Category Archives: Russian Church

On the Present Divisions in the Russian Orthodox Church on Account of the Ukraine

Foreword

We have never had the slightest doubt that the Russian Federation, one of the World’s four Superpowers and the fourth largest economy in the world, would emerge militarily victorious in the conflict in the Ukraine. It is common sense, its military-industrial base is far greater than that of the Collective West and its military technology is far ahead of the Western, which is stuck at least one generation behind in the 1990s, as shown by its burning backward tanks in Russia and the Ukraine. On top of that, it is supported by the whole Non-Western world, including China, India, Africa and Latin America, all who have been and are victims of Western colonialism and exploitation – nearly 90% of the planet. The West has isolated itself through its crimes. The Western defeat in the Ukraine, which is rapidly on its way, is Divine chastisement for its hubris and all its crimes over the centuries, not least its recent genocides in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and the Ukraine.

However, this common sense does not mean that we rejoice in any of this profound tragedy or Russia winning the war. Will Russia win the peace? At least a million men are dead or maimed in the Ukraine. All are victims of international politics, above all the victims are the poor Ukrainians, whom the racist Americans and the Western European elite want to see killed ‘until the last Ukrainian’. Now they want to murder even those Ukrainians between the ages of 18 and 25. However, as we have said from the outset, another great loser will be the once multinational Russian Orthodox Church, which has lost its Ukrainian flock and others by descending into Russian nationalist politics and cutting itself off from communion with the corrupt hierarchy of the Church of Constantinople. All seem to have forgotten that we are pastors, not politicians and we have no interest in power and money. Their punishment is coming. As the proverb says: Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.

Introduction: The Conflict in the Ukraine

The very tragic conflict in the Ukraine has especially since 2022 caused divisions in the Russian Church outside the Ukraine. (I do not speak of the divisions that it has caused inside the Ukraine – they are all too obvious).

For: Patriots?

On the one hand, there are the Conservatives (for want of a better word), who fully support the armed conflict, which has already created over a million victims, killed and wounded. Many of these, on both sides, are formally baptised, in the same Russian Orthodox Church. Nevertheless, the views of the Conservatives, shared, it seems, by all the bishops and most of the priests inside Russia, though not by all of them in Western Europe and the USA, are that this is an operation to defend the Russian Federation and Russians in the east and south of the Ukraine from American-led NATO and Neo-Nazi Ukrainian aggression from the Kiev puppet government. Therefore, Russian actions are justified. Indeed, they claim that Russian actions are simply defending threefold Orthodox East Slavdom, Holy Rus (the Russian Federation, the Ukraine and Belarus), from Western evils like atheism and transgenderism, like that of the 1916 murderer and traitor Yusupov.

Those who support the Conservatives proclaim that the latter are sincere Christians and good pastors, who are just defending Russia against its God-less Western enemies. Those against the Conservatives consider them to be cruel, heartless, anti-Christian, divisive and politically-motivated. How can they, especially as clergy, be in favour of destruction, war and death? What about: ‘Thou shalt not kill’? They consider that the supporters of the Russian forces are mercenary and murderous hirelings of an aggressive Russian government, and that they will do whatever the Russian State wants, that they have no Christian conscience. Their argument is supported by the fact that the Russian Orthodox Church is, or rather, used to be, the Church of all Russian Orthodox and all canonical Ukrainian Orthodox, that it used to be multinational. Therefore, to support one national side against another is to divide the flock of the Church, introducing a civil war into the Church. Is that Christian?

Against: Traitors?

On the other hand, there are the Liberals (for want of a better word), who are opposed to the conflict and demand the withdrawal of Russian forces from the Ukraine. These include the clergy of the former Russian parish in Amsterdam and in Madrid (all of them linked to the late liberal Metr Antony (Bloom)), and a well-known archpriest and protodeacon from Moscow, now in exile in Western Europe. They, and several others, have all been ‘defrocked’ by the Moscow Patriarchate for disagreeing with the ‘Party line’ (See Note 1) and so joined the Patriarchate of Constantinople – Moscow’s US-financed rival. But they had nowhere else to go. Others, bishops of the Russian-American Synod in New York have also called on Russia to withdraw its troops. The anti-Russian attitudes of such bishops, who are American citizens, are not surprising. In the past, they had at least one CIA-agent bishop and until 1991 subsidies from the CIA. Why should they not accept subsidies again?

Those who are against the conflict are said to be sincere Christians and good pastors. Those who support the conflict consider those against to be political traitors. In effect, those against the conflict are supporting Russia’s enemies, the Western Powers, led by the USA. They tell those who are against the conflict to visit the Avenue of the Angels monument in Donetsk, where 400 children murdered by Ukrainian/US shells between 2014 and 2022 are buried, together with nearly 14,000 adult civilian victims. Also, they point out that most of the ‘Russian’ troops fighting in the Ukraine are Ukrainians anyway – Russian-speaking inhabitants of the eastern and southern Ukraine, who are fighting for their right to speak their native language and attend their Orthodox Church, which is sorely persecuted by Kiev. Since they are Ukrainians, how can they withdraw from their own country? Here is the essence of the tragedy – this is the worst sort of war – a civil war.

The Third Way

Those who are for the conflict seem to support Russian nationalism and militarism, those who are against the conflict seem to support US globalism and secularism. It is clear that neither of these extremes can be supported. We support the Third Way. This says that the Church should not take sides in a conflict between secular States, the Russian Federation and the USA, both of which have, for example, very high rates of abortion and divorce, suffer from weak family life and have very low levels of Church attendance. We should act as pastors, not politicians, as Christians, not as secularists. Our secular passport may say Russian or Ukrainian, but our spiritual passport says Orthodox Christian. This is our heavenly nationality, over all that is earthly. We should pray not for ‘victory’, but for ‘peace’. It seems to us that the Russian Orthodox hierarchy in Moscow should grant the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church full independence.

If independence, or autocephaly, is what the canonical Ukrainian Church needs in order to stop persecution, even if only temporarily, let it have it. The Church does not put power above peace and money above love. Sadly, we must admit that the conflict in the Ukraine has highlighted that many, on both sides, have done the opposite, playing politics. For them there is only power and money, not peace and love. The example of St Nicholas of Japan (+ 1912) should be followed. During the Japano-Russian War of 1904-05, as the Russian bishop of Japan and founder of the Japanese Orthodox Church, he lived as a recluse in prayer, telling his Japanese flock to pray for the Japanese authorities, as the Apostle Paul instructs us. And then he fell silent for the duration. Why do the Church authorities in Moscow not do the same today? We also have the example of St Silvanus the Athonite (+ 1938), who during the First World War simply prayed that the least evil side win.

Conclusion: Towards Healing

Here are the examples that we may follow, praying that the present grave divisions inside the Russian Church and those between it and other Local Orthodox Churches may be overcome.

Note:

  1. ‘Defrocking’ for political reasons is utterly uncanonical and is ignored by all sixteen Local Orthodox Churches, including the Romanian Orthodox Church, the Church of Constantinople and the Russian Church. Thus, one part of the Russian Church freely receives ‘defrocked’ clerics from the Church of Constantinople, as well as, in the past, many from the Patriarchate of Moscow. Constantinople received hundreds of ‘defrocked’ Ukrainian clerics in the 1990s and has received others more recently. The Romanian Church has received over 200 ‘defrocked’ clerics in Moldova and in England from the Russian Church, who had been ‘defrocked’ because they had been persecuted by their bishops. As one Russian Moscow bishop told me about another bishop who had carried out such actions: ‘Send for the psychiatric ambulance to pick him up’! What always happens after such ‘defrockings’ is always ‘refrockings’, when meaningless pieces of paper, written against the Holy Spirit, often still in their unopened envelopes, are simply cancelled.

On Metr Antony (Bloom) and Archimandrite Sophrony (Sakharov)

Q: You are one of the few people who knew well both Metr Antony (Bloom) and Archimandrite Sophrony (Sakharov). What do you think of them and their disputes?

A: I am not sure that I am one of the few, but I did know them both well.

The future Metr Antony was born on the same day as my grandfather, though twenty years after him. He was a typical Franco-Russian intellectual. He was very gifted, very open, to the point of liberalism, and very sincere. His father, Boris, was an Imperial diplomat who was interested in the occult and had the gift of hypnotism. His mother was the sister of the ‘mystical’, but very unOrthodox Russian composer Scriabin.

Andrei Bloom (as he then was) came to the faith in his teens and lived it in his own way. He did not study at seminary. He was completely unmercenary and lived very modestly. His interests were intellectual and in people and was very popular, especially among women. He was widely read in Western literature, but not so much in the Church Fathers or the literature of piety and the Lives of the Saints. He was really quite emotional and you can hear this in his sermons. His approach to the Faith was emotional, even sentimental, and cultural. That approach is very important to some.

Fr Sophrony was eighteen years older than Metr Antony and came from a well-off Russian family in Moscow, emigrated to France after the Revolution and was a huge intellectual, philosopher and artist who had belonged in his youth to the Art Nouveau Movement. He came to England in 1959, when a large property was given him by the Church of England in an ecumenical spirit. At that time he was still living in France, where for some 14 years he had been under the Patriarchate of Moscow after he had been expelled from Mt Athos. He had lived there for twenty years and was expelled by the Greek authorities for political reasons, together with two other Russian monks.

In 1965 he left the jurisdiction of Metr Antony of Moscow after twenty years and returned to the jurisdiction of Greek Constantinople. This happened after he had fallen out with Metr Antony, who wanted to close his monastery and ordain his priests, so he could expand his tiny diocese. Fr Sophrony (as we always called him – never starets) is now a local saint, canonised by the Patriarchate of Constantinople, and venerated in the monastery, or convent, which he founded just outside a village in the east of Essex.

So we can see that Metr Antony had an emotional approach to the Faith and is very attractive to the emotional and even sentimental, especially to women, and brought tens of thousands of Russians and others to Orthodoxy. On the other hand, Fr Sophrony had an intellectual and philosophical approach to the Faith and he is attractive to highly educated people of many nationalities, many of whom have doctorates, like his monks.

Thus, they were very different people. But both played a positive role. The point is that everyone is different and there is no reason to reject or condemn either of them, as some do. Having said that, neither was my ‘cup of tea’ personally. But so what? There is room in the Church for many different sorts of people and many sorts of people are needed. Let us not be narrow! Tastes vary.

We can see this in the views of other Orthodox. For example, the then Fr Vitaly (Ustinov), later Metropolitan of ROCOR, called, I think in 1948, the then Fr Antony (Bloom) ‘a priest of Satan’, simply because he belonged to the Patriarchate of Moscow, which had been revived by Stalin. However, we know that Metr Vitaly ended his life outside the Church in a sect. Metr Antony (Bloom) did not.

Another critic, and of both the ‘Western’ Metr Antony and of the ‘delusional’ Fr Sophrony (according to Professor Osipov), is the Russian academic, Professor A. I. Osipov. His lectures are interesting for beginners in Orthodox life and he was very popular, especially in the 1990s when 100 million Russians were baptised, virtually without instruction. Once more, he is just another personality, with his own approach, a third approach, that of the academic.

All three approaches are interesting, but I don’t see why they should be mutually exclusive. However, once more he is not my personal cup of tea. But he is the cup of tea of many others. People are different! Accept that everyone is different and stop falling into that trap of sectarian narrowness and condemnation that some Russians can be inclined to, with their cries of ‘That’s uncanonical’, ‘you’re a schismatic’, ‘that’s heretical’ etc. None of that is Christian. Moreover, it is this Russian intolerance that has caused the schism between Russians and Greeks today, all the purely political divisions in the Russian emigration (meaning that today ROCOR is out of communion with the Western European Archdiocese of the Russian Church), and all the divisions inside Russia from the seventeenth century until today, Sad.

On Delusions: Western, Ukrainian, Russian and Clerical

For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom…and the stars shall fall from heaven…

Matt. 24

Introduction

The appalling conflict in the Ukraine marks a turning-point in world history. The choice offered by it is between transnational Globalism, which could lead to the eventual enthronement of Antichrist, or else National Sovereignty, which may be healthier, but brings many of its own violent dangers and nationalist temptations. The battleground and victim of this struggle is the tragic Ukraine, a country composed of different peoples, thrown together in the same geographical space by the tyrants of the twentieth century, and whose views and beliefs contradict one another, and who are now killing one another.

As one commentator has put it: ‘They are all Orthodox, but none are Christians’. When will it all end? We have finally discovered the true form of the prophecy of Elder Iona of Odessa (+ 2012) (the first part is often omitted) who said the following: ‘There will be a cold Easter, a hungry Easter, a bloody Easter and a victorious Easter’. It seems he was referring to 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025. Many misinterpret the last part of the prophecy, misunderstanding that a victorious Easter means a ‘Russian victory’. It does not. It means peace, for the only victory is peace, when Ukrainian and Russian alike will repent and help one another.

The Western Delusion

Meanwhile, senior bishops of the Russian Moscow Patriarchate are criticised by Western politicians and journalists and their Russian liberal servants, some of them traitors or who are CIA-paid, for spreading the nationalist, ‘Russian world’ ideology. This promotes the unity of the Russian-speaking world, regardless of where it may be, inside or outside the Russian Federation. However, in truth, this is no more nationalist than the ideology of Hellenism, which has been spread for generations by the Greek Patriarch of Constantinople. And yet none of the liberals denounces the Greek nationalists or calls them ‘heretics’ – as the Greeks and the liberals call the Russians! Strange, because they are exact equivalents with exactly the same exclusivist, racist and nationalist ramifications.

This ‘Russian world’ ideology means the nationalisation of the formerly multinational Moscow Patriarchate, excluding Non-Russians, just like Hellenism, which excludes Non-Greeks. This clearly means that Russia has no interest in invading Non-Russian countries, like Moldova, the Baltics, or the western, that is, truly Ukrainian, part of the Ukraine. Russia today is nationalist, not imperialist. This totally contradicts the absurd Western ‘narrative’ that ‘Russia wants to invade’ the rest of Non-Russian Europe further west, re-establishing the failed Soviet Empire. Never has any Russian official said such a thing, indeed quite the opposite – nobody wants to repeat the clear failure of the Soviet Union, ‘only someone without a brain wants it back’, as President Putin has said.

This Western narrative of Russian imperialism contradicts the other Western propaganda myth that ‘the Russians have no more fuel, shells, tanks, missiles, artillery, soldiers etc’, ‘the people do not want to fight’, and ‘Putin is dying of a serious illness’ and more recently that, ‘North Korean troops are fighting in Russia because so many Russians have died in ‘human waves of cannon fodder’’. We have heard all this propaganda, most of it dating back to World War II, for nearly three years, without the slightest proof of any of it, indeed everything points to exactly the opposite. It has to be one, the Russians are going to take over the whole of Europe, or the other, the Russians are exhausted, defeated and have nothing left. In fact, it is of course neither. Both are clearly lies.

The Ukrainian Delusion

The great Western delusion is centred on the Ukraine. The old Ukraine was the artificial creation of three Soviet tyrants, Lenin, Stalin and Khrushchov, between 1922 and 1954, set up so that it could be controlled all the more easily by those tyrants. Before that, the nineteenth-century Austrian-invented ‘Ukraine’, or Malorossija, to give it its real historic name, existed, but only in what is now the north-west of the present Ukraine, centred around and to the west of Kiev. As we have been saying for years, the future of the Soviet Ukraine would be to divide it into three parts. A Russian part, a Ukrainian part and another part, which could, conditionally, be given back to three neighbouring countries – Poland, Hungary and Romania. Only the details of such partitions are not clear.

For example, the Russian part could consist of at least six provinces or administrative areas (two in the Crimea). These have largely already been taken back by Russian forces, but there could be another four or even seven provinces in the east and south of the old Soviet Ukraine which might wish to go back to Russia. The Ukrainian part could include between eighteen and a half and eleven and a half provinces and areas out of the original twenty-seven. This part would be centred around Kiev, the north and west of the old Soviet Ukraine. Two and a half western provinces could return to Poland (Lviv, Ivanofrankivsk and the southern part of Ternopil – the northern part, called Kremenets, with the Pochaev Lavra, would rejoin Volyn/Rivne, where it was in 1939).

One province (Zakarpat’e, or properly Subcarpathian Rus) would go back to Hungary and one (Chernovtsy, or properly North Bukovina). would go back to Romania. The return of the areas to Poland would be conditional on their deNATOisation. As regards the Hungarian area, the Russian Church could then establish a Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Church for it, its territory including all Austro-Hungary. This would right the historic injustice of their Austro-Hungarian persecution. As regards the Romanian area, the conditionality could depend on Moldovan deNATOisation and on Transdnistria, Gagauzia and any other border areas of Moldova wishing by referendum to pass to Russian control being allowed to do so. The Russian world would thus respect the Romanian world.

The Russian Delusion

The conflict in the Ukraine has highlighted the underlying division between the clerico-administrative layer and the leftist-intellectual layer of the Russian Orthodox Church as a whole. This division is in fact between the pro-Catholic Conservative and the pro-Protestant Liberal layers in the Church. The first, the Conservatives, rule in Moscow, where politicians have replaced pastors and managers have replaced monks. The Conservative administrators are composed of such mini-oligarchs, who promote a militarised – and militant – Church, and propose admirals and generals as saints. They forget that before the Revolution people spoke of the worst bishops as ‘good administrators’ and then there was a Revolution. Now they speak of ‘effective managers’ (see Note 1 below).

So now there is a war in the Ukraine – the clear result of ‘effective management’. Nothing has changed. However, if there is to be no Revolution this time, there must first be a great cleansing of the Church, by the grace of God, through the coming Tsar. Now the ‘princes of the Church’ are proposing a ’Church’ which looks like a cross between folklore and an army – superstitious magic ritualism for women and Stalinist militaristic nationalism for men. That would be a Church which could only attract the brainless. We saw the ‘princes’ at the time of the ‘covid’ plot. The episcopate in Russia, closely followed by that outside Russia closed churches! It is something that even the Communists did not achieve so well. This was the persecution of the people of the Faith by bishops of little faith.

Then came the conflict in the Ukraine. The Liberals of Public Orthodoxy, including the sincere but very naïve Sergei Chapnin, Fr Alexei Uminsky, Fr Andrei Kordochkin are one thing. But many anti-Russian Liberals are, directly or indirectly CIA-funded, indirectly allied to the USA and sometimes to its vassals in Constantinople. Many anti-patriots think they are against the war, for they do not realise that they are for the war, but for the war of the Western elite against the Russian Federation. Both the Conservatives and the Liberals propose a Religion, but not Faith, a State manipulation, whether of the Russian State or of the American State, not the life in the Holy Spirit. Neither the pro-Catholic Conservatives, nor the pro-Protestant Liberals are of the masses of the Church.

The Clerical Delusion

The Liberals with their dissident congregationalism and anti-clericalism are clearly Protestant in spirit, but the Conservatives are clearly Roman Catholic in spirit, ‘Philopapist’, as can be seen in their misogyny (2) and homosexuality. Their clericalisation of the Church, obvious from website pictures seemingly showing more clergy than people at some services, is typical of the Vatican. This goes back at least to the later Metropolitan Nikodim (Rotov), who died in the arms of the Pope in Rome in 1978. This Philopapism with its sexual perversions is a disease that has spread among some in the Russian episcopate, both inside and outside Russia. As lifelong admirers of the power and money of Papism, which is full of sexual perverts, such bishops want to live as State bureaucrats.

Western critics of the Russian Orthodox Church imagine that it is a kind of Erastian Church, like the Church of England, where all the bishops are nominated by a Prime Minister, who may be a Hindu, or a Jew, or more often an atheist. This is nonsense. The Russian Church is not a State Church. It is free. Sadly, the truth is even worse than Anglicanism, for the free have given up their freedom. The need to kowtow to the State does not come from the State, it comes from such bishops themselves. In this way the senior Russian episcopate is exactly like that of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. The faithful in both Churches, including in the New York Synod, which parrots the love of power and money of its masters in Moscow (Note 1 below), have been let down – all voluntarily (3).

Thus, we see why the great saints of the Russian Orthodox Church were persecuted and lived far from the centres – with the exception of fools for Christ. St Paisius was forced to flee to Moldavia. Others lived in Sarov, Optina, Glinsk etc. In the twentieth century Elder Nikolai (Guryanov) lived on a remote island on the Pskov Lake. As for St John of Shanghai, he lived far away from Russia, ‘in the provinces’. The problem is the great abyss fixed between most of the episcopate and monastic life, and yet the episcopate is supposed to be composed of monks. The lack of monasticism is why today the Russian Church has embraced both the Vatican and Russian nationalism and is no longer multinational, but mononational. And that is how it has lost the Ukrainians.

Conclusion

When did all this recent decadence of Conservatives and Liberals begin in the Russian Church, formerly the Church of the New Martyrs and New Confessors? Without doubt, it all began in the 1990s, when the Church became a business, selling tobacco and alcohol – make money from anything. Then in about 2010, having obtained money, they made the huge mistake of turning from money to politics for more power. The new money-changers in the Temple ignored the Gospel again: ‘Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s’. And so came chastisement, in the form of covid and then of the Ukraine.

One of our parishioners considers that any candidate for the episcopate should first have to spend two weeks with two small children. Alternatively, perhaps every bishop should be forced to spend two weeks every three months cleaning the toilets or working in the kitchen garden of a real, down-to-earth monastery. Or else bishops must delegate far more to senior priests in deaneries, who decide who will be ordained and will call in the by then defeudalised bishop (they are for now feudal lords) when needed. Or else have a married episcopate – though that radical change would need the decision of a Universal Council.

Notes:

1.

The Four-Stage Moscow Business Plan for the ‘Effective Manager’ – copied to the letter by Russian bishops outside Russia.

a) An older bishop chooses a candidate for the episcopate, sometimes this may be a boyfriend (there are many examples of this, whom we could name), but in any case a candidate who is usually just as narcissistic or as sociopathic as himself. Then the older bishop obtains approval for his consecration. (At this point money often changes hands; 35 years ago Constantinople was charging was $20,000 a time – who knows how much Moscow charges now).

b) The new bishop enters his diocese, acquires a nice property and a nice car, if possible a cook and a chauffeur, and then gets rid of all those who were there before him, sometimes by retiring them, however young they may be. It does not matter even if they have been faithful for fifty years or more, if their large families are examples of Orthodoxy, if they have been good pastors, if they are popular (all the more reason), if they have written books, given international conferences – they must be destroyed through fictitious ‘suspensions’ and ‘defrockings’ (defrockings for no canonical reason are spiritual murder), for they know more than the young upstart bishop and are more popular than him. The young careerist will brook no rivals. The Church must be destroyed by him, as by all those who in their delusion do not even know that they are working for satan, but imagine that they are supporting the Church.

c) A young new priest, who owes his ordination to the new bishop (often literally, he owes him money for his ordination), is sent to a place without a church and told to build one, or to a place with a ruined church and told to restore it. For this privilege he has to pay a heavy annual tax to his bishop. If he does not do this, he will be bullied, intimidated and publicly humiliated with anger and cruelty. This puts pressure on him to extort money from his parishioners, charging for sacraments and anything else, and also puts pressure on the family of the priest. We know cases where such financial pressure has led to divorce. It is not uncommon. This same technique, like the rest of the Business Plan, is commonly used in all parts of the Russian Church, both inside and outside Russia, including in the USA and Western Europe. We have seen it.

d) Even if the young priest manages to do this and establishes a parish composed of loyal and enthusiastic people, he is then thrown out of the new church and replaced with a favourite of the bishop who can pay more for that privilege. This ruins the parish, but who cares? Money rules and real estate counts.

All four stages are marked by a total lack of Christian Faith and Love, accompanied by vice, exploitation, betrayal, bullying and cloning – clones being priests similar to the bishop and to his greed. Sometimes this similarity is even physical – in style of dress, shape of beard etc.

  1. There is perhaps no sadder example of the hatred of women and even vulgarity than that of the now fallen Fr Andrei Tkachjov, who at the start was respected and used to say helpful things. Pray for him in his temptation.
  2. Thus, the Pope of Rome has now suggested a concelebration with the Greek Patriarch in Turkey in summer 2025 to mark the 1700th anniversary of the First Universal Council in 325. We would suggest that any meeting, let alone concelebration, should first be made conditional on the Pope restoring the Nicene Creed in Roman Catholicism and renouncing once and for all the filioque heresy. Then we shall know if the Greek Patriarch is Orthodox or not.

 

Peace for the Ukraine – and for the Orthodox Church?

US Disengagement?

Even before Trump had been elected, the US elite had realised that it had to disengage from its Ukraine project. Russia had not been weakened, regime-changed, dismembered and destroyed, as had been the US plan all along. Instead its economy was booming, becoming the fourth biggest in the world, President Putin was more popular than ever and BRICS had taken off. As for the illegal Western sanctions, they were ignored by 90% of the world and damaged only the West. The US puppet, Zelensky, in his bunker in Kiev is clearly delusional, taking, they say, cocaine and desperately threatening invasions of Russia, without troops, arms and munitions, and even nuclear war, without nuclear weapons.

The claim by President-elect Trump during his campaign that he would achieve peace in the Ukraine within 24 hours, even before he entered the Oval Office was all presupposition and hubris. How could he end a war which the US had already lost. and Russian victory is ending anyway? Peace does not depend on him, even if the tragedy began as a US proxy war. Peace depends on the actions of the Russian military and President Putin. Indeed, peace may come through Russian military victory and Ukrainian military collapse even before Trump assumes office. That would probably be very welcome to Trump, enabling him to begin as President unburdened of the curse of the Ukraine, which has ruined everything.

The fact is that the President-elect does not want to solve the conflict in the Ukraine, what he wants is to disengage from it, so that the US can save money and at last ‘pivot to Asia’. The Ukraine is now a distraction from US strategic interests. Trump wants to run away from Kiev, just as the US ran away from its failed wars in Saigon and Kabul. Trump can do this very easily, if Kiev collapses before Trump’s inauguration. He can simply blame Biden for everything. This will be his ’exit strategy’. The puppet-master has changed and so the puppets must change too. After all, Trump has from the outset stated that the war would never have begun, if he had been President at the time. And that may well be true.

Peace Talks?

But who can Russia talk too? The Russians cannot talk to the Ukrainians, as their President is illegitimate and talks with Russia were literally outlawed by Kiev in 2022. The Russians cannot talk to Europeans, as they have shown themselves to be delusional liars and treaty-breaking traitors ever since 2014. This can be seen from their refusal to implement the so-called Minsk Accords, which they openly confessed were simply delaying tactics. In any case, the narcissistic and so delusional European ruling class is discredited and hated by the peoples of Europe and represents only the past and its own selfish interests. That ruling class is unable to talk to Russia because it is incapable of dealing with reality – its defeat.

In any case, Russia will certainly not sit down and talk now, when it is on the brink of victory. Would the Allies have stopped in January 1945 to talk to Hitler? Russia will not stop now, victory is in sight. Anyway, as we said, Kiev has literally outlawed talks with Russia and its President is illegal, as his term of service ended earlier this year, like that of his Parliament. The war has continued for so long only because of Biden’s support and EU and UK backing. And bankrupt Europe cannot replace the US, as Europe has run out of money and arms and cannot let its own troops die there. And it is troops that the Ukraine needs, for it has lost nearly a million soldiers, 517,000 of them in the unfinished year of 2024 alone.

As a result, with no-one to talk to, the Russians are taking back more and more territory from the Ukraine, 100 years after it was illegally handed over to the Ukraine by the anti-Russian Bolsheviks. There will be no ‘frozen conflict’ or ‘stalemate’ here, just Russian victory. ‘Frozen conflict’ was possible two years ago. The only people the Russians could talk to now are the Americans – but under Trump. Trump is a businessman and wants to disengage from a loss-making business and must sack Zelensky. As the Americans no longer have any diplomats, the hope is that Trump will appoint the only European politician left – Victor Orban – to talk not only to the Russian President, but also to the Russian Patriarch.

The Russian President

The Russian President could express the following terms to Trump’s representative, perhaps Orban: Firstly, drop all 16,000 illegal anti-Russian sanctions and absurd criminal charges. Then, recognise as Russian the four Russian provinces which have already joined Russia, and, if they have been taken by Russia by then, the next four once Russian provinces of the south and east, including Nikolaev and Odessa on the Black Sea coast, and the three more once Russian provinces to the north-east (Chernigov, Sumy, Poltava). The Russian President would leave the rest to become again the real Ukraine, perhaps to be called ‘Kievan Rus’ (Kiyivska Rus’), more or less mirroring Belarus to the north.

Such a nationally homogenous, Ukrainian-speaking Kievan Rus would consist of 14 administrative areas, just over half of the original 27 (including the two that were in the Russian Crimea), its new easternmost provinces being Kiev, Cherkasy and Kirovohrad. This would represent an area of about 260,000 square kilometres and a pre-war population of about 16 million. This would draw Ukrainian refugees back from Europe. Kievan Rus would be a neutral, sovereign and independent nation, that is, demilitarised (free of NATO) and denazified (free of the EU) which are racist, anti-sovereignty organisations. Agreement could then be reached and Russia would by treaty guarantee the territorial integrity of all European nations.

Of course, they would have to make a condition that Moldova should carry out referenda for any groups among its border population, such as those in Transdniestria and Gagauzia, who may wish to join Russia. Similarly, referenda must be held for Romanian and Hungarian minorities on the borders of Kievan Rus who may wish to ‘go home’. If the three tiny Baltic statelets were at last obliged to grant human rights to their Russian minorities, there would be no threat from Russia to them. With such an agreement, the Western half of Europe would be secure and could slash its military spending. Then Trump would see his dream come true and abandon NATO, which could be dissolved, just like the EU.

The Russian Patriarch

The Russian Orthodox Patriarch also has to be involved in these talks. Leader of by far the largest Local Orthodox Church, the whole Orthodox Church of 200 million has been in chaos ever since the British-orchestrated palace revolt or ‘Russian Revolution’ of February 1917. Without the Russian Church, several key Local Orthodox Churches were taken over through political interference by Great Britain and, after the Second World War, specifically in 1948 with the forced removal by the CIA of Patriarch Maximos V of Constantinople, by the USA. Freedom for the Orthodox Church, the end of Western interference in its internal affairs, is essential for peace in the Ukraine and for justice in Church affairs.

There would have to be an agreement with the Russian Church, which has also suffered as a result of American policy in the Ukraine and elsewhere. This is principally because of the Zionist neocon ideology, implemented by Nuland, Pompeo, Blinken, Biden etc. This established a fake Church in the Ukraine, permitted the open persecution of the real Church there and also sanctioned the Russian Patriarch personally. What could the terms of the Patriarch be and what concessions could he grant in return? Here there has to be mutuality, as there have been excesses on both sides. Here are Russian Orthodox terms to be imposed on the Greek Churches by the USA, with compensation from the USA:

  1. Closure of the fake Church in the Ukraine, the OCU, with Constantinople withdrawing its absurd Tomos, which justified it. All stolen property is to be returned to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (see Concessions 1, 2 and 3 below).
  2. Release of all Orthodox in Finland, Estonia and Lithuania from the uncanonical jurisdiction of Constantinople, introduced from the 1920s on, on condition that all Orthodox there be granted a new Autocephalous Baltic Orthodox Church (see Concession 5 below).
  3. No more interference by Constantinople in the affairs of the Polish Orthodox Church and, especially, in those of the Church of the Czechia and Slovakia.
  4. Granting to the Russian Church of jurisdiction over all Africa, except for Egypt, which has its own historic Greek Orthodox Patriarchate, based in Alexandria (thus returning to the pre-1920s situation). This is on condition that Moscow establishes an Autocephalous African Orthodox Church there by 2050.

Russian Concessions:

  1. Immediate resumption by Moscow of communion and concelebration with the Churches of Constantinople, Alexandria and other Greek Orthodox Churches.
  2. Immediate rescinding of all ‘suspensions’ and ‘defrockings’ of clergy in Russia, the Ukraine, Moldova, Lithuania, Western Europe and elsewhere, which were carried out for political reasons because of clergy disagreements with political, nationalist or uncanonical sectarian ideologies, imposed by certain Russian bishops.
  3. Autocephaly for the Kievan Rus Orthodox Church within twelve months.
  4. Autocephaly for the Moldovan Orthodox Church on the remaining national territory of Moldova within twelve months, in concert with the Romanian Orthodox Church, in order to reunite all Moldovan Orthodox in one Church. The Moldovan Diaspora in Western countries would come under the care of the Romanian Orthodox Church.
  5. Autocephaly for all Orthodox (about 500,000 in number) in the three Baltic States and Finland, forming an autocephalous Baltic Orthodox Church within twelve months.
  6. All Russian Orthodox in the Diasporas in Western Europe, the Americas and Oceania are to be instructed, under threat of excommunication, to merge by negotiation into new Local Churches, to be founded on those territories by 2050. This would be conditional on all other Local Churches which have Diaspora jurisdictions issuing the same instructions to their Diasporas.

 

The New Age of Sovereignty

You always knew who the goody was and who the baddy was in the cowboy films of the mid-twentieth century. The goody always wore a white hat, the baddy a black hat. Simple. This reflected the Cold War mentality of the time. The Capitalists were good, the Communists were bad. It was all an oversimplified world of good versus evil, right versus wrong, ‘with us or against us’, as per Bush. It was a simple, bipolar, dualist, Manichean world of black and white. It was not of course reality, which is usually lighter or darker grey.

In reality, although nobody liked the tyranny of Communism, especially those who lived in Communist countries, the paradoxical tragedy was that after the fall of Communism, the world became unipolar. In other words, the US and its Western vassals could brook no rivals. It was the ‘spoiled brat syndrome’ – ‘I am the only one’. ‘Hegemony’, that is, supremacy and domination over all, became the order of the day. But hegemony and bossy control freakery do not work – ask any Californian bishop who has tried to impose it.

However, as the whole world, except for the Western, now knows, neither a bipolar world (Capitalist versus Communist), nor a unipolar world (Western), work. Rule by one or two always leads to despotism. The solution is a multipolar world, which breaks the tyranny of the monopoly of one and the warring opposition of two. This is the realm of the Holy Trinity. Sadly, the West wants either unipolar or else bipolar, the ‘democratic’ (West) versus the ‘autocratic’ (East). This is the heretical nonsense of Manichaeism.

The fact is that the Western Establishment oligarchies are certainly autocratic, they ignore and despise their ‘deplorable’ peoples. ‘plebs’, as in France, the UK and Germany, all governed by minority governments. For the people are the greatest threat, as we saw from the very unexpected (for the elites) results of the referendum on Brexit and the recent US election. They were not unexpected for the people. As for the pro-Western CIA-sponsored dictatorships in the Arabian Peninsula, Latin America and Asia, are they not autocratic?

But the most autocratic of them all is the Kiev regime, which has banned other political parties, critical media, sent all opposition to the firing squads, prisons and torture chambers of the dreaded Secret Police, and is now even banning the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. On the other side, India is the world’s largest democracy. And President Putin can easily win any election, in the same way as the very popular political leaders of China and Iran. Some people like such ‘autocratic’ governments – the more the better, they say.

As long as the Western elites and their venal media criminalise or ‘hitlerise’ a dialogue with ‘cancelled’ Russia (though they talked to the USSR and China during the Cold War), the only end to NATO’s anti-Russian war in the Ukraine is Russian victory and their total defeat. And that will not be long now. The Western elite never cared about Ukrainians, or any other Non-Western people, it just used them as proxies, so their own troops did not have to die. However, this does not mean that the Russians are not guilty of mistakes.

For one thing, as President Putin has openly admitted, there was the continual Russian naivety with regard to Western politicians from 1989 on. The Russians actually thought they were dealing with honest people, viz the Minsk Accords. And then there has been the problem of the hangover of the old Soviet centralisation. After 1991, the Russian Federation failed to give the real Ukraine (the north-western half, not the Russian southern and eastern half), autonomy and to respect its culture and language, authentically Ukrainian.

It was the usual condescending Great Russian chauvinism and imperialism, dating back to the pre-Soviet times of the Imperialist Establishment, which says that if you are not Russian, you are a third-class citizen. This is the same attitude as in the Russian emigration, pre-Soviet and post-Soviet, towards all Non-Russians. This imperialist attitude of both many Russians (and many Americans – they have that in common) meant that the US conquered very venal Kiev in 2014 for a paltry $5 billion. But look at the miserable results.

The scale of the events in the Ukraine is that of a Shakespearian tragedy. The main role was performed by the CIA-hired and very overpaid actor and comedian Zelensky, who  firsthad to improve his English, learn Ukrainian and be reclothed in khaki sweatshirts for the role. Like Caesar, expect Zelensky to be betrayed and stabbed by Brutus. The Ides of March are near. President Putin is waiting for free Ukrainians to take power, perhaps with Trump’s backing. Then banned peace talks can start and the European elite can resign.

There needs to be a New Ukraine, sovereign, independent, free of NATO and the EU – which are not going to survive anyway. And as a Sovereign Nation  it must have its own autocephalous or independent Church. Ordinary Ukrainians, unlike their greedy oligarchic elites – usually Non-Ukrainians – have been the sacrificial lambs of both American and Soviet Imperialism. Hopefully, President Putin can persuade the Church in Moscow to abandon centralism and give autocephaly to all Russian Orthodox in territories outside the Russian Federation.

This may mean that before Trump’s inauguration in seventy days’ time the Russians will advance towards the Dnieper, taking from four to seven more Ukrainian provinces, including the Black Sea Coast, so joining up with Transdniestria. The territories outside the Russian Federation, where Russian Orthodox live, would need autocephaly, meaning a Church of the New Ukraine and a Church of the Baltics. All the other Diasporas, as well as Moldova, would have to come to an agreement with the other canonical Orthodox there.

Imperialism has always been a problem. It bankrupted the seventeenth-century empires of Spain and Portugal, of eighteenth-century France and of nineteenth-century Britain, each time the bankruptcy taking place in the century after greatness. Imperialism caused two ‘World’ (European) Wars. Now in the twenty-first century, Imperialism has bankrupted the USA. We believe that the Russian Federation has learned from the bankruptcy of the equally Imperialist USSR. The administration of the Russian Orthodox Church must learn that too.

We have entered the new Age of Sovereignty. Sovereignty is what multipolarity means, where one nation is balanced out by the others and no-one can become too powerful. All defend their own and each other’s interests, as the UN should have done. Away with the old Imperialism of unipolarity, World Dictatorship, and the bipolar Imperialisms of two rival blocs, everyone else crushed between them. We have entered the world of Sovereign Nations. Imperialism caused two World Wars and has nearly caused a Third. Enough is enough.

The Fall of the Moscow Patriarchate and the Rise of the Russian Orthodox Church

‘God so loved the world that He did not send a Committee’.

Foreword: The Hundred Years War Is Ending

The Hundred Years War (1914-2024) is at last ending, not in Sarajevo where the first part began in 1914, not in Warsaw, where the second part began in 1939, but in Kiev, where the third part began in 2014. The second and third parts were made inevitable by the key, first part, caused by rival Imperialisms. All three parts have pulled into Europe the USA, which had profited from them until the last part. But the seeds of US success contained the seeds of its own destruction. In order to maintain its supremacy, the US yoked itself to a delusional madman in Kiev, who has the most developed sense of entitlement of any of his people. When he does not get the means of destruction that he wants, and that is always more and more lethal, he throws a tantrum, like any spoilt actor or diva who wants adulation.

As with any spoilt child, all you have to do is call his bluff, that is, ignore him and walk away. However, he is still by far the most dangerous dictator of the many recruited and employed by the US, in any banana republic whether in Latin America, Western Europe, the Middle East or the Far East, with the possible exception of the equally genocidal maniac, Netanyahu. For Kiev wants nuclear weapons. It was inevitable. All that the US – and hysterical Western Europe – have to do is to pull the carpet from under the Kiev dictator’s feet. However, war victory in the Ukraine, or even the potential peace victory, do nothing to solve the spiritual and structural crisis in the Russian Church, whose jurisdiction used to extend to all the territories of the former USSR and beyond them to the Western world.

The Fall of the Moscow Patriarchate

The Russian Orthodox Church administration in Moscow, founded, named and centralised in Soviet times as ‘the Moscow Patriarchate’, is in great difficulty. It has once again tried to impose impossible political demands on the consciences of clergy and faithful everywhere, just as it did in the late 1920s, of which the ‘Sergianist’ mentality is currently much admired within the Patriarchate. These political demands stretch to outside the Russian Federation and Belarus – though even inside these countries it has great difficulties. There it has even ‘defrocked’ clergy for having political views on the tragic conflict in the Ukraine which are different from those of the Patriarchal authorities.

Wanting to pray not for ‘victory’, but for peace, that is, for the Victory of Christ, persecuted independent clergy have often had to flee abroad. Moscow also finds its churches boycotted by many faithful all over Russia. Surely an Orthodox is defined by his agreement with the Creed, the Symbol of Faith, not by his political views? Why this dogmatisation of political opinions and the canons, as also happened during the Soviet period? Surely the dogmatisation of non-dogmatic political views is, by definition, uncanonical? Outside those two Russian territories, where Patriarchal authority is backed up by the State, the situation of the Moscow Patriarchate is not just difficult, but catastrophic.

Inside the Former USSR

Inside the former USSR, the worst situation is in the Ukraine. Here over 12,000 churches and their clergy no longer commemorate the Russian Patriarch, since he is seen as an enemy leader. This is a pastoral disaster. How does a pastor come to be seen as the enemy of his people? He may reply that their perspective is wrong, but the fact is that that is how they perceive him. And it is too late to do anything about it. In Latvia, Russian Orthodox also no longer commemorate him, as the four besieged bishops there have had to declare independence from Moscow, despite their divided flock, who are often boycotting the Church. The situation is chaotic.

Meanwhile, in Lithuania and Estonia, the Russian Church is faced by schisms due to its disputed authority. Indeed, the Patriarch is not even allowed entry into Lithuania (nor into the UK and Canada). In Central Asia, there is dissidence and some are leaving for abroad, others declare that they are retiring. In Moldova, the only country in the former Soviet Union (apart from Georgia) where there is a canonical alternative to the Moscow jurisdiction, over a hundred more clergy have this year alone left with their parishes for the Orthodox Patriarchate of Romania, tired of Russian nationalism, racism and their mistreatment as third-class citizens.

Outside the Former USSR

Outside the territories of the former USSR, the Moscow Patriarchate finds itself in schism with the imperialistic Greek Orthodox world as a result of mutual disputes regarding ‘canonical territory’. This is not because either is intent on doing missionary work among Non-Orthodox, but rather each is intent on trying to steal each other’s flocks. In North America, Metropolitan Nicholas, the leading bishop of the Anabaptist ROCOR sect, an out-of-control American Protestant-style and anti-Russian (!) schismatic group under the Moscow Patriarchate, finds that people walk out on him when he prays for the Russian Patriarch and people refuse to donate.

In Western Europe many Russian Orthodox priests refuse to commemorate the Russian Patriarch or have left him. As for the Ukrainians, they have set up 100 parishes, separate from Moscow in Western Europe. And Moldovans are doing the same. In Australia and especially in Latin America, many will have nothing to do with the Moscow Patriarchate. In general, outside the former USSR, the parishes of the Moscow Patriarchate resemble ever smaller, ever more inward-looking, ever more nationalistic groups, often numbering only a dozen or two. As for native Orthodox people, everywhere they are tired of being treated as third-class citizens by Moscow and are leaving.

Babylon Versus Jerusalem

Let us be frank. The mentality that now pervades the apparently often ‘effeminate’ upper reaches of the Moscow Patriarchate is careerist, not saintly, political, not pastoral, bureaucratic, not spiritual, nationalistic, not multinational, Statist, not canonical. For that reason, they are losing their authority and people are, as the phrase goes, voting with their feet and leaving them. However, this fall of the ‘cardinals’ (be they overt or covert) of the Moscow Patriarchate and its associated Soviet-period administrative groups, like ROCOR, is leading to the rise of the Russian Orthodox Church, for the fall of Babylon always leads to the rise of Jerusalem, paradoxically the dead hand of the State brings opposition and so life.

The Rise of the Russian Orthodox Church

The fall of top-heavy, militaristic, Soviet-period superstructures like the Moscow Patriarchate or ROCOR is because the grassroots faithful want to return to the authentic Church. The great mainstream tradition of the monastics, pastors and people of the Russian Church is very much alive. Who were Sts Antony and Theodosius of the Kiev Caves? They were real Churchmen, not careerist administrators with their ‘protocols’, they were enlighteners of the peoples of Rus, who brought forth a host of saints, whose holy relics lie in the Kiev Caves today and give out myrrh, calling to God.

Who was the great Russian Orthodox St Sergius of Radonezh? Why is he called the Builder of Russia? He was the heir to that multinational network of monks and saints who spread again the prayer of the heart from St Gregory Palamas and Mt Athos through the Balkans north to the Russian Lands. He and his disciples, like St Nil of Sora, set up dozens and dozens of monasteries to spread the Word of God into still pagan central Russia and this movement spread ultimately to Siberia, the Pacific Coast and even beyond, through St Herman of Alaska and his companions, who spread the Light of Christ to California.

More Recent Saints

Who was St Job of Pochaev? He was the monastic founder who turned the Western Ukraine into an advanced post of Orthodoxy, a bastion against those whose filioquism was a political instrument for the Polish oppression of Orthodox in order to gain more power and wealth. Who was St Paisy (Velichkovsky)? He was the heir to the monastic renewal, forced by persecuting German Tsarinas to take refuge from what is now the Ukraine in what is now Romania, and from there to re-enlighten the Russian Lands, liberating them from the schismatic curses caused by the purely external observances of ritualism and State nationalism.

Who was St Seraphim of Sarov? He was the old, bent-over monk digging in his vegetable-patch in Sarov, whom the rich and ignoble noble regarded as a dirty peasant, because he looked at the saint’s rags and not his praying heart of gold, and who was canonised at the insistence of the pious Tsar against the opinion of bishop-bureaucrats. Who was St John of Kronstadt? He was the righteous and fragrant pastor who prophesied all, exactly as it happened, because the idle rich parasites, who persecuted him and were jealous of him, refused to repent for their persecution of the real Church and the Tsar and enraged the oppressed who then revolted.

The Saints After 1917

Who were the New Martyrs and Confessors, from Tsar Nicholas to St Tikhon, Apostle of America, Bishop of San Francisco and American citizen, who had the services translated into English, and then became the Patriarch of Moscow, from the Martyrs of Solovki to the 20,000 Martyrs of Butovo, from the Martyrs of Kazakhstan to the Martyrs of Kolyma, from St Matrona of Moscow to St Seraphim of Vyritsa, from St Laurence of Chernigov to St Luke of Crimea? Who was the universal missionary St John of Shanghai and Western Europe, persecuted and suspended by ROCOR bishops for being a good pastor and not a right-wing ideologist, and the wise fool Mother Alypia of Kiev, who saw through sinners to their hearts?

These all were those who thought nothing of nationality and politics, but knew that if they sought the Kingdom of Heaven first, then all would be added unto them, and for this reason they became saints. And, despite the persecution of bishop-bureaucrats, effeminates in love with luxury, they were and are followed by a countless host of saints, fools-for-Christ, prophets, faithful women and children, priests and nuns, who are victorious, as they were and are not the practitioners of politicians, but, as practitioners of Christ, the victims of politicians. We know that we are on their side and are undefeatable, for we follow Christ, Who overthrew the devil and defeated our enemy, Death, restoring all to Life.

Jerusalem Conquers Babylon

Faithfulness to the thousands of years of the Saints of the Universal Church, from the Patriarchs and Prophets of the Old Bible, from the Mother of God to St John the Forerunner, from the Apostles to the Martyrs, from St Spyridon to St Nicholas, from St Basil to St John Chrysostom, from St Maximus the Confessor to St Paraskeva, from St Xenia to St Nectarius of Aegina, and faithfulness to the thousand years of Saints of the Russian Lands, are why the Russian Orthodox Church triumphs against the political schisms of mere Patriarchal ‘careerist administrators’ and ‘effective managers’. The Saints all show not the Primacy of ecclesiastical bureaucrats, but the Primacy of the Holy Spirit, the Victory of Christ. 

Afterword: God Gives Opportunities

The territory of the Russian Federation forms by far the largest country in the world. It is the territory of the USA and the Continent of Australia combined. Its natural resources are extraordinary. In a word, it has everything. It could easily support a population five or perhaps ten times greater than it has now. And yet this is the country that suicidally threw so much away in 1917, before which year the Russian Empire had undergone phenomenal growth for a generation, which was to continue. In 1914 its projected population by the year 2000 was some 600 million. That of the Russian Federation today is 145 million.

I remember visiting the USSR in 1973 and 1976 and saying that I would not return until the Church was free. I remember visiting the Russian Federation many times between 2007 and 2018 and always thinking the situation is on a knife-edge. Either it will go one way, towards Orthodoxy, or else to the other, to militaristic nationalism and purely outward and bureaucratic ritualism. It went this other way. However, there is still the chance to step back from suicide, to the catholicity of the Church, towards good relations with the other Local Churches, so rejoining the mainstream of Love and Truth. May it be so!

 

From Kabul to Kiev and the Future of the Russian Orthodox Church

After his brutal rebuff in Washington (together with Starmer), ex-President Zelensky is now desperately touring leaders of Western Europe, even seeing the Pope, in order to try and get support for his failing regime. The fact is that, regardless of whether Harris or Trump wins in the US elections in a few weeks’ time, the US has abandoned Zelensky’s Ukraine, turning its back on it and disengaging from it. The US media will just stop talking about the Western rout in the Ukraine, as they did in Afghanistan. Kabul or Kiev, it is the same thing. You have lost, sweep it under the carpet, it never happened. The US has to face Israel’s military and economic collapse and its great commercial rival, China. It has no more time for the loser in Kiev. Americans never like losers, so it is walking away from them.

The US has dumped Kiev on Europe and will, as usual, leave Europe, whose tail the US has been wagging for years, hanging out to dry. The US refused to allow Kiev to make deep strikes on Russia, it will not allow Kiev to join NATO, indeed it cancelled the Kiev-NATO Rammstein meeting of 12 October and the majority of the EU do not want Kiev to join it. (Ironically, the only country which enthusiastically supports Kiev’s EU membership is the UK, which itself left the EU!) Yes, the EU may string Kiev along, which will then string naïve Ukrainians along, but Europe has no more arms or munitions to give Kiev, and many countries, like Germany, Croatia, Italy and Slovakia, have publicly said so. Just as the British ran back to their island at Dunkirk in 1940, so the US is running back to the Big Island in 2024.

As for Zelensky, he will also try to run away to the same place. The Russian Army has all but destroyed the suicidal Ukrainian forces which crossed the border into the Kursk province of Russia. 22,000 Ukrainian troops are already dead or wounded. From Kursk Russian forces could cross into Sumy province and take Kiev. For the 7 January? Russia will get on with the reformatting, absorbing and rebuilding of the Ukraine as a New Ukraine under a new government in Kiev, effectively forming a southern Belarus. Russia will take back the Russian south and east, including Odessa and Kharkov. A small slice of the south-west corner may return to Hungary, with autonomy granted at last to Carpatho-Rus (what Kiev condescendingly called ‘Zakarpattia’), and perhaps small slices in the south will return to Romania.

By agreement with Moldova the Russian Federation could take back Transdnistria and probably, also by agreement, Gagauzia. These moves would be extremely popular, but leaving Romania to take back most of Moldova. As for the tiny Baltics, they will die out, until they reach friendship agreements with Russia, once their US elites have been removed. This Baltic situation will be repeated throughout Western Europe, as US elites in the EU and the UK are removed by popular vote – as indeed is already happening. The defeat of the Neo-Nazi regime in Kiev will also bring freedom for the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church and shame on the Patriarchate of Constantinople, which the US bribed to set up a fake Church for ‘the national Ukrainian religion’, to replace the Church of God.

At this, questions will arise for the Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church, centred in Moscow. In nearly three years of the conflict in the Ukraine, the Patriarchate has lost control (to the CIA) of its New-York based Church Outside Russia (ROCOR), whose sociopaths have been rebaptising other Orthodox. It has also lost control of the Church in the Ukraine, in Moldova and in the Baltics. In the Western world the Moscow Patriarchate has been discredited, with the Patriarch of Moscow even being banned from Canada, the UK and Lithuania and its parishes there contracting and losing virtually all Non-Russians. The racist rejection by Muscovites of Moldovans, Ukrainians and local people, many of whom had been devoted to the Russian Orthodox Church for fifty years and more, has been scandalous.

It is now difficult to see what the Church authorities in Moscow can do to recover the situation. Moscow is in schism with the Greek Churches. It has invested in Africa, officially a Greek territory. Other Local Churches distrust it. Tens of millions have been disaffected from Moscow, after it betrayed them, in one way or another, including now banned priests inside Russia, who have been forced to leave the country in order to continue. Regardless of the outcome in the Ukraine, that is, the inevitable Russian military and political victory, you cannot force people to be what they are not. You cannot force people to go to church. It may even be that the Russian government will have to intervene in Moscow Church matters in order to bring it round to abandoning its disastrous and suicidal policy of centralisation.

May God’s Will be done.

 

 

 

Twelve Revelations from the Conflict in the Ukraine

 

The US-orchestrated conflict in the Ukraine began in February 2014 after the US tried to expand there in order to set up bases along the Russian border. After continual provocations by the US-installed Kiev puppet regime, its murder of 14,000 Russian-speaking Ukrainian civilians and its NATO-backed persecution of the Orthodox Church, the conflict intensified in February 2022. Since then, there have been twelve revelations in all: about the Kiev regime, the Free Ukraine which is now taking shape, the Russian Federation and the Western elite, which has been standing behind Kiev, using it as its proxy to try and destroy the Russian Federation and exploit its resources. The four groups of three revelations for each are:

The Kiev Regime

 

  1. It has become clear that the Kiev regime wants to blackmail the US, that is, all of NATO, into directly involvement on the ground in the Ukraine, as this is the only hope it has of possibly defeating the Russian Federation. Alone it can do nothing, it does not have the willing or trained manpower, let alone the necessary arms and munitions – which highly deindustrialised NATO countries cannot provide Kiev with anyway. (Similarly, through its constant provocations, Israel wants the US to get directly involved on the ground in its war against Iran in the Lebanon and its genocide in Gaza. Alone it too can do nothing). If the US does get involved directly in either case (most NATO countries will categorically refuse to do so), World War III could begin. At least for Kiev, it appears that the end is nigh, after it was seemingly abandoned by the Pentagon in Washington. In Israel nothing is yet clear.

 

  1. The US policy in the face of yet another lost war is not the same as the Kiev regime policy. The US policy is to hold on in the Ukraine only until the US elections in fewer than 40 days’ time or, at most, until the inauguration of the new President in fewer than 100 days’ time. After that, the whole policy can be dropped, as its abject failure can then be blamed on Biden, who by then will no longer be in power, not even officially, if, that is, he is still alive.

 

  1. Under the atheist Jewish Presidents Poroshenko and Zelensky, the Kiev regime set up a fake Church, which it tried to substitute for the real one. Although the CIA bribed part of the Greek Church to give this wild scheme some credibility, it has no serious believers in it and is headed by nationalist gangsters with defrocked corrupt and homosexual ex-clergy. How could it be taken seriously, when it was formed by violent thugs and hooligans? These beat up real Orthodox clergy and people in order to steal 1,500 emptied church buildings from the real Church under Metropolitan Onufry, whom the whole free Orthodox world backs. Typically, one of the first acts of the fake Church was to go over to the Protestant calendar, as favoured by its creators, the CIA!

 

The Free Ukraine

 

  1. The virulently anti-Russian, BBC-sponsored Mediazona group reckons ‘Russian’ casualties in the conflict at between 70,000 – 120,000 killed and wounded (against over 800,000 for the Ukrainian military). However, Medizona fails to explain that most ‘Russian’ casualties are Ukrainians from the east of the Ukraine, millions of whom have fled to Russia over the last ten years, seeking freedom and safety from genocide. These free Ukrainians form the backbone of the ‘Russian’ infantry who, as they see it, are today liberating the Ukraine from the Kiev regime and Neo-Nazi groups. The conflict in the Ukraine is a civil war and everybody there knows it.

 

  1. The Ukraine is also being freed by an anti-Nazi Ukrainian resistance network. These are local Ukrainians outraged by the genocide carried out by the CIA-imposed Kiev regime and its dreaded SBU secret police. Their network provides intelligence to the Russian-led forces, so that they can destroy NATO equipment and munitions, eliminate foreign mercenaries and carry out sabotage on Kiev regime infrastructure, especially electricity generation and the railways.

 

  1. There will be no ceasefire, ‘stalemate’, ‘frozen conflict’ or ‘Korean solution’ in the Ukraine. Russia is advancing, so it will not open any peace talks, even if Kiev wanted them, which it cannot, as the Western elite long ago forced Kiev to make peace talks with Russia illegal. There will only be capitulation, unconditional surrender, on Russia’s terms. This means Russia retaining at the very least the five Russian provinces which it has more or less occupied or liberated already, and possibly the next four historically (until 1922) Russian provinces. The rest will be demilitarised, de-NATOised and neutralised. There will be self-determination for the Non-NATO rest, the Free Ukraine, with freedom for the Church and human rights for all its citizens of all nationalities guaranteed.

 

The Russian Federation

 

  1. Thanks in part to the fabulously backfiring Western sanctions, the economy of the Russian Federation is now the fourth largest in the world, even according to the very low PPP measurement, after only China, the USA and India. However, it is clear that the economy of the Russian Federation, which has a population only one tenth of India’s, is now catching up with the economies of both India and the USA. The size of the latter’s economy is much exaggerated, as it is measured by the non-productive criteria of finance, insurance, real estate and crime, and not by manufacturing. And yet in 2022 the Western media told everyone that the Russian economy was no bigger than Spain’s! In any case, the Russian economy has overtaken both Japan’s and Germany’s, which are in freefall, leaving France’s and Britain’s in ninth and tenth places in the world and Spain’s somewhere further down the list. The Russian economy is now the largest in Western Eurasia and there will come a time when it will become the third largest in the world.

 

  1. The development of the Russian-founded BRICS has been greatly accelerated by the illegal anti-Russian sanctions, such as the refusal to allow Russia to use payments by SWIFT, imposed by US and European aggressiveness and narcissistic jealousy. Western aggression has thrown the Russian Federation, China, Iran and others in the Global Majority together in the warmest of embraces. Seeing these sanctions, the rest of the world is now turning its back on US and Western European bullies, whom it too can no longer trust. This is the boomerang effect of sanctions, which has led to the accelerating decline of the one billion of the West and the accelerating rise of the seven billion of the Rest. Western sanctions have boosted BRICS perhaps by up to ten years in just two years. The collapse of the dollar is no longer a myth, but a dangerously close real possibility, as too is the possibility of BRICS becoming the new UN.

 

  1. After many generations of both State-imposed and now self-imposed imperialisation, ritualisation, bureaucratisation, militarisation and secularisation, the administrative bureaucracy of the Russian Orthodox Church has lost its spiritual independence and has compromised itself. To its shame, it is refusing to support persecuted confessors for Orthodoxy and so is no longer taken seriously. However, freedom is in the air and more new Local Orthodox Churches will yet be formed out of the Russian Orthodox Church, which has unworthily clung on to centralised, imperialist, Soviet-style power for far too long. And this is despite the Russian State’s abandonment of centralised, imperialist, Soviet-style power over thirty years ago. Indeed, the Russian Church administration may need the help of the Russian State to get the Russian Church to catch up, returning it to its true heritage, of St Sergius, St Seraphim, St Matrona, St John of Shanghai and all the other New Martyrs and Confessors, who confess the freedom of the Holy Spirit.

 

The Western Elite

 

  1. Over the last 30 years the Western European ruling class has lost its spiritual independence and, compromising itself, has been vassalised. Whereas thirty years ago, indeed even twenty years ago, the Western European governing class showed independence in thought and action, today it has surrendered itself to the Globalist US elite, to which it essentially belongs. However, although their elite is now US-run, European Sovereigntist patriotic peoples, regardless of left or right politics, are today beginning to overthrowing in elections these Globalist Brussels-Washington leaders. Many of these leaders who cling on to power despite the election results are also perverts. The peoples are asserting their independence from them. This is clear in the very weak and unpopular government in Germany, in France, which has had no government for three months and where rule is through a president-dictator who refuses to accept the results of elections, and in the UK, which is now on its hated fifth Prime Minister in five years and may soon be on its sixth. Hungary, Slovakia and now Austria have already overthrown their elites and in Italy, the UK and the Netherlands, the people are trying. Outside Europe, Japan is following the same pattern.

 

  1. The media of the Western world, often also led by perverts, have given up freedom and free speech in favour of censorship. This is because its media, like its elite, are US-controlled, called under ‘editorial control’. Their new word for lies or propaganda is ‘narratives’. Narratives come from living in a virtual world, from delusions and wishful thinking, PR, psyops and spin.

 

  1. The source of these delusional narratives is the narcissism of the Western elite. Narcissism always blinds to reality, as narcissists prefer to live in delusions. We can see this in US Foreign Policy, just as we can see it in US bishops. When narcissists do not get their way, as they have no empathy anyway and despise those who do, they lose their temper and often turn to drink and try to destroy families, as we have also seen, screaming, ‘Give me the keys to the church’, down the telephone.

How ROCOR Double-Crossed the Moscow Patriarchate

Some years ago a Russian Metropolitan and personal friend told me that Patriarch Kyrill had always considered that the interest of the 2007 reconciliation between the Moscow Patriarchate (MP) and the New York-based Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) was political, rather than spiritual. In order to assert that the MP is the Mother Church, émigré churches had to be reconciled, proving that the MP was no longer a Soviet organisation, thus reconciling the divide between ‘Red and White’. This was the historic, political importance of the event for the MP, which even then was a hundred times larger than ROCOR.

For us, then in the old European ROCOR, the reconciliation was also vital, not for political, but for spiritual reasons. In order to ensure that the sectarian tendencies which had been developing in American ROCOR since the 1960s and had already resulted in the schism in 1986 would not take over, ROCOR would be brought back, even in the USA, and anchored in the Russian Orthodox mainstream. If the reconciliation had not occurred, we, like many others, would at once have left for the MP, deserting ROCOR as a sect behind us. Indeed, it was the pressure from us that helped the bishops to make the right decision in 2007 and become part of the MP.

I can still remember how after the historic concelebration and reconciliation between Patriarch Alexis and Metropolitan Laurus in the Church of Christ the Saviour in Moscow in May 2007, a very senior and well-known mitred Russian archpriest from ROCOR said to me: ‘We’ve done it!’ And that is how we all felt – relief and joy. The sectarians had lost. Moscow had given victory to the Orthodox majority in ROCOR and now we could look forward to building a united Diaspora together with Russian and other Orthodox, the sectarian elements leaving for various tiny old calendarist groups, each even stranger than the other. Sadly, this was not to be.

Within ten years of that triumph, the sectarians started coming to the fore into ROCOR again, effectively double-crossing Moscow. A turning-point came in 2017 when ROCOR bishops refused the Patriarch’s request to establish three regional Metropolias within ROCOR. This would have led to metropolitanisation or decentralisation, mirroring the same processes inside the Russian Federation, as implemented by Patriarch Kyrill. After this came the americanisation of European ROCOR, persecuting and spiritually destroying, a situation reflected also in Australian ROCOR. In other words, ROCOR had fallen into centralisation and uncanonical extremism.

This refusal meant the outright rejection of our helping towards the creation of new regional Local Churches, contributing ROCOR’s legacy to them. However, the situation grew even worse. At the very end of 2020 a young and untutored American ROCOR bishop created a schism with another part of the MP on account of the canonical reception of Non-Orthodox, rejecting the age-old Russian Orthodox and European ROCOR conciliar way. In so doing he lost half his diocese, but. amazingly, received the backing of his fellow-bishops amid silence from the MP. The slippery slope was there and soon ROCOR bishops began rebaptising Orthodox.

The MP was quiet, obsessed by the politics of the 2007 ROCOR reconciliation and not by the dogmatics of baptism and pastoral practice. Then all its attention was distracted by the conflict in the Ukraine, with the resulting chaos in all its dioceses outside the Russian Federation and Belarus, not least in the Ukraine, the Baltics, Moldova and Western Europe. Essentially, this heresy of the new ROCOR is Neo-Donatist Anabaptism (the Donatists were the first rebaptisers), that is to say, repeating baptism, contrary to the Creed of the Church, ‘I believe in one baptism…’.  We can see how the new ROCOR is founded on American Protestant sectarianism.

As one American friend said to me: ‘The new ROCOR are really Orthodox Amish’. For the Amish like other sects are of course issued from Donatist Anabaptism. After 50 years inside the Russian Church and despite constantly being so often treated as third-class citizens, we are all very sad to see what ROCOR has become and how it has fallen away from the Orthodox Church. What saddens us the most is that though the old European ROCOR had nothing in common with the new ROCOR, it has now been taken over by it. The legacy of St John of Shanghai and Western Europe is being persecuted again, just as he was persecuted by US ROCOR in 1963.

The fragments of the old European ROCOR are being americanised, all who resist after lifetimes of service are expelled. And all this is encouraged in New York! Will Moscow wake up to what it has brought into the world? It thought it had gained canonical Russian Orthodox representatives in the Western world, but in fact it has been double-crossed and is represented by a sect of extremists and bullying pharisees and hypocrites, not by the Church. The new ROCOR ideology is playing no role in witness to the authentic Orthodox Faith, rather it is discouraging and delaying it.  Here is the tragedy that distracted Moscow will one day have to address.

 

 

 

The End-Game for the Ukrainian State and Church?

https://savetheuoc.com/press-release-ukraines-passage-of-8371-is-a-grotesque-violation-of-religious-freedom/

Militarily, the Ukraine is collapsing. In the east Russian forces are advancing some miles almost every day, as former Kiev strongholds, undermanned and underequipped, fall. In the north, the NATO-planned operation to ‘invade’ Russia through the southern tip of the province of Kursk with up to 15,000 elite troops (2,000 of whom are Polish, American, British and French, but wearing Ukrainian uniforms) is turning into a bloodbath. Over 4,000 of those troops are already dead or seriously wounded. Many others have surrendered. That was a last act of desperation, a last chance to do something big. It too has failed, as the NATO-led Ukrainians are outmatched and outgunned in every was.

Two and a half years ago, all that Russia wanted was a neutral Ukraine and human rights for its Russian inhabitants. The USA forbade that. And slowly the USA escalated this war, arming and training Kiev troops. Even only a few weeks ago, Russia was still prepared to open peace negotiations with Kiev. Other BRICS countries were encouraging this. That is over. Now NATO, not the Ukraine, has invaded Russia. The Kursk Operation was NATO-planned, NATO-trained, NATO-equipped and NATO-financed. Here there are echoes of Napoleon’s multinational Western invasion of Russia in 1812 and Hitler’s equally multinational invasion of Russia in 1941. When will the West stop invading Russia? After each previous invasion from Western Europe, Western Europe was entirely reshaped. Here is the future for it. As for the Ukraine, it no longer has any future as such.

Meanwhile, there is also chaos in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Seeing these words, some will say: ‘No news here, it always is in chaos’. The confusion comes from the existence of so many pseudo-Orthodox Churches – here, clearly, I am not referring to the many US-founded Baptist/Pentecostalist sects in the country, which have no pretence of being Orthodox. Apart from the very few actual Roman Catholics, who are very traditional and more or less condemn the Second Vatican Council as heretical (and who have in the past contacted me), there are the not very many ‘Greek Catholics’. Neither Greek, nor Catholic (!), they are better known as Uniats, as they vaguely pretend to be Orthodox, but think like very old-fashioned, very right-wing and very anti-semitic Polish Catholics.

Then come those who call themselves ‘Ukrainian Orthodox’. There is the tiny group around the long since defrocked ‘Metropolitan’ (or is it Patriarch?) Filaret of Kiev. Nobody, not even Constantinople or his own children (both with Metr Onufry), takes this money-greedy (ex-?) Communist criminal seriously. Then comes the ‘OCU’, (‘the Orthodox Church in the Ukraine’), a group of clerically-dressed thugs and defrocked clergy who have stolen many churches from the actual Ukrainian Orthodox Church and whose favourite instruments are not liturgical, but angle-grinders and bolt-cutters. Their ideology appears to be Neo-Nazi, though they do convince a few patriotic but unchurched Ukrainians that they are actually Orthodox. After all, they were founded by the Patriarchate of Constantinople under American orders and greased with millions of US dollars, now nearly six years ago. Now using the Catholic calendar for their services, no serious Orthodox takes them seriously.

There is in reality only one real, internationally recognised and canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church. 95% + of Ukrainian Orthodox belong to it, despite vicious persecution by the Neo-Nazi Ukrainian State. Its ruling hierarch is Metropolitan Onufry of Kiev and All the Ukraine. It is this Church which has today been banned by the Rada, or Parliament, in Kiev (269 votes for, 29 votes against). So much for American-sponsored freedom and democracy in the Ukraine. America is the new atheist Soviet Union, it seems. However, the law must be signed by the President, after which it can only be enacted after thirty days. Now things are moving quickly to stop this.

Constantinople warned the Ukrainians not to pass this law. Constantinople now knows that the OCU is fake and that the only real Church is the one Kiev wants to ban. Kiev has just disobeyed. Of course, Constantinople in itself has no power. But behind it stands the USA. The local Greek Archbishop there, Elpidiforos, who four years ago had his photograph taken with Biden, whom then he praised and told everyone to vote for, is now seen with Trump. Trump is much less keen on the Ukraine. His Catholic Vice-Presidential running-mate, Senator Vance, is a supporter of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Everybody knows that probably the next US President, if still unassassinated, will be Trump, and that he is fed up with giving money to subsidise everything in the Ukraine, which without US dollars would have gone bankrupt years ago.

Moreover, everybody knows that Patriarch Bartholomew is now aged 84. Archbishop Elpidiforos is very keen to succeed him. As also is Metropolitan Emmanuel (Adamakis). The former has taken against the Ukrainian OCU, the latter very much did the dirty work to found it. Now a delegation from there is going to Kiev, as they wanted to before. (Let us hope that the dreaded SBU Kiev Secret Police, will not assassinate them). Constantinople is very keen for it not to be seen as the instigator of a law to ban the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Given the failure of its OCU fantasy, it may at last be ready to repeal its statute (‘tomos’ in Greek) which founded the OCU and re-establish relations with Metropolitan Onufry’s canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church and the rest of the Orthodox world, from which it has isolated itself.

Having implemented its OCU gaffe six years ago, this would be a convenient let-out (in American English ‘off-ramp’) for Constantinople. If Constantinople states that it was lied to by the OCU, it can unrecognise it. If it were sensible it could even offer Metr Onufry autocephaly for his Church. That would put the Moscow Church, of which the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is de jure, but not de facto, a part, and to which for over thirty years it refused to grant autocephaly, in a tight corner. Of course, it may will not do this. Instead, some say that Constantinople wants to open up yet a new ecclesiastical structure in the Ukraine, an Exarchate, under the notorious and hated Archbishop Job (Getcha). That would be a great pity, because it now has an opportunity to improve relations with Moscow and embarrass it for Moscow’s uncanonical incursion into Greek-claimed Africa.

Our former friend, the former press secretary of the ever-memorable Patriarch Alexis II and journalist, Sergei Chapnin, who once came to our house, is heading for Constantinople now. We may hear more in the coming days. As the old Russian saying goes: ‘The circus left town, but the clowns stayed behind’.