Why does OCU cleric serve on an antimins from Patriarch Kirill?
Filiuk serving on an antimins from the Patriarch of the Russian Church. Photo: Filiuk's Instagram
A popular online “priest-blogger” from the Ternopil region, Oleksii Filiuk, accidentally revealed in a video that he is serving on an antimins signed by Patriarch Kirill.
Yet not long ago, in an interview with national media, he claimed that only the “brainwashed” attend the “Moscow Church” where “they give drugs instead of Communion”.
Such statements are common among OCU members, including Dumenko himself. For them, the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church is a heretic, a supporter of Putin, a propagandist of the “Russian world”, and in general – an enemy.
The OCU publicly blames UOC clergy for even mythical ties to Patriarch Kirill. Meanwhile, they themselves serve on his antimins. How can this be explained?
The church shown in the video is not named by Filiuk, but the inscriptions inside are in Ukrainian. It was originally built by the OCU, the UOC-KP, or the UAOC. The antimins, however, was clearly taken from one of the seized UOC churches. In other words, Filiuk brought it into his church deliberately. But why?
Even before the Tomos, some “priests” from the UOC-KP and UAOC would secretly bring their children to be baptized in the UOC, not fully trusting in their own grace.
It seems the same is happening here. Did Filiuk want a touch of “canonicity”?
We see no other explanation.
Read also
A hint at a new demographic reality?
It appears that we are facing a mass influx of migrants from the poorest countries of Africa and other regions. And the absolute majority of them will profess Islam.
On the seizure of a UGCC сhurch in Tokmak
Statements by the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church about “blasphemy” are not the cry of a persecuted Church. They are a textbook example of double standards.
On Budanov's statement regarding UOC
For Yelensky and his the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience (DESS), Budanov's statement was very untimely.
Why does OCU still celebrate Easter “with Moskals”?
On social media, “patriots” are again asking in exasperation: why are we still celebrating Easter with Moscow? How much longer?
Did Patriarch Bartholomew really mourn Filaret’s death?
Constantinople has never recognized Filaret as a patriarch – not “His Holiness,” not “honorary,” not under any title whatsoever. That alone makes the line in the Ukrainian presidential press service’s report sound astonishingly implausible.
Why did Dumenko sit in Metropolitan Onufriy’s chair?
The head of the OCU has his own residence – and Filaret’s residence as well. But what he needs is the Lavra, Metropolitan Onufriy’s office and chair.