A voice from the grave

Patriarch Bartholomew was holding secret meetings with Filaret as far back as 18 years ago. Photo: UOJ

From beyond the grave, Filaret has revealed a small but telling piece of compromising evidence against Patriarch Bartholomew. It turns out that before 2008, the head of the UOC-KP flew to the Phanar to meet him and discuss the terms under which his structure might enter the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Until now, we knew that such negotiations had taken place indirectly; we knew that Filaret had written to Patriarch Bartholomew asking to be restored to his rank. But that Filaret and Bartholomew personally discussed the details of a future alliance in face-to-face meetings – this we have learned for the first time.

The point is that, officially, the Patriarch of Constantinople regarded Filaret as anathematized – that is, as a layman stripped of his rank and cut off from the Church. There is an official document to this effect, in which the Patriarch agrees with the ROC’s 1997 decision and states that no one in his Church’s hierarchy would maintain ecclesiastical communion with Filaret or his followers.

So it turns out that a hierarch who calls himself the “head of Orthodoxy” was secretly communicating with a man whom he himself had recognized as under anathema – and negotiating with him about entering his own Church of Constantinople.

We understand that no human being is perfect. Yet somewhere deep down, we still expect Church hierarchs to possess, if not holiness, then at least a certain moral stature. Or at the very least, an impeccable adherence to Christ’s not-so-difficult command: “Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’” (Matt. 5:37).

Otherwise, how are such hierarchs any different from politicians?

Read also

Who is working for the Kremlin in Poland? OCU, Uniates and Catholics versions

Who in the conflict between Poland and Ukraine is "an agent of the Russian Federation"? Zelensky, who gave the UPA name to an AFU special operations center? Nawrocki, who stripped him of an order for it? Polish MEPs?

Can we judge those who joined the OCU from the military commissariat?

There are many known cases where priests and deacons of the UOC, detained by TRC officers, were offered a simple way to secure their release – to switch to the OCU. Most refused.

On Rivne Metropolitan's excuse for service in Jerusalem

If today we consider it possible to make excuses for concelebrating with the ROC, what will we have to justify tomorrow?

UOC isn’t banned, just ‘de-Russified’? Neither was UGCC under Stalin then

By Shevchuk’s logic, Stalin never banned the UGCC or curtailed freedom of conscience – he merely “freed” the souls of the Uniates from Bandera ideology.

A dip in the Jordan on “one – two – three”

Well-known OCU blogger in “holy orders” Oleksii Filiuk has come up with his own theological formula on the banks of the Jordan. It goes like this: “One – two – three.”

On the situation at Sviatohirsk Lavra

After the killing of Monk Varsonofiy and the attempted murder of two other monastery residents, many patriots claimed that the crime had been committed by enemy saboteurs.