By Rostislav Ishchenko
Translated by Ollie Richardson and Angelina Siard
cross posted with http://www.stalkerzone.org/rostislav-ishchenko-bartholomews-exarchs-and-poroshenkos-destabilisation-policy/
Poroshenko decided to build his electoral campaign on the destabilisation of the country. This move could be effective, although extremely risky if Petro Poroshenko understood what game he started and if he is ready to go all the way. In principle destabilisation is necessary in order to receive a quasi-lawful pretext to cancel elections, to prolong his reign via a low voter turnout, to repress political competitors, and to establish a dictatorship.
Today such a move is possible in Ukraine – neither the Americans, nor Europeans, nor Russia will start to interfere with the infighting in the Ukrainian political terrarium. Regardless of who wins or who is killed, the situation won’t seriously change. But there is – albeit small – hope that the winner in the internecine Maidan fight will be able to stabilise the situation for some time and that Ukraine will last a little longer in a condition of half-collapse, without crossing the point of no return and without distracting global players from serious affairs by the need to solve the future of the people and territories that make up the Ukrainian state.
This hope, of course, is scanty, because no Ukrainian politician has any chance of quickly winning against all real and potential, present and future opponents. I.e., in principle their fight must develop into a long armed civil conflict that will only catalyse the disintegration process. But somehow all the same nobody can influence the processes ongoing in Ukraine. Or more precisely – nobody wants to. This is a rather expensive action that won’t bring any quick effect (it is possible to wait for positive results in about 15-20 years, or even longer), but will focus scarce resources on itself at a time when the global economy can shatter at any time, making the Great Depression look like minor unpleasantness.
This crisis will additionally stimulate civil conflicts in countries that have a weak economy and destroyed administrative-political structures – a category that Ukraine certainly belongs to. So Ukraine practically stands no chance of avoiding the transfer of the civil war to Kiev and Lvov. But until recently there was a possibility to choose the format of the civil conflict.
It could’ve developed into the format nationalists and “eurointegrators” (these same nationalists, but seen in side view only) against ethnic minorities; it could start in the form of clashes between private armies belonging to politicians and business, and also the formally state law enforcement structures controlled by them; it could also develop into an anti-oligarchical spontaneous uprising of the Nizy [a term coined by Lenin to describe the rank and file members of society, as opposed to the “Verkhi” – the higher-ups – ed], for the suppression of which this same nationalist illegal and legalised armed groups would be sent (the latter format would assume the spreading of the Donbass situation to all of Ukraine).
But Ukraine is the closest it has ever been to a civil war on religious grounds. Moreover, it is almost impossible to avoid this conflict. There are too many parties interested in further aggravating the situation, and not enough of those who understand what it can lead to as a result. In addition, a considerable part of the figures influencing the development of events is outside of Ukraine.
For the Greek Bartholomew from Istanbul who provoked this conflict, it is absolutely all the same how many Orthodox Christians in Ukraine will die and how many temples will be destroyed. The most important thing for him is to create his own exarchate on this territory, via which he plans to sharply elevate his influence in the orthodox world, which doesn’t seek to be subordinated to the wishes of the applicant for the orthodox papacy possessing a microscopic church that is subordinated to the Turks and the successor of uniates.
In the past the Roman throne (at the time of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth) tried to spread its influence in Ukraine by fire and the sword, but now it doesn’t especially worry either about the price of its influence. Rome has well calculated that having opted for a split, having lost the trust and support of true Orthodox Christians, and being soiled by the blood of believers, Bartholomew will need support, and for the sake of this support he, once again, will quietly accept the union [with the Vatican – ed], having recognised the priority of the papacy.
The so-called Kiev Patriarchate can expect to win the fight against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UOC – MP) for the souls of believers only by force. And not even by simply seizing temples and monasteries, but by forcing the UOC-MP out of Ukraine in principle. It’s not a coincidence that they constantly call especially the Ukrainian church the church of the aggressor country and spread rumours about the UOC being allegedly controlled from Chisty Pereulok [the Patriarchate residence in Moscow – ed], and even directly from the Kremlin.
Poroshenko needs an undoubted victory over Russia on the eve of elections. For this purpose it also isn’t enough to create some autocephalous structure (a Ukrainian patriarchate or Kiev’s exarchate of the Istanbul patriarchate). He needs the liquidation of the UOC-MP. Russia can stop him only by force, but this will immediately give the chance to everyone (from Bartholomew to Poroshenko) to stage hysteria about the “aggressive interference of Moscow in the Ukrainian intra-church conflict”. If Russia doesn’t interfere, agitator-Russophobes will present it as the cowardice of the Kremlin and will declare an unambiguous victory for Poroshenko.
The recent planting of information about the storming of the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra being set in motion testifies to the fact that forceful actions against UOC are being prepared. This false alarm allowed militants to study the work of the warning system of the Lavra’s defenders and to evaluate the possible timeframe that they can assemble in and the number of people capable of quickly gathering at the shrine’s walls. In addition, such information planting also works for a demobilisation effect. People start to get used to false news about a storm, and when this news turns out to be real, they will spend much more time trying to receive confirmation that it has indeed started.
The monks of the Pochayev monastery also appealed to their parishioners to be ready to defend the Lavra. It is clear that this statement was made by them on the basis of concrete information about the preparation of a seizure.
At the same time it should be kept in mind that the militants are not only armed, but they are also mobile, better organised, and enjoy state support. At the critical moment they can anticipate the arrival of believers and rush into the monasteries before defenders arrive. By the way, they have enough forces to attack several monasteries simultaneously, and logic hints that it is more effective to seize both Lavras simultaneously, because after the first one has been captured, believers will surely start to guard the second one on a constant basis.
Nevertheless, the militants can’t capture all the temples and monasteries simultaneously. Besides this, it is impossible to exclude that there will be attempts to re-capture what was seized, especially symbolic temples, cathedrals, monasteries, and Lavras. Already at this stage blood will be almost inevitably shed.
The so-called Patriarch of Kiev and All of Ukraine Filaret (Denisenko) never stopped at the sight of blood, and he won’t stop this time either. And he won’t be especially restrained. I will remind that it’s not an independent Kiev Patriarchate that Constantinople needs, but its own exarchate in Ukraine. Since the head of the UOC [Moscow Patriarchate – ed], the most blessed Onufry, took a hard-line and isn’t going to join the schismatics in a “local church”, Filaret will have to cleanse the hierarchy of the UOC. Moreover, he can’t postpone the beginning of active actions for a long time, because the actions of Bartholomew/Poroshenko already instigated the unification of the episcopate of the UOC [Moscow Patriarchate – ed] around Metropolitan Onufry. The influence of the autocephalist group inside the UOC [Moscow Patriarchate – ed] was undermined and continues to fall. Active actions are needed by supporters of autocephaly in order to change the situation in their own favor. They need at least a small split in the UOC-MP, which will not so much weaken the church as it will allow the Ukrainian state to both declare that all “patriotic” “responsible” faiths reached an agreement and to lay the blame for the impending massacre on the UOC-MP, Metropolitan Onufry, Patriarch Kirill, and Moscow.
After the moor (Denisenko) does his business, he, most likely, will be helped to leave this world. He won’t for anything in the world agree to be deranked from a patriarch to an exarch, and Rome and Constantinople have a vast experience in solving difficult issues with the help of the unexpected deaths of high-ranking church hierarches, including the Popes. The death of a Filaret (Denisenko) who has compromised himself with bloodshed will hardly provoke a strong reaction in society, and he is already elderly – in January, 2019 he will turn 90.
The next to leave without being elected will be Poroshenko, and Bartholomew will become alone on the glade that was cleared for him by his accomplices. Well, and after this the ball will be in the Vatican’s court. I don’t know how much time will be needed to induce Constantinople to a union, but Popes know how to wait.
As we can see, in all cases everything rests on the fact that the majority of the characters of the approaching tragedy can’t wait, they need to resolve the issue with the UOC-MP (I emphasise, not with “Tomos” and not with an autocephalous local church, but with the destruction of the UOC-MP) before Poroshenko’s elections [the 2019 elections, which he tries to shape in his favour – ed]. At the same time, neither Filaret nor Poroshenko, by all accounts, understand that the Patriarch of Phanar is going to use them and dispose of them – and, perhaps, for some of them this will mean exiting life.
They can solve their problems (the problems that they think are theirs) in a short period of time (less than half a year) only by force. At the same time, if Filaret (Denisenko) most likely imagines what big bloodshed this matter stipulates, Poroshenko, by all accounts, is sure that he will succeed to solve this problem, albeit via violence, but without victims. And it’s unlikely that someone will tell him what he pushes the country towards.
Clashes on religious grounds become almost inevitable because they are in the general course of Poroshenko’s destabilisation policy, they are favorable to the majority of the characters playing on the side of Kiev. Poroshenko doesn’t understand just how dangerous (including for himself personally) the game he started is. Autocephalists have no time to stop and sensibly assess the situation in which they unambiguously losing.
i feel like crying when i think about the UOC and those evil bastards attacking it and our heritage, i fear we are headed for troubling times in the Orthodox Church.
I should probably read fewer books about eschatology tbh, http://averkyapocalypse.blogspot.com/
but i wont..
” If Russia doesn’t interfere, agitator-Russophobes will present it as the cowardice of the Kremlin and will declare an unambiguous victory for Poroshenko.”
Calling people who do not agree with some of Kremlin’s politics related to Ukraine, ‘agitator-Russophobes’, diminishes all credibility Rostislav might have.
A guilty conscience needs no accuser:
Why do you defend agitator-Russophobes and project on them the simplicity of “disagreement of some of the Kremlin’s politics”?
Most strange. And you tag on it the attack on Ishchenko that he loses all credibility. (Which by the way is massive credibility.)
He’s explaining the coming catastrophe and widespread bloodshed. You attack him.
Thus, my first statement seems apt.
Не беспокойтесь друг. Or in American English, don’t get your jimmies rasseled. Ishchenko is referring to the Ukrainian nationalists, and is completely correct to call them such.
He means the fifth column in Russia, like Novaya Gazeta, Dozhd, Echo of Moscow, Radio Svoboda, etc.
not sure about that.
I doubt the fifth column would push for more proactive Kremlin’s role in defending Russian people in Ukraine.
The way I am reading this (I might be wrong), he is calling agitator-Russophobes those who are supporting
more ‘aggressive’ Russian role in protecting Donbass people against fascist regime in Kiev.
Thank you for translation.
The El Murids of this world have been promoting Russia’s urgent (and idiotic) intervention in Ukraine since time immemorial. It is no different here. Russia will intervene (not necessarily symmetrically) in Ukraine ON ITS OWN TERMS, and not on terms dictated/forced by Washington.
@Saker Here is an interesting quote by Patriarch Filaret, head of the Kiev patriarchate, in an interview he gave to a Catholic News Agency:
“The patriarch does not believe unification of the two churches is realistic today, but it is “desirable” and greater cooperation is possible.”
This is disgusting. Just like The Saker and others have pointed out.
I wanted to share this link with everyone. This is from a dear family friend:
What corruption! Let us pray that Almighty God will have mercy on us and purge the Church from this corruption.
Iconodule, thanks for this link . I have also seen your previous link (from a Father Andrew?)
Pretty shocking. If this is true, it explains Bartholomew’s behaviour (that he is being blackmailed). If he has indeed embezzled those funds, then Bartholomew will need to be removed and perhaps even face criminal charges. Do you know if anyone is following up on this? If it happens quickly it may affect the outcome of events in ukraine. Please keep posting new information.
Dear Serbian Girl,
I do not know if anyone is following up on this. My guess is no, given the fact that the State Department of the United States (and CIA) is involved. My guess is the US State Department will cover this up, and no one will be held accountable.
The rumor is that the reason the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America (GOA) is facing a financial crisis is that wealthy donors used to make up what was needed at the end of the year. The donors have since passed on, and the GOA is facing a budget shortfall. My suspicion is there is more to it than that. Patriarch Bartholomew has been using the GOA as a cash cow to finance his endeavors.
My hope is if this is not exposed inside the United States (due to our corrupt government) that it will be exposed by Russia or other Orthodox counties. Then, Lord willing the local Churches will convene a pan-Orthodox Council and depose these heretics.
I don’t know how large of support this renegade Ukrainian church has, but if a vast majority of them were to be illuminated with the truth and joined the UOC-MP, wouldn’t that be the end of this madness? God has been known to intervene on behalf of his children.
One possibility might be to invoke the Canons of the Council of Sardica regarding appeals. Per Wikipedia: “The canons promulgated at Sardica were ratified in 451 by the fourth ecumenical council (Chalcedon) canon 1, in 692 by Quinisext Council canon 2] and in 787 by the seventh ecumenical council (Nicaea II) canon 1.” As such they are still recognized by all the Orthodox Churches. The relevant Canons are as follows, all of which seem to apply to the current situation:
Canon 3c: if a bishop is convicted of an offence by a verdict in a case, and if the convicted bishop objects to the verdict and seeks recourse by asking for reconsideration, then the bishops who judged the case – the trial court – should “honour the memory of St. Peter the Apostle” and write to the bishop of Rome about the case; if the bishop of Rome – the court of second instance – decides that the case should be retried, then “let that be done, and let him appoint judges;” if the bishop of Rome decides that the case should not be retried, then he shall confirm the verdict.
Canon 4: if a bishop is sentenced with deposition in a case by a verdict “of those bishops who have sees in neighbouring places,” and if the deposed bishop “announce[s] that his case is to be examined in the city of Rome,” then the execution of the sentence is suspended, in that a replacement bishop shall not be ordained to the see of the deposed bishop until after the case has “been determined in the judgment of” the bishop of Rome.
Canon 7: if a bishop is deposed from his office by bishops of his region acting as a court, and if the deposed bishop takes refuge with the bishop of Rome and seeks recourse by asking the bishop of Rome for a retrial, and if the bishop of Rome decides that the case should be retried; then the bishop of Rome may write to those bishops of a neighbouring province to investigate and conduct a retrial. The deposed bishop may ask the bishop of Rome to delegate priests to the retrial; at his discretion, the bishop of Rome can send priests acting as legates with his authority to serve as judges in cases where the bishop of Rome decides that the bishops of a neighbouring province alone are insufficient.
Since the Bishop of Rome and the Patriarch of Moscow are on good terms, currently, the results would likely be favorable.
one sided. read last monday’s editorial on wsj.
Hahaha thanks for the comedy!
For the Saker. Is it reasonable given religious nature of this article that I append the following link to its comments.? Surely it is. I hope you read it Saker.
Russian Orthodox Church Forced to End Eucharistic Ties With Constantinople
Previously, a representative of the Constantinople Patriarchate announced that the synod of the church had decided to lift the anathema of two leaders of schismatic churches in Ukraine and return the metropolia under Constantinople’s jurisdiction.