The Russian Orthodox Church has been affected by recent events as much as the rest of Russian society has. Now, more than ever, the Church is being asked to support the government and this has had ripple effects on church politics. The biggest story is the unceremonious demotion of Metropolitan Hilarion. Once the Russian Orthodox Church’s ambassador to the West and Ecumenist-in-Chief, Metropolitan Hilarion has now been stripped of his official positions. This is almost certainly because he refused to support the special operation in Ukraine. While we don’t have conclusive proof of this yet, we can piece together the story by looking at recent events in context and then puzzle out the implications that this will have for the Russian Orthodox Church going forward.
Jun 22, 2022·edited Jun 22, 2022Liked by Rurik Skywalker
As I posted a moment ago and often "God" is not "religion" your post confirms this in spades. When it's in their interests "religions" lean WOKE when it's not they lean "conservative" right. Why? It's about revenue streams and self perpetuation.
Everyone needs to find their own way, as I said in other posts a "religion" must "work for you" if not you're wasting your time. Find the belief system that does and go with it.
"If you focus too narrowly on a path to God, all you will ever find is the path."
As a Roman Catholic, I beg to differ with Orthodoxy's view on Francis of Assisi, as you said. St. Simeon Stylites was a major saint of the 5th century. He spent decades on top of a pillar in Syria. His fame was enormous and people came to see him from afar. The emperor in Constantinople, the pope, even St Genevieve from Paris wrote letters to him. A true rock-star. He is unquestionably a saint both for the Orthodox and the Catholic. His life demonstrates that the Orthodox's attitude towards Francis of Assisi is disingenuous. However beyond Francis of Assisi, there is genuine miscomprehension between the mystical traditions of the Catholic and Orthodox.
As for the Orthodox church or churches, it is even more complicated than you describe. The Russian church is autocephalous but the Patriarchate of Moscow is uncanonical. The canonical Patriarchate was ended by Peter the Great and the supreme organ of the Russian Orthodox Church became the Holy Synod. In 1917 a council was convened by the provisional government in Petrograd and the council reinstated the Patriarchate. Except it did not have the authority to do so. Only the patriarch of Constantinople may create or recreate patriarchates. In the centuries past the patriarchate of Kiev was created two or three times. This is the first example of an Orthodox patriarchate created without the seal of Constantinople.
To make things worse, this newly created patriarchate was left vacant or abolished, it is unclear, after the death of Tikhon, the first patriarch, which occurred in 1925. The Communists themselves slaughtered priests, monks and nuns en masse. The Russian Church split over opposition/cooperation/submission to Communists. It became unclear who was bishop and who had canonical authority over what. Then in 1943 Stalin summoned another council of NKVD selected bishops and delegates and had a new patriarch elected. But how valid are the decisions of a Christian assembly manipulated by Stalin ?. Hence the Moscow patriarchate really is invalid.
Tikhon first new patriarch of Moscow was unquestionably a man of great faith. The following ones were the men of NKVD/KGB/FSB. Hence beyond the invalidity of the institution, there is the doubt on their faith. For a Christian, and even more for an Orthodox Christian, this is not idle questioning.
However what is certain is that the patriarchate of Moscow has the full power of the Russian state behind him.
It was possible to sort out the canonical mess in Russia in the 1990s. It would have required the intervention of the patriarch of Constantinople and the summoning of a council. However the Soviet-appointed bishops and abbots were not keen on losing their power and in recognising their faults and sins: pride, power, belief in one's right and might. A thoroughly Unchristian attitude.
A positive contribution to a complicated set of relationships among these different branches of Eastern orthodox Christianity. The good development is the strengthening of patriotism and more conservative moral values through the churches. However, their infighting and rivalries are negative features.
Great summary - very helpful for those of us in the West who need help navigating the Byzantine complexities of the Orthodox world. Hilarion is clearly an agent of Globohomo - a wolf in sheep's clothing etc. and good riddance to him. Maybe he can become one of Pope Francis's Cardinals - it would suit him better. Malachi Martin used to label Patriarch Kiril as a KGB agent back in the 90's (his "novel" Windswept House, although ostensibly fiction, contains a lot of disclosure about Vatican II, John Paul II, and other issues of corruption and conspiracy in the Church; some people drink it all in, others reject it......he was a crazy old Irish ex-Jesuit after all) but in a similar way to Putin himself, I think Kiril is lining up on the side of Russia and her survival. What were people supposed to do under the USSR? A talented young motivated dude had to go along to get along, and the Soviet Union, for all its dysfunctions, was a great power that maintained a certain position for Russia in the world. And unlike Hilarion, Kiril (and others, like the guy up north at the Solovetskiy Monastery) has condemned the Covid Vax agenda, even to the point of saying that the Vax overwrites one's God-given DNA. It seems to me that the ultimate root of hatred for Russia flows from the hatred of the Orthodox core of its culture and spirituality. From Charlemagne, various Popes, the Crusaders, to the Protestant sola scriptura crowd, and now the mandarins of post-Enlightenment Liberal Globohomo Feminized Bugman pseudo-religion - they all hate Russia. Now Russia is going her own way, and leading the entire world out of the morass of modernity. I don't need Russia to be perfect to see that she is the vector for whatever hope we might have left on this super screwed planet.
Thank you for this! I had only vague "maps" of this part of the Orthodox Christian world, and you have given me much clearer maps now.
Question: Did you mean to say *failed to cause* here: "Bartholomew, claiming the exclusive right to grant autonomy, encouraged them to declare themselves autonomous without the blessing of the Serbian Church. In this instance, he failed to cause an even deeper split between the two Churches."
(If so, I'm not surprised, given the would-be-antipope-of-orthodoxy role I suspect Bartholomew is playing, ha ha!)
In the last photo, with all the guys in green jackets, the two directly behind the guy with the cross, excluding the one directly behind him, look like identical twins.
As I posted a moment ago and often "God" is not "religion" your post confirms this in spades. When it's in their interests "religions" lean WOKE when it's not they lean "conservative" right. Why? It's about revenue streams and self perpetuation.
Everyone needs to find their own way, as I said in other posts a "religion" must "work for you" if not you're wasting your time. Find the belief system that does and go with it.
"If you focus too narrowly on a path to God, all you will ever find is the path."
- Meister Eckhart
Thank you Rolo for this piece.
As a Roman Catholic, I beg to differ with Orthodoxy's view on Francis of Assisi, as you said. St. Simeon Stylites was a major saint of the 5th century. He spent decades on top of a pillar in Syria. His fame was enormous and people came to see him from afar. The emperor in Constantinople, the pope, even St Genevieve from Paris wrote letters to him. A true rock-star. He is unquestionably a saint both for the Orthodox and the Catholic. His life demonstrates that the Orthodox's attitude towards Francis of Assisi is disingenuous. However beyond Francis of Assisi, there is genuine miscomprehension between the mystical traditions of the Catholic and Orthodox.
As for the Orthodox church or churches, it is even more complicated than you describe. The Russian church is autocephalous but the Patriarchate of Moscow is uncanonical. The canonical Patriarchate was ended by Peter the Great and the supreme organ of the Russian Orthodox Church became the Holy Synod. In 1917 a council was convened by the provisional government in Petrograd and the council reinstated the Patriarchate. Except it did not have the authority to do so. Only the patriarch of Constantinople may create or recreate patriarchates. In the centuries past the patriarchate of Kiev was created two or three times. This is the first example of an Orthodox patriarchate created without the seal of Constantinople.
To make things worse, this newly created patriarchate was left vacant or abolished, it is unclear, after the death of Tikhon, the first patriarch, which occurred in 1925. The Communists themselves slaughtered priests, monks and nuns en masse. The Russian Church split over opposition/cooperation/submission to Communists. It became unclear who was bishop and who had canonical authority over what. Then in 1943 Stalin summoned another council of NKVD selected bishops and delegates and had a new patriarch elected. But how valid are the decisions of a Christian assembly manipulated by Stalin ?. Hence the Moscow patriarchate really is invalid.
Tikhon first new patriarch of Moscow was unquestionably a man of great faith. The following ones were the men of NKVD/KGB/FSB. Hence beyond the invalidity of the institution, there is the doubt on their faith. For a Christian, and even more for an Orthodox Christian, this is not idle questioning.
However what is certain is that the patriarchate of Moscow has the full power of the Russian state behind him.
It was possible to sort out the canonical mess in Russia in the 1990s. It would have required the intervention of the patriarch of Constantinople and the summoning of a council. However the Soviet-appointed bishops and abbots were not keen on losing their power and in recognising their faults and sins: pride, power, belief in one's right and might. A thoroughly Unchristian attitude.
A positive contribution to a complicated set of relationships among these different branches of Eastern orthodox Christianity. The good development is the strengthening of patriotism and more conservative moral values through the churches. However, their infighting and rivalries are negative features.
Great summary - very helpful for those of us in the West who need help navigating the Byzantine complexities of the Orthodox world. Hilarion is clearly an agent of Globohomo - a wolf in sheep's clothing etc. and good riddance to him. Maybe he can become one of Pope Francis's Cardinals - it would suit him better. Malachi Martin used to label Patriarch Kiril as a KGB agent back in the 90's (his "novel" Windswept House, although ostensibly fiction, contains a lot of disclosure about Vatican II, John Paul II, and other issues of corruption and conspiracy in the Church; some people drink it all in, others reject it......he was a crazy old Irish ex-Jesuit after all) but in a similar way to Putin himself, I think Kiril is lining up on the side of Russia and her survival. What were people supposed to do under the USSR? A talented young motivated dude had to go along to get along, and the Soviet Union, for all its dysfunctions, was a great power that maintained a certain position for Russia in the world. And unlike Hilarion, Kiril (and others, like the guy up north at the Solovetskiy Monastery) has condemned the Covid Vax agenda, even to the point of saying that the Vax overwrites one's God-given DNA. It seems to me that the ultimate root of hatred for Russia flows from the hatred of the Orthodox core of its culture and spirituality. From Charlemagne, various Popes, the Crusaders, to the Protestant sola scriptura crowd, and now the mandarins of post-Enlightenment Liberal Globohomo Feminized Bugman pseudo-religion - they all hate Russia. Now Russia is going her own way, and leading the entire world out of the morass of modernity. I don't need Russia to be perfect to see that she is the vector for whatever hope we might have left on this super screwed planet.
Thank you for this! I had only vague "maps" of this part of the Orthodox Christian world, and you have given me much clearer maps now.
Question: Did you mean to say *failed to cause* here: "Bartholomew, claiming the exclusive right to grant autonomy, encouraged them to declare themselves autonomous without the blessing of the Serbian Church. In this instance, he failed to cause an even deeper split between the two Churches."
(If so, I'm not surprised, given the would-be-antipope-of-orthodoxy role I suspect Bartholomew is playing, ha ha!)
In the last photo, with all the guys in green jackets, the two directly behind the guy with the cross, excluding the one directly behind him, look like identical twins.