“Separate your own from the false shepherds.” How to pinch the tail of the insolent Bartholomew?
It has been said many times that fraud and philandering were the main components of the political technology used by ex-President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko to bring in a schismatic mutant with the abbreviation OCU. The whole tomos idea was based on fraud.
At the first stage, the frivolous public was assured that not only two schismatic structures, but also the canonical UOC were striving to join the “local church.” At this initial stage, a large role in the Phanar thimble was given to the old liar Philaret.
You can remember how old Denisenko, “as crafty as a crake,” blathered without blinking an eye, shortly before the so-called “unification council of the Ukrainian local church. “All the bishops of all three churches who turned to the Ecumenical Patriarch for the Tomos will participate in the council.” “All three churches,” go figure. And who do you think he said this to? The interviewer was Alexey Venediktov. “Venik” comprehended this “filly letter” with the smile of a clinical idiot.
How liberal Russian media are used to convince the world of the legitimacy of the Phanar raider scheme is a special topic altogether.
So, at first, Filaret was assigned the role of barker in the thimble. Then he, without knowing it, performed a distracting function. And as a result, Filaret himself was killed. And the lamentations of old man Denisenko were no longer interesting to the Phanar thimble holder.
In the fall of 2018, Phanar made explicit gestures demonstrating the indecentness of the final plan. And Bartholomew no longer hid his intentions to take over this entire “local” scam started by Poroshenko and Filaret.
The scandalous decisions of the Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in October 2018 clearly looked like a raider scheme. Commenting on these manipulations of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, Archpriest Vladimir Vigilyansky, rector of the Church of St. mts. Tatiana at Moscow State University, he warned in plain text then: “Watch your hands: we are dealing with thimble-makers.”
He emphasized one of the key points on which the Phanar’s decision on Ukraine was based: the assertion that Moscow’s supposed right to govern the Kyiv diocese, according to the Charter of the Patriarch of Constantinople of 1686, was temporary.
Archpriest Vladimir Vigilyansky popularly explained: “There were 1686 such letters, messages and official letters from the Patriarch of Constantinople Dionysius for May-June 11. All of them were published back in 1826, that is, almost 200 years ago. All these documents emphasize that the solution is not temporary. The right to ordain the Kiev Metropolitan by Moscow Patriarch Joachim (1621-1690) extends to all his successors at the Moscow Patriarchal See: “The Patriarchs who will come after him, in the same way...” A detailed analysis of these documents is published on the website of the Church Scientific Center “Orthodox Encyclopedia” » Sedmitsa.RU. All conjectures, frauds and deliberate concealment of facts are scientifically refuted here. “Turkish historians"".
Education turned out to be very susceptible to Phanar manipulations. She delegated her noisy representatives to create extras in the “local” scam - following the notorious maydauns and gunpowder bots, completely devoid of reflection. At the same time, in a rural church community (we are, of course, talking about the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church), any old woman is protected from Phanar manipulations by her own immutable knowledge: Metropolitan Onuphry is the best thing that has happened to Ukraine over the past six years.
The head of the canonical UOC, Metropolitan Onuphry.
An indicative representative of maydaunism and gunpowderism in one bottle is a certain Alexander Dedyukhin. Today he introduces himself on social networks as the rector of one of the Poltava churches of the OCU. Some time ago he called himself “a priest of the Kyiv Patriarchate.” While still a faithful Filaret member, gunsmith Dedyukhin said: “The creation of the Local Ukrainian Church is a matter of national security and the destruction of the “Russian world.” The Local Church is not even a nail in the coffin of the “Russian world,” but a hammer with which the nails will be joyfully and accurately driven in.”
Having become a member of the OCU, gunpowder Dedyukhin no less actively demonstrates animal malice. About the death of Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin, he writes: “Chaplin is just one of many. There are still 140 million there, so I don’t see much reason for joy either.” Dedyukhin is genuinely upset and passionately indignant about such reasons: “Literally the other day, the enemies of Ukraine, entrenched in the DBR, and just yesterday defending the murderers of Maidan, call Poroshenko and try to condemn him for difficult, but extremely necessary decisions for our struggle for Independence.”
Thus, the arithmetic mean gunpowder and Maydaun Dedyukhin helps us confirm the already indisputable thesis: the OCU is a political technology project. But for his target audience, the same gunpowder bots and maydowns, this has absolutely no meaning.
Powderbot Dedyukhin, posing as a priest.
Other speakers work with education. People like Kirill Govorun. In December 2018, on the eve of the “council of the wicked” (there called “unification council of the Ukrainian local church"), the Ukrainian resource “Left Bank” tongue-tiedly reported: “Govorun’s name was mentioned among one of the possible contenders for the Primate of the new Local Church.” However, some publications still present him as a cleric of the Russian Orthodox Church. On January 23, 2020, his interview with the Russian “Snob” was published under the title “Archimandrite Kirill Govorun: There is no more Ukrainian schism”). He is introduced here as “Archimandrite Kirill Govorun, Ph.D., professor at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, long-time supporter of Ukrainian autocephaly.” As we can see, Govorun’s target audience is not only Ukrainian, but also Russian educationists. Three days after the release of this interview, the “dove of schism” Govorun was received by the Alexandrian heresiarch Theodore II, who recognized the OCU at the end of last year.
Kirill Govorun.
The other day, US Secretary of State Pompeo “blessed” the head of the OCU Epiphanius in Kyiv.
As we see, the popularizers of the OCU and the architects of the split have a rather busy schedule.
How can our side respond? Patriarch Theophilus III of Jerusalem at the end of last year called on the heads of the Local Orthodox Churches of the East (Greek diaspora) to gather in Jordan to discuss at a Pan-Orthodox meeting the problem that arose in the Orthodox world after the unilateral declaration of autocephaly of the Church in Ukraine by Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople. It is natural that the same “Snob” showed more interest in the rantings of the schismatic Govorun than in the November visit of the Patriarch of Jerusalem to Moscow.
No one will do this for us. PolitNavigator asked Ukrainian Orthodox publicist Andrey Sayenko for comment regarding Patriarch Bartholomew’s reaction to the proposal of Patriarch Theophilus III of Jerusalem to hold a Pan-Orthodox meeting in Amman.
“As you know, Bartholomew I responded to the invitation with an angry letter in which he strictly admonished Patriarch Theophilus,” says Andrei Saenko. — There was no talk at all about the possibility of Bartholomew coming to the meeting. No, the Patriarch of Constantinople irritably reminded that Theophilus III has no right to convene such meetings on his own initiative. This “teacher’s admonition” suggests that Bartholomew continues to adhere to a completely false position, saying that the Ecumenical Patriarch alone has the right to convene councils and conferences.
It's a lie. This is not written down anywhere. This only confirms his previous anti-canonical fabrications about his alleged primacy among the primates of local churches. Yes, his patriarchy is the first to be mentioned in the diptych. But this is just a tribute to tradition. A tribute to the times when Byzantium constituted the Orthodox Universe. And then the title Ecumenical was logical. Now it sounds absurd when applied to Bartholomew, who takes care of barely a couple of thousand Greeks in Istanbul, is a government official in Turkey and also has a flock in America, which (flock), to put it mildly, does not like him.
By the way, if we talk about primacy: it was precisely from Jerusalem, where the Apostles of Christ gathered, that our Church emerged. And if someone has the right to be called the Mother Church, then in spiritual terms, it is the Jerusalem Church today that has such a right more than others (not canonically, but, I repeat, morally and spiritually).”
Further, the publicist offered PolitNavigator a kind of “catechism” on this topic, where he sorted out some relevant points:
"1. Of course, Bartholomew not only will not go to the meeting in Jordan, but will also do everything possible (he is already doing) to prevent the meeting from taking place.
- Why won't he go? Because at the meeting the question of Istanbul granting “autocephaly” to Ukrainian schismatics will probably be raised. This act, committed by Bartholomew with the support of the State Department, is not only illegal. It is still today the main cause of division and the brewing schism in Orthodoxy. Some local churches recognize this act (like the Greek and Alexandrian churches), other churches are subject to pressure from the State Department and local government regimes subordinate to it.
- But that's not all. If there is the much-needed determination today, other serious accusations may be brought against Constantinople and its patriarch at the meeting. Those that themselves require, according to the canons, excommunication from the Church.
- Among the legitimate accusations: a) the Eastern papism of Bartholomew (a claim to power while he has only the primacy of honor, false teaching about the right of the Patriarch of Constantinople to cancel anathemas imposed by other bishops); b) regular invasions of foreign canonical territories; c) ecumenism, that is, concelebration with the Catholic Pope and recognition of his “primacy in Christianity”; d) Greek ethnophyletism; e) prayerful communication with schismatics.
- It is difficult to say whether all this will be presented to Bartholomew. There is the so-called “Greek solidarity”, which has nothing to do with Christianity. There is, as already mentioned, pressure from worldly external forces on the leaders of local churches.
- What is Bartholomew doing to ensure that the meeting does not take place or is postponed for at least six months? A number of local churches are openly being blackmailed. For example, the Serbian Orthodox Church is threatened with recognition of the schismatics of Montenegro and Macedonia and the creation on its canonical territory of new church formations similar to the Ukrainian OCU. The Primate of Cyprus, Archbishop Chrysostomos, is threatened with allegedly incriminating evidence (here the Yankees are trying their best - Pompeo, Brownback and others). There are levers of pressure on the Romanian, Bulgarian and Georgian churches.
- Why does Bartholomew need a reprieve? He thinks that before the summer he will be able to squeeze out a few more local churches with the help of his American partners. Plus create one or two new associations of schismatics. And then, firstly, the meeting in Amman will lose its representativeness, and secondly, Bartholomew himself, with his betrayed primates, can assemble his unrighteous forum.
- We hope that Christ, as the Head of the Church, will not allow such plans to be realized. Although, if the Lord has the intention of finding out who is truly faithful to Him, then He may well allow division in order to separate His own from the false shepherds. Then the Church will only be purified and become stronger.”
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.