unification of the Catholic and Orthodox churches, was signed at the Florence Cathedral in 1439.

This act provided for the supreme supremacy of the Pope, and, while the Eastern Church retained its own rites, its acceptance of Catholic dogma. It is quite natural that such an agreement, which runs counter to the requirements of the Charter of the Russian Orthodox Church, was rejected by Moscow, and Metropolitan Isidore, who put his signature under it, was defrocked.

Christian Patriarchs in the Islamic State

It's been less than a decade and a half. The Byzantine Empire collapsed under the onslaught of Turkish troops. The Second Rome fell, giving way to Moscow. However, the Turks in this case showed religious tolerance, surprising for religious fanatics. Having built all the institutions of state power on the principles of Islam, they nevertheless allowed a very large Christian community to exist in the country.

Since that time, the Patriarchs of the Church of Constantinople, having completely lost their political influence, nevertheless remained the Christian religious leaders of their communities. Having retained a nominal second place, they, deprived of a material base and practically without means of subsistence, were forced to fight with extreme poverty. Until his establishment as a patriarchate in Russia, the Patriarch of Constantinople was the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, and only generous donations from Moscow princes allowed him to somehow make ends meet.

In turn, the Patriarchs of Constantinople did not remain in debt. It was on the banks of the Bosphorus that the title of the first Russian Tsar Ivan IV the Terrible was consecrated, and Patriarch Jeremiah II blessed the first Moscow Patriarch Job as he ascended the chair. This was an important step in the development of the country, putting Russia on a par with other Orthodox states.

Unexpected ambition

For more than three centuries, the patriarchs of the Church of Constantinople played only a modest role as the heads of the Christian community located inside the powerful Ottoman Empire, until it collapsed as a result of the First World War. Much has changed in the life of the state, and even its former capital, Constantinople, was renamed Istanbul in 1930.

On the ruins of the once mighty power, the Patriarchate of Constantinople immediately became more active. Since the mid-twenties of the last century, its leadership has been actively implementing the concept according to which the Patriarch of Constantinople should be endowed with real power and have the right not only to lead the religious life of the entire Orthodox diaspora, but also to take part in resolving the internal issues of other autocephalous churches. Such a position provoked sharp criticism in the Orthodox world and was called "Eastern papism".

Court appeals of the patriarch

The Treaty of Lausanne, signed in 1923, legally formalized and established the border line of the newly formed state. He also fixed the title of the Patriarch of Constantinople as Ecumenical, but the government of the modern Turkish Republic refuses to recognize it. It gives consent only to the recognition of the patriarch as the head of the Orthodox community in Turkey.

In 2008, the Patriarch of Constantinople was forced to file a human rights lawsuit against the Turkish government, which illegally appropriated one of the Orthodox shelters on the island of Buyukada in the Sea of Marmara. In July of the same year, after considering the case, the court fully satisfied his appeal, and, in addition, made a statement recognizing his legal status. It should be noted that this was the first time that the primate of the Church of Constantinople appealed to the European judicial authorities.

Legal document 2010

Another important legal document that largely determined the current status of the Patriarch of Constantinople was the resolution adopted by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in January 2010. This document prescribed the establishment of religious freedom for representatives of all non-Muslim minorities living in the territories of Turkey and Eastern Greece.

The same resolution called on the Turkish government to respect the title "Ecumenical", since the Patriarchs of Constantinople, whose list already numbers several hundred people, bore it on the basis of relevant legal norms.

The current primate of the Church of Constantinople

A bright and original personality is Bartholomew Patriarch of Constantinople, whose enthronement took place in October 1991. His worldly name is Dimitrios Archondonis. A Greek by nationality, he was born in 1940 on the Turkish island of Gokceada. Having received a general secondary education and graduated from the Chalkinsky theological school, Dimitrios, already in the rank of deacon, served as an officer in the Turkish army.

After demobilization, his ascent to the heights of theological knowledge begins. For five years, Archondonis has been studying at higher educational institutions in Italy, Switzerland and Germany, as a result of which he becomes a doctor of theology and a lecturer at the Pontifical Gregorian University.

Polyglot at the patriarchal pulpit

The ability to assimilate knowledge from this person is simply phenomenal. For five years of study, he perfectly mastered German, French, English and Italian. Here we must also add his native Turkish and the language of theologians - Latin. Returning to Turkey, Dimitrios went through all the steps of the religious hierarchical ladder, until in 1991 he was elected primate of the Church of Constantinople.

"Green Patriarch"

In the field of international activity, His Holiness Bartholomew, Patriarch of Constantinople, gained wide popularity as a fighter for the preservation of the natural environment. In this direction, he became the organizer of a number of international forums. It is also known that the patriarch is actively cooperating with a number of public environmental organizations. For this activity, His Holiness Bartholomew received an unofficial title - "Green Patriarch".

Patriarch Bartholomew has close friendly relations with the heads of the Russian Orthodox Church, whom he paid a visit to immediately after his enthronement in 1991. During the negotiations that took place then, the Primate of Constantinople spoke out in support of the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate in its conflict with the self-proclaimed and, from a canonical point of view, illegitimate Patriarch of Kyiv. Similar contacts continued in subsequent years.

Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, Archbishop of Constantinople has always distinguished himself by his principles in resolving all important issues. A vivid example of this is his speech during the discussion that unfolded at the All-Russian Russian People's Council in 2004 on recognizing Moscow as the Third Rome, emphasizing its special religious and political significance. In his speech, the patriarch condemned this concept as untenable from a theological point of view and politically dangerous.

List of apostles, bishops and patriarchs of Antioch with years of reign: Contents 1 Early period 2 From 331 to 358 archbishops Arians ... Wikipedia

The list includes the Orthodox ("Greek") bishops and patriarchs of Alexandria (see Patriarch of Alexandria, List of Coptic Patriarchs). Years of government are given in parentheses. Contents 1 Bishops of Alexandria (42,325) ... Wikipedia

Main article: Patriarch of the City of Jerusalem and All Palestine Contents 1 Jewish Bishops of Jerusalem 2 Bishops of Aelia Capitolina ... Wikipedia

List of popes buried in St. Peter's Basilica. Marble slab at the entrance to the sacristy in St. Peter's Cathedral ... Wikipedia

List of popes buried in St. Peter's Basilica. Marble slab at the entrance to the sacristy in St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican Note: Only in 384 ... ... Wikipedia

Bishops of Jerusalem No. Name. years 1 Apostle James, brother of the Lord until 62 2 Simeon, son of Cleopas 106 107 3 Justus 111 ??? 4 Zacchaeus??? ... Wikipedia

This term has other meanings, see Intercession Cathedral (meanings). This term has other meanings, see St. Basil's Church. Orthodox Cathedral Cathedral of the Intercession of the Most Holy Theotokos, on the Moat (St. Basil's Church ... ... Wikipedia

Wikipedia has articles about other people with the name Joachim. Joachim III Ἰωακεὶμ Γ΄ Μεγαλοπρεπής Patriarch Joachim III ... Wikipedia

Fourth Council of Constantinople Date 879-880 Orthodoxy is recognized Previous Council Second Council of Nicaea Next Council Fifth Council of Constantinople Convened by Basil I Under the chairmanship Number of participants 383 bishops ... ... Wikipedia

Constantinople (Ecumenical) Orthodox Church

Eusebius of Nicomedia (338/9-341)

Proclus (434-446) (He began his Church career as a cell-attendant at John Chrysostom. He was known as a moderate church leader and a supporter of compromises. He was the author of more than 20 sermons, 7 epistles and other writings).

John II Cappadocian (518-520) (Confirmed the decision of the Council of Chalcedon and anathematized the distributor of the Eutychian heresy (Monophysitism). He died in 520).

Anastasius (730-754)

Constantine II (754-766)

Nikita I (766-780)

Anthony I Cassimata (821-834)

St. Ignatius (secondary) (867-877)

Nicholas II Chrysoverg (979-991) (Before the patriarchate he was Metropolitan of Adrianople. Known for his letters).

In 991-996. - the throne is vacant.

John IX Agapit (1111-1134)

Khariton Eugeniot (1178-1179)

Maxim II (1215) (Residence in Nicaea. Prior to becoming patriarch, he was abbot of the Akimites monastery in Constantinople. He was known as a great saint of women from the Nicene court gynoecium, thanks to whose patronage he became patriarch).

Methodius (1240) (Before the patriarchate, he was hegumen of the Nicene monastery of Iakinf. He was known for being a knowledgeable person, but in fact he was not very educated. He ruled the Church for only three months).

Mitrofan II (1440-1443) (Before the patriarchate, he was the metropolitan of the city of Kyzik).

Gennady II (for the third time) 1464-1465

Simeon I of Trebizond 1465

Mark II Xilokarawi 1466-1467

Dionysius I 1466-1471

Simeon I (secondary) 1471-1475

Raphael I 1475-1476

Maxim III Christonim 1476-1482

Simeon I (for the third time) 1482-1486

Nifont II 1486-1488

Dionysius I (secondary) 1488-1490

Maxim IV 1491-1497

Nifont II (secondary) 1497-1498

Joachim I 1498-1502

Nifont II (for the third time) 1502

Pachomius I 1503-1504

Joachim I (secondary) 1504

Pachomius I (secondary) 1503-1513

Theoleptus I 1513-1522

Jeremiah I 1522-1546

Joannicius I (illegitimate) 1524-1525

Dionysius II 1546-1556

JoasaphN 1556-1565

Mitrofan III 1565-1572

Jeremiah II Tranos 1572-1579

Mitrofan III (secondary) 1579-1580

Jeremiah II (secondary) 1580-1584

Pachomius II Batista (illegal) 1584-1585

Theolept II 1585-1587

Jeremiah II (for the third time) 1587-1595

Matthew II 1596

Gabriel I 1596

Meletius I Pigas m/bl 1596-1597

Theophan I Karikis 1597

Meletios I, m / bl (secondary) 1597-1598

Matthew II (secondary) 1598-1601

Neophyte II 1602-1603

Matthew II (third time) 1603

Raphael II 1603-1607

Neophyte II (secondary) 1607-1612

Cyril I Lucaris, m/bl (Patriarch of Alexandria) 1612

Timothy II 1612-1620

Cyril I Lucaris (former locum tenens) 1620-1623

George IV (not recognized) 1623-1634

Anfim II 1623

Cyril I (for the third time) 1623-1633

Cyril II Kondaris 1633

Cyril I (fourth time) 1633-1634

Athanasius III Patellarius 1634

Cyril I (fifth time) 1634-1635

Cyril II (secondary) 1635-1636

Neophyte III 1636-1637

Cyril I (sixth, times) 1637-1638

Cyril II (for the third time) 1638-1639

Parthenius I the Elder 1639-1644

Parthenius II the Younger 1644-1646

Ioanniky II (not recognized) 1646-1648

Parthenius II (secondary) 1648-1651

Ioanniky II (secondary) 1651-1652

Cyril III Spanos 1652

Athanasius III (secondary) 1652

Paisios I 1652-1653

Ioanniky II (for the third time) 1653-1654

Cyril III (secondary) 1654

Paisius I (secondary) 1654-1655

Ioanniky II (fourth time) 1655-1656

Parthenius III 1656-1657

Gabriel II 1657

Parthenius IV 1657-1662

Dionysius III Vardalis 1662-1665

Parthenius IV (secondary) 1665-1667

Clement (not recognized) 1667

Methodius III Moronis 1668-1671

Parthenius IV (for the third time) 1671

Dionysius IV Muselimis 1671-1673

Gerasim II Ternovsky 1673-1674

Parthenius IV (fourth time) 1675-1676

Dionysius IV (secondary) 1676-1679

Athanasius IV 1679

Jacob 1679-1682

Dionysius IV (for the third time) 1682-1684

Parthenius IV (fifth time) 1684-1685

Jacob (secondary) 1685-1686

Dionysius IV (fourth time) 1686-1687

Jacob (for the third time) 1687-1688

Callinicus II Acarnanus 1688

Neophyte IV Philaret 1688-1689

Kallinikos II (secondary) 1689-1693

Dionysius IV (fifth time) 1693-1694

Callinicus II (for the third time) 1694-1702

Gabriel III 1702-1707

Neophyte V (not recognized) 1707

Cyprian 1707-1709

Athanasius V Margunius 1709-1711

Cyril IV 1711-1713

Cyprian (secondary) 1713-1714

Kosmash 1714-1716

Jeremiah III 1716-1726

Paisius II 1726-1732

Jeremiah III (secondary) 1732-1733

Seraphim I 1733-1734

Neophyte VI 1734-1740

Paisios II (secondary) 1740-1743

Neophyte VI (secondary) 1743-1744

Paisius II (for the third time) 1744-1748

Cyril V 1748-1751

Paisius II (fourth time) 1751-1752

Cyril V (secondary) 1752-1757

Callinicus III 1757

Seraphim II 1757-1761

Ioanniky III 1761-1763

Samuel I Khantziris 1763-1768

Meletius II 1768-1769

Theodosius II 1769-1773

Samuel I (secondary) 1773-1774

Sophronius II 1774-1780

Gabriel IV 1780-1785

Procopius 1785-1789

Neophyte VII 1789-1794

Gerasim III 1794-1797

Gregory V 1797-1798

Neophyte VII (secondary) 1798-1801

Kallinikos IV 1801-1806

Gregory V (secondary) 1806-1808

Callinicus IV (secondary) 1808-1809

Jeremiah IV 1809-1813

Cyril VI 1813-1818

Gregory V (for the third time) 1818-1821

Eugene III 1821-1822

Anfim III 1822-1824

Chrysanthes I 1824-1826

Agafangel I 1826-1830

Constantius I 1830-1834

Constantius II 1834-1835

Gregory VI 1835-1840

Anfim IV 1840-1841

Anfim V 1841-1842

German IV 1842-1845

Meletius III 1845

Anfim VI 1845-1848

Anfim IV (secondary) 1848-1852

German IV (secondary) 1852-1853

Anfim VI (secondary) 1853-1855

Cyril VII 1855-1860

Joachim 1860-1863

Sophronius III 1863-1866

Gregory VI (secondary) 1867-1871

Anfim VI (for the third time) 1871-1873

Joachim II (secondary) 1873-1878

Joachim III 1878-1884

Joachim IV 1884-1887

Dionysius V 1887-1891

Neophyte VIII 1891-1894

Anfim VII 1895-1897

Constantine V 1897-1901

Joachim III (secondary) 1901-1913

Hermann V 1913-1918

locum tenens

Prussian - Dorotheus 1918-1921

Caesarea - Nicholas 1918-1921

Meletius IV Metaxakis 1921-1923

Gregory VII 1923-1924

Constantine VI 1924-1925

Vasily III 1925-1929

Photius II 1929-1935

Benjamin I 1936-1946

Maxim V 1946-1948

Athenagoras I 1948-1972

Demetrius I 1972-1991

Bartholomew 1991-

Used materials of the book: Sychev N.V. Book of dynasties. M., 2008. p. 863-871.

“What is the Patriarchate of Constantinople?”

They say that a religious war is brewing in Ukraine, and this is due to the actions of some Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew? What really happened?

Indeed, the situation in Ukraine, already explosive, has become more complicated. The primate (head) of one of the Orthodox Churches - Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople - interfered in the life of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (a self-governing but integral part of the Russian Orthodox Church - the Moscow Patriarchate). Contrary to the canonical rules (immutable ecclesiastical legal norms), without the invitation of our Church, whose canonical territory is Ukraine, Patriarch Bartholomew sent two of his representatives, “exarchs,” to Kyiv. With the wording: "in preparation for granting autocephaly to the Orthodox Church in Ukraine."

Wait, what does "Constantinople" mean? Even from a school history textbook it is known that Constantinople fell a long time ago, and in its place is the Turkish city of Istanbul?

Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople. Photo: www.globallookpress.com

All right. The capital of the first Christian Empire - the Roman Kingdom (Byzantium) - fell back in 1453, but the Patriarchate of Constantinople survived under Turkish rule. Since then, the Russian State has helped the Patriarchs of Constantinople a lot, both financially and politically. Despite the fact that after the fall of Constantinople, Moscow assumed the role of the Third Rome (the center of the Orthodox world), the Russian Church did not dispute the status of Constantinople as “first among equals” and the designation of its primates “Ecumenical”. However, a number of Patriarchs of Constantinople did not appreciate this support and did everything to weaken the Russian Church. Although in reality they themselves were representatives of only Phanar - a small Istanbul region, where the residence of the Patriarch of Constantinople is located.

Read also:

“Patriarch Bartholomew is three times worthy of judgment and defrocking”: Patriarchate of Constantinople dances to the tune of the USA Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople is going to aggravate the conflict with the Russian Orthodox Church on...

This is a disguised impostor. Once, in the Soviet years, this native of the Donbass, who practically did not know the Ukrainian language, was indeed the legitimate Metropolitan of Kyiv, a hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church (although in those years there were many unpleasant rumors about the personal life of Metropolitan Filaret). But when he was not elected Patriarch of Moscow in 1990, he held a grudge. And as a result, on the wave of nationalist sentiments, he created his own nationalist sect - the "Kyiv Patriarchate".

This man (whose name on the passport is Mikhail Antonovich Denisenko) was first defrocked for causing a schism, and then completely anathematized, that is, excommunicated from the Church. The fact that the False Philaret (he was deprived of his monastic name 20 years ago, at the Bishops' Council of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1997) wears patriarchal robes and periodically performs actions identical to Orthodox rites, speaks exclusively of the artistic abilities of this already elderly person, as well as - his personal ambitions.

And the Patriarchate of Constantinople wants to give autocephaly to such characters in order to weaken the Russian Church? Will Orthodox people follow them?

Unfortunately, a significant part of the population of Ukraine is poorly versed in the intricacies of canon law. And therefore, when an elderly man with a gray-haired beard in a patriarchal headdress says that Ukraine has the right to a “single local Ukrainian Orthodox Church” (UPOC), many people believe him. And of course, the state nationalist Russophobic propaganda is doing its job. But even in these difficult circumstances, the majority of Orthodox Christians in Ukraine remain children of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

At the same time, Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople never formally recognized Ukrainian nationalist schisms. Moreover, relatively recently, in 2016, one of the official representatives of the Patriarchate of Constantinople (according to some sources, a CIA agent and at the same time the right hand of Patriarch Bartholomew), Father Alexander Karloutsos, said:

As you know, the Ecumenical Patriarch recognizes only Patriarch Kirill as the spiritual head of all Russia, which means, of course, Ukraine.

However, Patriarch Bartholomew has recently intensified his activities to destroy the unity of the Russian Orthodox Church, for which he is doing everything to unite nationalist sects and, apparently, after their oath to him, provide them with the coveted Tomos (Decree) on Ukrainian autocephaly.

"Tomos of autocephaly" as an "axe of war"

- But what can this Tomos lead to?

To the most terrible consequences. Ukrainian splits, despite the statements of Patriarch Bartholomew, this will not heal, but will strengthen the existing ones. And the worst thing is that it will give them additional grounds to demand from the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church their churches and monasteries, as well as other property. In recent years, dozens of Orthodox shrines have been seized by schismatics, including with the use of physical force. In the event of the legalization of these nationalist sects by the Patriarchate of Constantinople, a real religious war could begin.

- What is the attitude of other Orthodox Churches towards Ukrainian autocephaly? Are there many of them?

Yes, there are 15 of them, and representatives of a number of them have repeatedly spoken out on this matter. Here are just a few quotes from the primates and representatives of the Local Orthodox Churches on Ukrainian issues.

Patriarch of Alexandria and All Africa Theodore II:

Let's pray to the Lord, who does everything for our good, who will guide us on the path to solving these problems. If the schismatic Denisenko wants to return to the bosom of the Church, he must return to where he left.

(that is, to the Russian Orthodox Church - ed.).

Patriarch of Antioch and All the East John X:

The Patriarchate of Antioch acts jointly with the Russian Church and speaks out against the church schism in Ukraine.”

Primate of the Jerusalem Orthodox Church Patriarch Theophilos III:

We most categorically condemn the actions directed against the parishes of the canonical Orthodox Church in Ukraine. It is not in vain that the Holy Fathers of the Church remind us that the destruction of the unity of the Church is a mortal sin.

Primate of the Serbian Orthodox Church Patriarch Irinej:

A very dangerous and even catastrophic situation, probably fatal for the unity of Orthodoxy [is the possible] act of honoring and restoring schismatics to the rank of bishops, especially arch-schismatics, such as the “Kyiv Patriarch” Filaret Denisenko. Bringing them to the liturgical service and communion without repentance and return to the bosom of the Russian Church, from which they renounced. And all this without the consent of Moscow and coordination with them.”

In addition, in an exclusive interview with the Tsargrad TV channel, the representative of the Jerusalem Patriarchate, Archbishop Theodosius (Khanna), gave an even clearer description of what is happening:

The problem of Ukraine and the problem of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine is an example of the interference of politicians in church affairs. Unfortunately, this is where the realization of American goals and interests takes place. US policy has targeted Ukraine and the Orthodox Church in Ukraine. The Ukrainian Church has always historically been together with the Russian Church, has been one Church with it, and this must be protected and preserved.

"Who are these strange 'exarchs'?"

But let us return to the fact that the Patriarch of Constantinople sent two of his representatives, the so-called "exarchs", to Ukraine. It is already clear that this is illegal. And who are they, and who will receive them in the same Kyiv?

These two people, quite young by episcopal standards (both under 50), are natives of Western Ukraine, where nationalist and Russophobic sentiments are especially strong. Even in their youth, both found themselves abroad, where they ended up as part of two semi-schismatic jurisdictions - the UOC in the USA and the UOC in Canada (at one time these were Ukrainian nationalist sects, which were granted legal status by the same Patriarchate of Constantinople). So, a little more about each.

1) Archbishop Daniel (Zelinsky), cleric of the UOC in the USA. In the past - a Uniate, in the rank of a Greek Catholic deacon, he transferred to this American Ukrainian nationalist "Church", where he made a career.

2) Bishop Hilarion (Rudnik), cleric of the UOC in Canada. Known as a radical Russophobe and supporter of Chechen terrorists. Thus, it is known that “on June 9, 2005, while in Turkey, where he was an interpreter during a meeting between Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople and Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko, he was detained by the Turkish police. The bishop was accused of traveling on forged documents and being a "Chechen rebel". Subsequently, this figure was released, and now, together with Archbishop Daniel (Zelinsky), he became the "exarch" of the Patriarch of Constantinople in Ukraine.

Of course, as "uninvited guests", they should not even be accepted in the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Poroshenko and his entourage will be accepted and, apparently, solemnly, at the state level. And of course, the leaders of pseudo-Orthodox sects will turn to them with joy (and maybe bow). There is no doubt that it will look like a nationalist farce with an abundance of “zhovto-Blakit” and Bandera banners and cries of “Glory to Ukraine!”. To the question of what relation this has to patristic Orthodoxy, it is not difficult to answer: none.

The decision of Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople to appoint two Americans of Ukrainian origin as his “exarchs” in Kyiv may lead to a split in the entire Orthodox world

The appointment by the Patriarch of Constantinople of his representatives-bishops in Ukraine - without the consent of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and His Beatitude Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Ukraine - is nothing but an unprecedentedly brutal invasion of the canonical territory of the Moscow Patriarchate. Such actions cannot go unanswered.

This is how Vladimir Legoyda, chairman of the Synodal Department for Relations between the Church, Society and the Media, commented on the decision taken in Istanbul on the social network Facebook. Usually extremely diplomatic, Legoyda expressed only a fraction of the emotions of Russian Orthodox people, who are closely following the problems of “Ukrainian autocephaly”, the process of which was launched by Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople (in reality, Istanbul). But if yesterday it was about the “war of discussions”, today the Phanar (the Istanbul quarter, where the residence of the Patriarch of Constantinople is located) went on a real offensive.

According to many experts of the Tsargrad TV channel, including Archpriest of the Jerusalem Patriarchate, Archbishop Theodosius of Sebaste (Khanna) such actions are links in the chain of the anti-Russian policy of the United States of America, which largely controls the activities of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. To clarify the scale of the church tragedy that happened (and we are talking about the beginning of a tragedy that has become much more difficult to prevent from today), Tsargrad turned to the leading expert in the Ukrainian church issue, Professor of the Orthodox St. Tikhon Humanitarian University, Doctor of Church History Vladislav Petrushko.

Professor of the Orthodox St. Tikhon Humanitarian University, Doctor of Church History Vladislav Petrushko. Photo: Tsargrad TV channel

Tsargrad: Vladislav Igorevich, how to assess what happened? What actually happened, what kind of characters were sent by Patriarch Bartholomew to Kyiv? Who are these “legates” or “nuncios” of the Constantinople “pope”?

Professor Vladislav Petrushko: It seems to me that we do not place accents quite correctly. What happened, on the one hand, is expected, since it is a logical continuation of the policy initiated by the Phanar. On the other hand, it was unexpected that so quickly, literally a week after the meeting of the two Patriarchs in Istanbul, a decision was made to appoint Phanariot "legates" to Ukraine. And although they try to present it in such a way that these two bishops are “only” representatives of the Patriarch of Constantinople, and not the heads of some new structure, new jurisdiction, we know very well from history the ability of the Greeks to juggle terms, words. Today it is "exarch" as a "legate", as a representative. And already tomorrow - the actual primate of the semi-autonomous "Church".

The appointed exarchs, or rather, the exarch and the deputy exarch, are two Ukrainian bishops of Constantinople jurisdiction. One is from the USA, the other is from Canada. And one, if I'm not mistaken, in the past was a Uniate (Greek Catholic), who converted to Orthodoxy in one of the Constantinople jurisdictions. It is clear that both come from Galicians, which means patented nationalists, but they should not even pay attention to this. And what happened at the last Synaxis (the bishops' meeting of the Patriarchate of Constantinople), and the statement of Patriarch Bartholomew on the results.

Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Kirill. Photo: www.globallookpress.com

In fact, there was a revolution. And not only canonical, but ecclesiological (ecclesiology is the doctrine of the Church, including its boundaries - ed.). For the first time, the creation of an eastern analogue of the papacy was declared so openly at an official event of the Church of Constantinople. It is stated that only the Patriarch of Constantinople is an arbiter and can interfere in the affairs of other Churches, resolve disputes, grant autocephaly, and so on. In fact, on the sly, what happened throughout the 20th century and at the beginning of the 21st came to a logical result. And Ukraine is a kind of first "trial balloon" on which this "Eastern Papacy" will run in. That is, a new structure of the Orthodox world has been proclaimed, and now everything will depend on how the Local Orthodox Churches react to this.

C.: Thus, what happened can be compared with 1054, the “great schism” that divided the Eastern and Western Churches, Orthodox and Roman Catholics?

Professor Petrushko A: Yes, that's the first thing that comes to mind. But even in the 11th century, it began with much more innocent things than now, when we see that the Phanar raged, lost all adequacy and, in fact, puts an ultimatum to the entire Orthodox world. Either you recognize the "Pope" of Constantinople, or we go to you and do whatever we want in your canonical territories, including recognizing any schism, any non-canonical structure. Of course, this is already complete chaos, this is the real church "raiding". And this must be brought to a decisive end by all the Local Orthodox Churches.