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.

 

 

 

Our Future after the Defeat of Millennial Nazism in the Ukraine

 Introduction

The geographical fault-line between what is Western Secularist (former Catholic-Protestant) and Orthodox Christian Civilisations runs through the Austro-Polish Hapsburg far west of the Ukraine. This is precisely the origin of the present war there, for the same reason as the war in ex-Yugoslavia took place a generation ago because of the existence there of that same civilisational fault-line, only to the south-west of the Ukraine. The Secularist desire has been to conquer the Ukraine (and then ex-Yugoslavia) in order to exploit its natural resources and riches. One Imperialistic Civilisation, the Western Secularist, is trying to take over the other, the Christian. However, we are resisting and the Christian will be victorious, for: ‘We are based on sovereignty, freedom, creation, and justice. Our values ​​are humanity, mercy and compassion’. What is the situation in the Ukraine now, after what will soon be 1,000 days of tragic conflict?

In the Ukraine Now

Last Sunday I asked one of my parishioners where her husband, who is a builder, was. She explained that, together with hundreds of other Russian-speaking builders who live all over Western Europe, he is in the Ukraine, six weeks on, six weeks off. There, just outside Kiev, he is helping to build a palace for the well-known Rinat Akhmetov, the richest oligarch in the Ukraine. She showed me a photograph of the palace under construction. It is indeed a huge Disney-like, oriental palace, of the sort that has not been built in this country for 200 years. She told me that it is being built with the finest materials, marble and gold, from all over the world. Here is the reality of the bankrupted Ukraine today, where tens of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers are dying every month on behalf of such oligarchs, who have been fattened on billions of our dollars, euros and pounds, though our own infrastructure is collapsing.

Two and a half years ago Western leaders used to repeat the same hypnotising mantra: ‘We will support the Ukraine for as long as it takes.’ What did that mean? As long as what takes? For as long as it takes the Democrats to win (or lose?) the US elections in November 2024? Now they declare: ‘We will support the Ukraine for as long as we can’. But what does that mean? ‘For as long as we want?’. For today virtually everyone, even in the pro-Kiev Western media, has dropped the propaganda line and knows that the West has lost its proxy war in the Ukraine against Russia, wasting a million young lives and $250 billion. That is why few in the West now speak of it. That conflict used brainwashed Nazi or press-ganged Ukrainians to die on behalf of the USA, in order to attack and destroy Russia, without a single American dying. ‘The best investment ever’, according to Graham, a particularly Fascistic US Congressman.

The fact is that the Russian Federation has had to demilitarise and denazify not just the Ukraine, as it had originally and clearly announced as its aims on 24 February 2022 together with the third aim of the liberation of the Donbass, but also NATO. (By the way, NATO was established thanks to Nazi Germans like Reinhard Gehlen after 1945). The demilitarisation and denazification of NATO was never the ambition of the Russians; it was the fault of NATO, which gave all its political, financial and material support to prop up Kiev instead of supporting peace talks. Otherwise, the Ukraine would long ago have capitulated to Russia. The task of demilitarising NATO is why the conflict in the Ukraine has taken so long. The task of denazifying the Ukraine, which many thought impossible, has happened as a result of the deaths, or rather suicides, of whole Nazi regiments of the Kiev Army and of the emigration of others.

There will soon be no Nazis left in the Ukraine, or whatever will replace the Ukraine after the defeat of the Kiev regime and the rout of US/NATO. This was the inevitable result of the Western refusal to negotiate with the Russian Federation for eight years. Now even more NATO countries like Croatia and Slovenia have joined Hungary, Slovakia, Austria and Turkey in rejecting the US/NATO war in the Ukraine (let alone in allowing the fantasy of letting the Ukraine join NATO). Italy, Germany and even disillusioned Poland fundamentally agree with them, and France, changeable as ever, has spoken of possible talks. Even the Pentagon in Washington now refuses to give any more support to Kiev, as US military stockpiles are so severely depleted. There remain only the puny military forces of the Russophobic UK, and the seven Nordic and minute and dying Baltic States which still support Kiev, at least in rhetoric.

Zelensky cannot talk, since the West forced Kiev to pass a law to forbid them in April 2022. For the Ukrainian surrender to take place so that there can be peace, Zelensky the US actor-stooge must be removed together with the whole Neo-Nazi cast of the show in Kiev. Perhaps they will murder one another in a violent coup in Kiev, or else they will run away to join the Ukrainian mafia in the USA. In any case, they will remove themselves. The time for peace talks and ceasefires is long over. Some suggest that Kiev can survive under NATO, if it cedes some land to Russia. But Russia, by far the biggest country in the world, does not want any land, it wants security. They could have taken place at any point between early 2014 and early 2022. They did not, because Kiev and, above all, its Western sponsors refused. The Ukraine, as it was, has no future. It will have to capitulate on Russian terms. The West forbade it to have a future.

BRICS

Ever since the collapse of the USSR in 1991, and even before that, under worldwide Western Imperialism, the Planet has faced the possibility, one day, of a One World Dictatorship. Since 1991 this potential has become closer. The identity of a possible World Dictator seems to have been a future President of the USA, governing the world through ambassadors and vassals. After the US occupation of the Ukraine in 2014 and then the challenge to its hegemony by the Russian Federation, the possibility of such a One World Dictatorship has rapidly receded. This is because of the BRICS organisation, which recognises several centres of power. Founded 15 years ago on 16 June 2009 in Ekaterinburg, the city of the martyrdom of the last Russian Tsar, BRICS, now with nine members, already has a larger economy than the G7. The Non-Western world is now interested in BRICS, which is to meet in Kazan in a few days’ time.

Indeed, over 150 countries now either want to join BRICS or else have expressed a desire to join it. It is clear that the multicontinental BRICS Alliance, initially Brazil, Russia, India, China and then South Africa, now with Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the UAE, is going to replace the UN. The latter is in the US and is effectively controlled by three Western countries of the UN Security Council, the US, the UK and France. They can ignore and block any of its resolutions, like those regarding the illegal sanctions imposed by the West on Russia, Iran, China, Cuba etc, or against Israeli genocide. The teeming billions of Africa, Latin America and India have no real representation at the UN. BRICS is destined to set up a new Assembly or Parliament for the Global Majority. It is also pursuing the gradual process of dedollarisation of the world economy and will replace US-controlled organisations like the World Bank and the IMF. The future beckons.

The impetus for BRICS and its dedollarisation has been created by the US weaponisation of the dollar against the Russian Federation and other countries and the stealing of their assets and gold. Thus, trust has been broken in the SWIFT international payments system. It is not that BRICS is a bloc, it is not, it is a multilateral, multipolar, multicontinental, multicivilisational organisation. As a result, the Western world, which is also bankrupt, that is, the USA and its Anglosphere vassals like the UK, Canada and Australia, the divided Peninsular Western European EU, and other US coastal and island colonies and vassals like Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the settler state of Israel, have been isolated – or rather have isolated themselves. BRICS means the disappearance of the hegemony of the USA and all its vassal organisations, not just the World Bank and the IMF, but the G7, the EU, WHO, UNESCO etc.

We can see this Western self-isolation and irrelevance in the fact that the Russian Federation, by far the largest country in Europe by population and area, is now the largest economy in Europe and growing rapidly, and yet Western European countries have cut themselves off from it and are declining. Why cut yourselves off from natural resources like oil, gas, fertiliser, minerals? Countries like Turkiye and all South-Eastern Europe, from Austria to Greece, from Serbia to Hungary, from Romania to Slovakia, from Bulgaria to Cyprus, from Czechia to Croatia, have realised that they are missing the boat. They will peel off from EU tyranny and join BRICS too. They may be joined by countries in South-Western Europe, from Spain to Italy, and eventually France, Benelux and Germany. Only English-speaking North-Western Europe will remain in the US orbit, but only until their US-appointed elites have been overthrown.

BRICS means the end of the domination of the Atlantic Powers, which has lasted for 500 years. The Pacific and Indian Powers have risen and are taking their place. The former Western colonies or countries that adopted one or other of the bipolar Western ideologies of Capitalism or Communism, from Eurasian Russia to Africa, from Asia to Latin America, are freeing themselves from Western geopolitical and financial colonialisation. BRICS countries work on behalf of their peoples, who believe in sovereignty and patriotism, but do not believe in the tyranny of transnational corporations, banks and Globalism. Centralisation, whether Capitalist or Communist, is dead. It is time in all spheres to move away from top-down centralised control and to delegate to the grassroots. It is time for the dinosaurs to remove themselves from the world stage, or else be removed by the ever-accelerating course of history.

The Sinking Millennial Titanic

Some observers say that the present rout of the West in the Ukraine, which the West tried to expand to and absorb by its habitual organised violence after February 2014, is a turning point. They say that it marks the end of 500 years of Western domination of the world and overseas expansion, expressed by the word ‘Globalism’. This began with Western voyages of conquest and settlement across the Atlantic to the Americas, Africa and Asia some 500 years ago. They are wrong. The Western world and its unique ideology of supremacy and infallibility began not 500 years ago, but 1,000 years ago. It can even be dated precisely – to 14 February 1014. Then, in Rome, the new foundational Creed of the West was consciously promulgated – previously it had only been proclaimed by illiterate provincial barbarians, who did not even understand what they were saying. From then on, the West moved south and east.

This new Creed, first proclaimed in Rome at the Coronation of the German King Henry II as the ‘Holy Roman’ Emperor (he was not Holy or Roman), claimed that the Holy Spirit, the Source of all authority and unity, proceeds from the leader of the West. Then the leader of the West was the Pope of Rome – even though the formal dogma of his infallibility was not proclaimed and formulated until 856 years later, in 1870. However, his supremacy was already clear in, for example, the Dictatus Papae of Pope Gregory VII in 1075, though nearly all of these principles had been repeated for decades. Today this supremacy and infallibility have been passed down to and inherited one after the other by the leaders of other Western countries. Now it belongs to the President of the USA. The claim to worldwide supremacy and infallibility has been the essential belief of the post-Christian, post-1014, post-Schism West.

The consequences of the 14 February 1014 Declaration of Papal, that is, Western, supremacy and infallibility can already be seen in the 1030s with the Papally-sponsored invasions of Spain and then Sicily. In 1066 it came again with the Papally-sponsored invasion and genocide of England, again using its Norman shock troops, and then to Wales, Scotland and Ireland, where the same genocide was repeated. But it is also clear in the German/Frankish/Western ‘Crusades’ in the Holy Land, in internal inquisitions and crusades (against the Cathars) in Western Europe, and in those of the Teutonic Knights in Eastern Europe. The essence of this ethnic Western ideology was what we today call Nazism. And it is precisely ethnic Western. For example, when the Soviet Union invaded Bulgaria in 1944, ordinary Bulgarians greeted the Soviet forces enthusiastically, for only the Germanic elite in Bulgaria was Nazi.

The fact is that Orthodox Church culture, even of lapsed Orthodox Russians and Bulgarians in 1944, is anti-Nazi. For example, let us take the case of the Non-Orthodox British historian, David Irving, who defends Nazi Germany. For him anti-Nazism is hypocrisy, given that Allied leaders also participated in Hitlerite crimes and racism in that conflict. True, Hitler hated the Jews and the West loved them, but only because the Western Allies were funded by Jewish financiers. However, just like Hitler, the Western leaders also hated ’subhuman’ Russians, Africans, Arabs and Asians. Irving should have been consistent and angry at all Nazism, not just British, French and American, but the German too. So the foolish Irving attacks Allied Nazism, not seeing that anyone can be a Nazi. For example, a bankrupt Israeli, Netanyahu, real name Mileikowsky, is also a genocidal Nazi, and as such is opposed by heroic Non-Zionist and anti-Nazi Jews.

Nothing can save the West from its sinking Titanic in Kiev. True, it can try and blame the senile Biden, but shifting the blame is not a solution. In reality, the West is not afraid that Russia will win against it in its proxy war, but rather it is afraid that the truth will win. This fear of the truth has now become the main concern. This fear of the truth is also why most Western people will not join the Orthodox Church – because they refuse to repent. As Western people claim: ‘I cannot join the Orthodox Church because of my culture’. They reject Christ because of their proudly unrepentant, Secularist culture. All they have to do is to refer back to their countries of birth before the millennial aberration and deviation of 1014. For example, I am English by blood, have a British passport, but I am not British, not even English. I am Old English and belong to Old England, to Orthodoxy, to Christ, not to Secularist pride.

The Future of Western Europe, Russia and the Orthodox Church

Thus, White Supremacism, Racism, Aryanism, Fascism, Nazism, Zionism, whatever you wish to call it, is deeply Western, as it justifies imperialism, colonialism and the exploitation of the whole Non-Western world. Ultimately, it goes back to the supremacy and infallibility of medieval Papism. This ideology is not of the Church. That is why certain Russians of the émigré Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) group, Romanians of the Iron Guard, and other Fascists, even though somewhat culturally Orthodox, were always tiny fringe groups, outside the mainstream, outside communion with the Church, outside Christianity. Let us recall that Christianity was born in Asia, not in the aberration of a Europe, cut off from the rest of Asia and, above all, from the Church of God. The tired old Western ideologies of Papism and Protestantism are dying. However, their substitution by Secularism is even worse, indeed, it is lethal.

Here we can speak of the Sovietisation of the West over the last 35 years of President Bush’s ‘New World Order’, already the Old World Order. Sovietisation can be seen in the Western elite/nomenklatura which governs by Uniparty and censorship (‘cancelling’) of ‘dissident’ views. Such ‘heretics’ commit ‘hate speech’ and so are persecuted. The elite has learned nothing from the fall of the USSR. Sovietisation is lethal, for it is based on death, hatred for God, persecution of the Church and its words of life, through abortion, euthanasia (‘good death’) and inevitable depopulation, as women are told to be men and men are told to be homosexuals. That is the new norm. On the other hand, Russia is returning to its roots. It is no longer Western, neither Imperial as it was from 1721-1917 with its serfdom, nor Soviet as it was from 1917 to 1991 with its Gulag, nor Oligarchic as it was from 1991 to 2016 with its Wild East Capitalism.

The 300 years or twelve generations of the three Western experiments in Russia failed, and disastrously so, and have now led Russia to begin the return to its roots. It is all that remains. These are precisely the roots to which the last Tsar, Nicholas II, wanted to return to, in governance, in social and foreign policy, in architecture, in Church painting and singing. The Tsar, who founded the Hague Peace Conventions, would have greatly approved of BRICS, of international co-operation and harmony. He was the forerunner to it. The future Ukraine will share in such co-operation. After the tragic conflict which the USA has created there, the New Ukraine will be renewed and its third world infrastructure will be brought to world class standards by BRICS, its corrupt Western oligarchs chased out by a State that protects its people, as has been happening so spectacularly in Russia over the last twenty-five years.

The transformation of the Russian Lands, the Russian Federation, the Ukraine and Belarus, will mean transformation within the Orthodox Church, 75% of whose faithful live in those Lands. True, several parts of the Orthodox Church are for now under the control of elderly individuals, who are stuck in the past. Such is the situation of the Patriarchate of Constantinople in Istanbul, where individuals still dream of an Empire which collapsed nearly 600 years ago. In Moscow too, there are individuals who also dream of an Imperial future, patterned by rigid ritualism, ultra-nationalism and propose a militarised and uniformised ‘Church-Army’. And as a result, there are individuals in the Russian Church, who call themselves ‘princes of the Church’, who dream of imperialist power and effeminate riches, ironically sometimes sponsored by the CIA, and who undertake schism, jealousy and hatred, persecuting pastors and people alike.

The reality is quite different from those delusions of empire, for the Church does not belong to ‘princes of the Church’, but to the faithful people. For example, the population of Non-Orthodox Western Europe, inclusive of and westwards of Finland, Germany, Austria and Italy, is approximately 431 million. Almost exactly 1% of that population are Romanian Orthodox (other Orthodox, Greeks, Russians, Serbs etc, number at most only 0.2% of that 431 million). Certain elderly Greeks and Russians may dream of building ecclesiastical empires in Western Europe, but they are irrelevant to 4.3 million Non-Greeks and Non-Russians. Such too is the situation elsewhere outside Russia and Greece, in lands where Orthodox have emigrated and live. The future of the Church in the Ukraine, Moldova, the Baltic States, Western Europe, the Americas and Oceania is with the majority who live there, not with imperialistic dreamers in distant cities.

Conclusion

A fresh wind is blowing from the east and it is sweeping away the corrupted old world, the cobwebbed, antiquated and dying structures formed out of the last millennium and the domination of the planet by the anti-Christian Western world and its ideologies, whether Capitalist or Communist. The old ‘Papism’, centralised control from one centre, is dead. The unipolar and unilateral is rapidly being replaced by the multilateral and multipolar. Western Europeans, wake up! You have been fooled and betrayed for a thousand years! They have substituted the truth with a fake! Return to your spiritual roots and identity! Ignore the pathologically sick, who reject their own identity, and tell you that you are beyond salvation without their rebaptism, and come to the Church of God. Here you are welcome. Yes, indeed, our values are: ‘humanity, mercy and compassion’.  The old is going. The new is here. Welcome!

 

 

 

 

 

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.

Soviet Vestiges: Centralisation and Personality Cults among Neophytes

We all know how the Soviet Union unconsciously adopted the outward, cultural practices of the Russian Orthodox Church. Thus, instead of the Holy Trinty, Soviet Communism promulgated Marx, Engels and Lenin, iconographically presented as an indivisible three in one, a new Holy Trinity. It was blasphemous, since these three were not gods or even decent men, but quite vile people. Then, anyone watching film of a Mayday Parade in the old USSR notices at once the abundance of banners and red flags, which simply imitated the church banners and icons of Easter processions, which also take place around 1 May. Christmas too was substituted by pagan Soviet New Year drunkenness and overeating.

Then there was the substitution of Christ. Who was the new Christ? Lenin and then Stalin. First came the iconography of a benign-looking Lenin, whose chemically-preserved mummy is still on display in the centre of Moscow like unholy relics. Then after him came the iconography of a kind and fatherly Stalin, which was everywhere on streets and in schoolbooks of that age. Yet he was a mass murderer and an evil persecutor of the Church. Famously, the idolatry of Stalin even had to be denounced by Khrushchov as a personality cult – which is exactly what it was. Little wonder that President Putin said years ago that only someone without a brain would want to restore the collapsed Soviet Union.

However, some in the Russian Church unconsciously adopted the outward, cultural practices of the Soviet Union. Indeed, one part of the Soviet Union did not collapse in 1991 – the Moscow Patriarchate, the Soviet-period administrative superstructure of the Russian Church. Sadly, this administration has retained two elements of the old Soviet Union. The first is Soviet Centralisation. The USSR dissolved into fifteen separate republics – the Church did not. The result is anti-Moscow schisms in the Church in Orthodox parts of the old USSR which do not have their own independent Church, in the Ukraine, Moldova, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia, with Russophobic discontent expressed in Belarus, Kazakhstan.

The second element that survived in the Moscow Patriarchate is Soviet-style personality cults. This can be seen in the statues of Russian saints. In 1976 I met the pious and talented sculptor Vyacheslav Klykov: I dared not tell him what I thought, that statues replace the statues of the Bolshevik monster Lenin. As such they are welcome, but statues are not a traditional part of Orthodoxy. For Orthodoxy free-standing statues are considered idolatrous. And this is precisely the danger of all personality cults. There exists an exaggerated cult of certain clerical figures, bishops, priests or monks. Among some it is enough for a man to be in a cassock and have a beard and he is already worthy of worship.

This attitude is concerning, for enchantment with mere people is always followed by disenchantment – disillusion always follows illusion. If this is news, read the Psalter. We have seen this clearly with the tragic story of Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfevev), whose photos have suddenly been removed and whose books are suddenly no longer on sale. ‘Put not your trust in princes, nor in the sons of men’. We can see it also in the situation of other clerical figures. Fr Andrey Tkachov is an example. Absurdly popular for really just an ordinary if well-read priest, his categorical and even extremist views are typical of one who comes from the complexed far west of the Ukraine, not of the average Orthodox.

His aggressiveness, lack of diplomacy and tact and just plain rudeness is shared by others and also gives rise to a cult following among the simple and unthinking. Fr Andrey is far from being the only such example of one engaged in broadcasts, podcasts and the writing of books and who makes a lot of money in this way. For instance, I know one Russian woman who never comes to church, but she does spend a lot of time on her computer reading the ‘prophecies’ of ‘holy elders’. This too is an example of personality cults. She told me that she prefers ‘elders’ with very long hair and very long hair. The attachment to externals is typical of the superficial and the neophyte, not of the rooted and the grounded.

As I have remarked many times, it took 75 years for the USSR to Sovietise and then fall and therefore it will take 75 years for de-Sovietisation to take place. 33 years after the dissolution of the USSR, the administration of the Moscow Patriarchate still retains the above two elements of the Soviet mentality. It is therefore no surprise that Ukrainians insult Russians by calling them ‘Moskali’ – Muscovites. It has long seemed to me that the top-heavy and highly centralised Moscow nationalist administration of the Russian Orthodox Church, with all its tiresome bureaucracy and taxes, is not something that is to be retained from the USSR. Nor are clericalist personality cults which are so close to idolatry.

 

 

Towards a Council of the Orthodox Churches

Introduction

In 2006 I took part in a Local Church Council of the Russian Diaspora. A very divided part of the Russian Church debated its future, whether to enter back into canonical communion with the rest of the Russian Church or not. Suddenly, the division more or less disappeared. We visibly felt the wafting of the Holy Spirit over us. Such is the vital importance of all Church Councils, Universal, Regional or Local. This wafting is the spirit of catholicity, of conciliarity, this is the Holy Spirit, Who alone heals divisions by revealing the clear Will of God.

Universal Church Councils

Who has the authority to call a Council of all the Orthodox Churches? Purists will respond ‘the Emperor of Constantinople’. There is not one, so that is absurd. Greek nationalists will respond ‘the Patriarch of Constantinople’. This is at once divisive and also untrue. And then does a Council have to include all the Local Orthodox Churches in order to have universal authority? Clearly not, for there have been many purely Local Councils, which have with time gained universal authority, for example the ‘Palamite’ Councils of the thirteenth century.

Consultations

In any case, nobody can call a ‘Council’ of the whole Church as such. Any Consultation of bishops can only be called a Council after the event, for the decisions of a Consultation have to be ‘received’, that is, recognised by the clergy and people. Until ‘reception’ has taken place, there can only be a Consultation. This we saw quite clearly with the Consultation of some 150 Orthodox bishops from several of the Orthodox Churches in Crete in 2016, which was, absurdly, called a ‘Pan-Orthodox Council’ before it had even begun! Of course, it failed.

The Need for a Consultation

So let us therefore be realistic. Any head of any Local Church can issue invitations to a Consultation, inviting the heads and episcopal delegations of any number of other Local Churches who wish to attend. Such a Consultation is necessary because at present two of the sixteen Local Churches, Constantinople and Moscow, are in schism with one another and refuse to talk to each other, let alone concelebrate. As a result, the whole Church suffers and is even to some extent in a state of paralysis. The Church needs to hold a Consultation.

Who Could Call a Consultation?

Thus, the head of any Local Church can call a Consultation. Several enjoy prestige. For example, the Patriarch of Jerusalem, who is at is the centre of the Church. Or the Patriarch of Bucharest, as his Church is the largest outside Moscow. But others enjoy respect and prestige, for instance, the Patriarchs of Sofia or Belgrade or the Archbishop of Albania. But really any of them. But what would an invitation to a Consultation mention? It should certainly not be restrictive, as that was the error of the agenda-imposed 2016 meeting in Crete.

Two Initial Stages of Consultation

Let us suppose that the head of any one of the fourteen Local Churches sent out a circular letter to the other thirteen heads and invited them, perhaps each with two other bishops, to discuss initially the intra-Church crisis. This would be Stage One of a Conciliar process composed of 42 bishops. If they met, they could talk and, if they agreed, they could go to a Second Stage, which would be for a Consultation of the nearly 500 bishops, who do not belong to the Patriarchates of Constantinople and Moscow, which have over another 500 bishops.

The Third Stage

Observers from Constantinople and Moscow would naturally be invited to the First and Second Stages. A Third Stage would be for all Orthodox bishops, though that would mean Constantinople and Moscow ending their schism. That, at present, is not realistic, as the nature of their schism is political. And as long as both Patriarchates are engaged in politics with States, there is no hope of that. A Consultation, let alone a Council, can only be held among the politically free, which is why no Consultation ever took place during the Soviet period.

An Agenda

So a Consultation is necessary, but why? What would its non-restrictive agenda be? At present, the Church faces two sets of challenges. Firstly, there must be a dogmatic response to the doubts and denials of the contemporary world by affirming the Creed of the Seven Universal Councils. Secondly, there must be a pastoral and administrative witness to the same contemporary world. The first response affirms the Revealed Truth of God, the second affirms Love, that the teaching and witness of the Church is not political and nationalistic.

The Dogmatic Agenda

By affirming the Creed a Consultation would affirm that God is the Maker of Heaven and Earth and of all things visible and invisible, rejecting Secularism, which proclaims that the universe is self-made through an inexplicable process of ‘evolution’. It would affirm the uniqueness of Christ, the Son of God and His Salvation, Resurrection and Return and the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father, Who spoke through the Old Testament, and in the uniqueness of the Church and Her Baptism. All these are challenged by the contemporary world.

The Pastoral Agenda

Of a world population of over eight billion, only 200 million, two and a half per cent, are Orthodox Christians. There is little doubt that the mission of the Church has been severely limited by politics and nationalism, not least Greek and Russian. There is a need for new Local Churches to be founded, immediately in the Ukraine, where the lack of a Local Church has caused division and distress, secondly in areas where millions of Orthodox live, in Western Europe, the Americas and Oceania, and thirdly in most of Non-Christian Asia and Africa.

Conclusion: The Alternative

Without a Church Council divisions will continue. This happens when one or both sides refuse to move. For example, ever since 1014, when the elite of the then small part of the Orthodox Church in Western Europe ended its communion with the Church by altering the Creed, it has refused to return to the Creed. Indeed, it has actually justified its change and so remained out of communion with the Church. Thank God, the present conflict between Constantinople and Moscow does not concern the Creed, but it does concern communion. And that is vital.

 

 

 

The Collapse of Unions

Ex-President Zelensky (his term ended last May) is now in the USA, proposing a ‘Victory Plan’. In fact, as the bankrupt Ukraine is being defeated, if not routed, this is a Plan for World War III. This is because it demands that the Ukraine join NATO, meaning that NATO troops would then die fighting nuclear-armed Russia in the Ukraine. Well over half the already bankrupt countries in NATO are totally against this. In any case, NATO has very few weapons and munitions left in terms of tanks, artillery, drones and shells, it has and prints only inflationary dollar bills. The fact is that there is no ‘Victory Plan’, except in the deluded fantasies of CIA-controlled US and UK PR advisors, whose scripts are read by the handpicked actor Zelensky.

With 800,000 Ukrainian dead and wounded, 400,000 of them since 1 January 2024, (and 70,000 Russian dead) so far, it is long since time for the conflict in the Ukraine to end. Those who want it to continue want to continue Slav fratricide. It will not end in stalemate or a frozen conflict, it can only end in the capitulation of Kiev through the overthrow of the Neo-Nazi puppet regime in Kiev by those many Ukrainians, who hate it and resist it. Nobody wants to fight for them any more, for they are not following a Ukrainian agenda, but an American agenda. There will follow the formation of a New Ukraine inside realistic and natural borders. And it will be NATO and EU free, for neither NATO, nor the EU has any future anyway.

The tragic events in the Ukraine, like the waves of Israeli terrorism against Palestine and the Lebanon, blinding and maiming civilians through exploding electronic devices, are ushering in a New World Order. This New Order is the result of the 1991 collapse and dissolution of the Soviet Union and now the collapse and dissolution of the American Union, which is 33 years overdue. The American Union means not just the USA (a corporate Union formed after a bloody, four-year long civil war in the USA), but all its associated, largely US-run organisations, the UN, the IMF, the World Bank, the G7, the OECD, NATO, the EU, the Anglosphere, AUKUS, the Five Eyes, the Olympic Games, the ICC, the ICJ, the Nobel Prizes etc.

The time of Unions is over. The Soviet Union, formed as a result of the First World War, and the American Union, formed as a result of the Second World War, are finished. The Soviet Union is being replaced by a Confederation of the three East Slav peoples, Russian, Belarussian and Ukrainian, returning to the pre-Imperial Russia (which was also Unionist) of over 300 years ago. However, the American Union has not yet been replaced. Its dissolution, concerning the whole Western world which is vassal to it, is far more dramatic, for it is based on a Western Union which is a millennium old. Its ideology of Globalism, that is, US-controlled Domination, is to be replaced by the mutually beneficial co-operation of Sovereign Nations.

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 BRICS Alliance and the Holy Trinity

‘Between Holy Trinity and hell there is a deep abyss’

‘The Orthodox Church’ by Archpriest Sergius Bulgakov

Western leaders have for years been weaponising the adolescent hatred for Russia that is widespread in the Ukraine, the Baltics, Poland, and other Eastern European countries. It is adolescent because ever since achieving independence between 1989 and 1991 after over four long decades of Soviet captivity, these countries have behaved like disruptive teenagers and have still not grown up even after 35 years. They are opposed to those who for them still represent their oppressive Soviet parents, but in fact are not, for Soviet Imperialism is, like the Soviet Union, long since dead. The present conflict in the Ukraine is the most tragic example of this adolescent revolt.

Interestingly, Western leaders have failed to achieve this weaponisation in Georgia. This is because since its failed attack on Russian-protected territory at US bidding in 2008, Georgia has grown up and is no more a teenager. It has understood that the Russian Federation is not a Soviet organisation, but a different country. In the Russian Federation only a few old people and obscurantists nostalgic for Stalin hanker after the Soviet period. Georgians want to apologise for their 2008 war and understand that today’s Russian Federation does not want an Empire again. The USSR died in 1991 and the Russian Federation has seen the negative results of past imperialism.

In this, Russia is unlike the Western Establishment, which continues to want to impose its imperialist rule, either by organised military violence or else by economic stealth on the rest of the world. This is because the ‘Western Union’ did not die in 1991. Indeed, it proclaims that since ‘the West is Best’, therefore ‘the Rest’ must submit themselves to the Western Establishment. The reality is that it has psychologically projected its own aggressive imperialism onto the Russian Federation, treating it as the Soviet Union, and so accusing it of being aggressive! This is their narrative. In fact, when talking of Russian aggression, it is talking about itself. This is psychological projection.

The Western Establishment is stuck in the past, in 1991. What has replaced the rejected Soviet Imperialism of the past and, potentially, what will replace the still unrejected Western imperialism of the present? Since imperialism does not work, the answer is some kind of mutual benefit organisation. And today this is represented by the BRICS Alliance, which is the coming together of various countries and civilisations: Orthodox Christian (Russia), Buddhist-Confucian (China), Hindu (India), Muslim (Iran and the UAE), South American Catholic (Brazil), African (South Africa, Egypt and Ethiopia), but dominated by none, quite unlike the US-controlled UN in New York.

The BRICS Alliance has yet to be permanently headquartered in a centre (in Kazan, or in Ekaterinburg or elsewhere in Eurasia?) and have its own Parliament, infrastructure, secretariat and spokesmen. This will come, as mutual economic benefits become ever clearer. With time these economic benefits can become more and more social and diplomatic and create friendships between different peoples. Unlike the G7, membership of BRICS is not restricted to the USA and its political vassals. The BRICS New Development Bank is called on to replace US-run organisations like the World Bank and the IMF. BRICS members are not at all obliged to sign up to the LGBT ideology.

Thus, this Alliance of Sovereign Nations could become a genuine and literal ‘United Nations’, independent of US control and its Security Council, dominated by the elites of three Western nations, representing fewer than 7% of the world. Structurally, we see that BRICS has the Trinitarian concept of Unity in Diversity. Yet, it is a multipolar organism, not a one-size-fits-all unipolar organisation, imposed from above by one power on all others. It is this Unity in Diversity, typical of a Confederation or Family of Nations which is at the heart of the BRICS Alliance, and not the abyss of a Unitarian, Unionist and unipolar imposition such as: ‘Agree with us or else we will sanction you’. BRICS is the future and its sixteenth summit will be taking place in Kazan in exactly a month’s time.

 

 

The Struggle for Catholicity Against Papist Centralisation and for Unity Against the New American Heresy of ‘Corrective Baptism.’

Introduction: Centralisation and Decentralisation: Unity in Diversity

The Church is an image of the Holy Trinity, a Unity of Three Persons in One Essence, of Diversity and Unity, a subtle balance between centralising and decentralising forces. If centralising forces take over, legitimate diversity in Church life can be threatened, as we see outside the Church, in Roman Catholicism. This results in the boycott of the Church, which is no longer seen as being ‘our Church’, but the ‘Church’ of an irrelevant, distant, alien and foreign clerical elite. If decentralising forces take over, Church unity can be threatened by divisions and sects, as we see in Protestantism. This results in the dissolution of the Church into secular fragments, which are irrelevant to spiritual resistance and incapable of ascetic struggle for the Truth of Christ.

The Two Struggles of My Life

Personally, my life can be divided into two halves. The first half was spent in apprehending and comprehending God’s presence in the world, in learning and in serving in the Church in Europe. The struggle then was for the teachings of the Church against ideological compromises, being forced onto the Church by the anti-Christian Western world. That US-led world was trying to impose on all others its One World Government under the name of ‘Globalism’. This meant trying to deform the integrity of the Orthodox Church by imposing syncretistic modernism and ecumenism and corrupting its clerical elite, as Globalism had already done with Protestantism and Roman Catholicism and was then trying to do with Orthodoxy too. This was an attack on the integrity of the Church.

The second half of my life is being spent in England, building towards the inevitable Local Church of Western Europe. This ongoing struggle now takes place from within the largest part of the Orthodox Church here, the millions of the Romanian Metropolias of Western and Southern, Central and Northern Europe. This struggle is for the Catholicity of the Church through the concord of fourteen of the sixteen Local Orthodox Churches. This is because the two remaining Local Churches, Moscow and Constantinople, have tragically fallen into schism with one another because of their rival nationalist centralisations. Through their Papist-style centralisation of finance, power and control they are trying and failing to divide and share out the Orthodox world between them.

The Struggle for Catholicity Against the Papism of Constantinople and Moscow

Thus, the fourteen other Churches, the Patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem, the Churches of Georgia, Cyprus, Serbia, Greece, Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, America, Albania and Macedonia, are fixed between the two extremes of Constantinople and Moscow. True, some are much closer to one or the other, but still they say to Constantinople: Yes, you were once the Patriarchate of the Imperial City, but that was nearly 600 years ago and even then you had no right to interfere in the internal affairs of others. And to Moscow they say: Yes, you are by far the largest in number, but you are still only one among sixteen, so do not try and tell us how we must live and think. The Soviet age is over, so stop denying the diversity and Catholicity of the Church.

The friction can most clearly be seen in the Ukraine. Thus, most, if not all, of the fourteen Local Churches know that what Constantinople did there in setting up a fake Church outside its own territory was wrong, against the canons of the Church. This is very clear, especially through the statements of the heads of the Churches of Albania, Poland and Bulgaria. As for Muscovite centralisation, so reminiscent of the Soviets, it is rejected not only by all others (though in the case of Constantinople, the rejection is clearly politically dictated by the US and so has no spiritual authority), but also in the Moscow Patriarchate, in the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Metr Onufry and wherever decentralisation and new autocephalous Churches are for pastoral reasons urgently required.

We can see all this visibly, if we simply compare photographs of bishops. The photo of the average Constantinople Metropolitan appears to show a bureaucrat with a thin black veil and a carefully trimmed beard, like that of a married priest whose wife dislikes beards. Only the metropolitans are not married, supposedly monks. The photo of the average Moscow Metropolitan appears to show a richly-decorated and rigidly-uniformed military man, at the service of a State army, not of the Word of God. Both show careerists, ‘Princes of the Church’, to use the Roman Catholic term for cardinals. My favourite photo of a metropolitan from one of the fourteen Churches shows a man in a dusty old cassock hauling a bag of cement in a wheelbarrow to build a new monastery.

The Novel and Aggressive American Heresy of Rebaptism

Orthodox Unity is now being challenged by the novel and highly aggressive American heresy of rebaptism. This sectarian heresy of rebaptising Orthodox is known as ‘corrective baptism’, a term quite unknown to the Fathers of the Church and the Saints, because it has been brought into the Church from the sectarian Lutheran world outside. Contradicting the Creed of the Church ‘I believe in one baptism…’, it means rebaptising those who have been canonically received into the Church by the established authority of its thousand canonical bishops. Although the Orthodox in question may have been receiving the sacraments of the Church for years, the schismatics are rebaptising them. This revolt against Church practice is uncanonical, heretical and sectarian.

The practice was condemned by all as long ago as 1976, when the Syshchenko scandal in the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) broke in London. Then this same practice, implemented by an uncanonically ordained and very poorly-trained Ukrainian priest, was thoroughly rejected by the ever-memorable Metropolitan Philaret and the then still Orthodox ROCOR Synod as the heresy of Donatism. Sadly, this view is no longer held by some of today’s ROCOR bishops who do not know the Church Tradition. Thus, apart from ‘bishops’ in old calendarist sects, there are now those in ROCOR who have also turned aggressively schismatic, imposing their pseudo-Russian, American old calendarism, which is in fact nothing more than a sectarian Protestant revolt, a new outburst of Anabaptism, the bullying and hypocritical pharisaic rebaptism for ‘the pure’.

This is the first heresy of converts, neophytes who want to be ‘more Orthodox than the Orthodox’. Such converts do not remain Orthodox because they have not yet cleansed themselves of the post-Schism Western mentality, they still do not know the Pre-Schism Western mentality. For them Orthodoxy is not existential, it is just a decoration added on top of what they do not want to renounce, a cherry on top of the Western cake. Their mentality therefore remains fundamentally anti-Orthodox. And they can go to one extreme or the other. Being anti-Orthodox is not only being pro-ecumenist, pro-modernist, pro-reformist, it is also to be filled with hatred for Roman Catholics and Protestants. Both extremes are equally anti-Orthodox, equally opposed to Truth and Love.

Conclusion: The Dangers of Centralisation and Sectarianism

With their natural Russian flock dying out or leaving them, these bishops are desperate to make up falling numbers by recruiting disgruntled ex-Protestants. These often psychologically unstable extremists have no spiritual roots in the Church. To my knowledge, so far two American ROCOR bishops in different continents are publicly boasting of rebaptising other Orthodox, though others may be involved. Once this news reaches the for now politically unfree Moscow and it has the time to act, there will be trouble for the ROCOR schismatics. So continues our struggle for the Catholicity of the Church against anti-missionary and secular-inspired centralisation, and for the Unity of the Church against sectarian attacks, always towards the new Local Church of Western Europe to be established through a Council.

Russophobia and the Ukraine: Self-Liberation or Self-Destruction for Western Europe?

PART ONE: Russophobia and the Ukraine

Introduction: Western Russophobia

Western Russophobia has always been based on a large number of artificial and utterly hypocritical oppositions: Superior-inferior; West-East; European-Asiatic; Christian-barbarian; Civilised-primitive; Modern-backward; Strong-weak; Liberal-autocratic; Democratic-authoritarian; Good-evil; White-black. In other words, the West is always right. In fact it has always based its ‘rightness’ on lies, PR propaganda, Hitlerian racist enmity and a series of hypocritical prejudices. Let us look at this Russophobia in one specific case, the classic British case.

British Russophobia

After the defeat of Napoleon at Waterloo in 1815, a defeat largely owed to the German Prussians rather than to Wellington, Great Britain no longer had an enemy. It soon found one: Russia. Russia had directly defeated Napoleon and his Combined Western Army of twelve nationalities of some 600,000 in 1812, and had then liberated Paris in 1814. Therefore, it was a potential rival and therefore the enemy. By the 1830s this feeling of hostility towards Russia had been developed under the pro-Ottoman Urquhart and British imperialists invented the paranoid, anti-Russian, delusional narrative of ‘the Great Game’.

So came the full-scale, unprovoked invasion of Russia in the so-called ‘Crimean War’ of 1853-1856. Then Britain’s propaganda machine suddenly switched from being anti-French to anti-Russian and from anti-Ottoman to pro-Ottoman, allying itself with the vengeful Napoleon III, the nephew of the previous evil enemy, and with the Muslim Ottomans. At the end of the nineteenth century the British were to exploit the anti-Jewish pogroms, conducted almost wholly by Lithuanian, Polish and Ukrainian Galician peasants, and none of which took place on Russian territory, as yet another anti-Russian tool.

Free England Condemns the Hypocrisy of the British Ruling Class

In the 1830s the English liberal Richard Cobden (1804-1865) called for an end to this Russophobia.  He was already arguing that just as ‘in the slave trade we (the British) had surpassed in guilt the world, so in foreign wars we have the most aggressive, quarrelsome, warlike and bloody nation under the sun’. In October 1850 he wrote a letter claiming that in the last 25 years ‘you will find that we have been incomparably the most sanguinary nation on earth… in China, in Burma, in India, New Zealand, the Cape, Syria, Spain, Portugal, Greece, etc, there is hardly a country, however remote, in which we have not been waging war or dictating our terms at the point of a bayonet’. Cobden stated that the British, ‘the greatest blood-shedders of all’, had been then involved in more wars than the rest of Europe put together. This was factually correct.

For this, Cobden blamed the British Establishment aristocracy, which he stated had ‘converted the combativeness of the English race to its own ends’. On the British invasion of Burma in 1852, Cobden wrote: ‘I blush for my country, and the very blood in my veins tingled with indignation at the wanton disregard of all justice and decency without our proceedings towards that country exhibited. The violence and wrongs perpetrated by Pizarro or Cortez were scarcely veiled in a more transparent pretence of right than our own’. The Burmese, Cobden continued, had ‘no more chance against our 64-pound red-hot shot and other infernal improvement in the art of war than they would in running a race on their roads against our railways…the day on which we commenced the war with a bombardment of shot, shell and rockets…that the natives must have thought it an onslaught of devils, was Easter Sunday!’

Western Fascism

In the end, Great Britain ‘won’ its Great Game by overthrowing the Tsar through its regime-change operation which culminated in 1917. But that was a Pyrrhic victory. It all went wrong, for it was in this way that Britain was largely responsible for creating the anti-Western Communist Soviet Union, which replaced the highly Westernised Christian Russian Empire. When the next Combined West invaded Russia in June 1941 under Hitler, the second Napoleon, this multinational invasion from the West was welcomed by the Russophobic British. However, it ended unexpectedly with Russian troops liberating Vienna and Berlin from Western Fascism in 1945.

This was exactly as the Russian Empire had been about to do in 1917 before the British sabotage of Russia in the so-called ‘Revolution’. In reality, despite British anti-Russian propaganda about pogroms, the pogroms in Germany and Austria were far worse than any in the Non-Russian territories in the west of the old Russian Empire. And it was precisely such Western pogroms which later gave rise to the appalling and purely Western phenomenon of Fascism and Nazism, most of whose death-camps were, like Auschwitz, liberated by Russian-led Soviet troops.

Occupying the Ukraine

Now we leave to history the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union and move forward to our own times. Once Russia had thrown off the purely Western atheist Communist yoke in 1991 (yes, Communism is like Fascism a Western ideology and has nothing Russian about it), there was a period in which the US-led Western world invented a new enemy, Islam. However, given its ensuing defeats in the Muslim world in the 2010s, its attention turned back to Russia as its enemy once more. On the hundredth anniversary of the outbreak of World War One, the Combined West, now called NATO, meaning Washington and its mainly Western European vassals, invaded the Russian Lands again: Paris, Berlin, Washington. Napoleon, Hitler, Biden.

This meant the CIA violently toppling the democratically-elected Ukrainian government in Kiev in 2014, applauded by EU Commissars. After eight years of pleading for peace since 2014, in 2022 Russia was obliged to pre-empt the planned Kiev invasion and genocide of the Russian Lands in the south and east by NATO-trained and NATO-supplied Kiev regime forces. The US intention was to use the Kiev regime and its troops as pawns, suicidal proxies to weaken and destroy Russia. Russia pre-empted the invasion by sending token forces into the Ukraine. Thus began the liberation of the Russian south and east of the Soviet-invented ‘Ukraine’, so dismantling this purely artificial country, invented by Western-created Communist monsters from 1922 on, into its constituent parts. This means essentially into Russia, Ukraine, Poland. Hungary and Romania.

Liberating the Ukraine

Russia does not want to ‘conquer’ the Ukraine, whatever ‘conquer’ means. By far the biggest country in the world has no need of more territory. Its hope is that the powerful anti-Nazi Ukrainian Resistance Movement can overthrow the CIA-imposed and financed Fascist regime in Kiev with the angry, disillusioned and betrayed peoples of the Ukraine. The hope is that with help Ukrainians will set up their own Free, Non-Nazi, Non-CIA, Ukrainian government there, which will unite the Ukrainian Ukraine into a sovereign country.

Its protection from Western/NATO imperialists will be guaranteed by the Russian Federation. The drama has always been that, greedy to control and exploit their natural resources and geopolitical significance, the West has never allowed the peoples of the Ukraine self-determination. Hence 40% of Ukrainian territory now belongs to the US Blackrock Corporation, sold off by corrupt and feudal Kiev politicians behind the backs of their peoples.

World War III or World War I, Part III?

This lack of self-determination, or lack of freedom, for Ukrainians has resulted in the largely MI6-planned terrorist attacks on Russian civilians, repeating the typically British terrorist attacks on German civilians and others in World War II, which were just as futile. This has resulted in the recent, NATO-planned Ukrainian incursion into the unpopulated and forested southern tip of the Kursk province of Russia. World War II German Panther and Tiger tanks, driven by SS Ukrainians, have been replaced by German Leopard tanks today.

Nothing has changed. Little wonder that some consider that there has only ever been one World War, but in three parts. Perhaps it is World War One, Part III that is now ending in the Ukraine? The US at last understands that it has lost its proxy war in the Ukraine; all it wants to do now is to hold on until the US elections, when they can forget it. Although this liberation is well-advanced, what can be said of the future liberation of the Western Peninsula half of Europe, which begins after the Polish border?

PART TWO: Self-Liberation or Self-Destruction for Western Europe?

The New Poverty of Western Europe

The centre of Western Europe’s economy and industry had for at least five generations been Germany, despite two Great Wars. No longer today. Having been forced by its US-run elite to cut itself off from cheap Russian gas, oil and other natural resources and accept the US destruction of the Nordstream pipeline, exactly as the US had publicly promised to do, its industry is closing down. The social effects in a country which is already full of refugees from the failed US-led wars in Muslim North Africa, West Asia and the Ukraine, are catastrophic. Germany, like the rest of Western Europe, is already no longer an economic rival to the US, for like most EU countries it threw away control of its own currency. Widespread poverty is now visible. The US has won, defeating not victorious Russia, but destroyed Western Europe.

The centre of Western Europe’s ideology and diplomacy had for generations been France, which even provided it with the French language for diplomacy. With its UN seat, it promoted an independent, pro-Gaullist European line, opposing, for example, the second US war against Iraq in 2003, for which Americans called the French ‘cheese-eating surrender monkeys’. No longer today. Since the corrupt President Sarkozy, who forced France to join the US-run NATO in 2009, France has been ruled by US-placed Presidents. Today, France is paralysed, as its Rothschild bank-clerk president, Macron, surrounded by other perverts, has refused to implement the results of the last French Parliamentary election, which he disastrously lost. The country is ungovernable and he is left as a detested dictator.

Europe Governed by the American Empire

The two other major EU countries, Italy and Spain, are silent, besieged and impoverished like all the other smaller ones from Ireland to Portugal, Romania to the Netherlands, Greece to Croatia, by masses of illegal immigrants, whom national governments are not allowed to reject, as the elites passed control from the nation state to the Globalists. The only Western European countries whose voices are heard are those who scurry to repeat and exaggerate US policies, being ‘more royalist than the king’, to try and show that their completely unimportant countries are somehow important. Indeed, the US has to restrain these fanatics.

They are delusional. In fact, the leaders of these countries are talking to themselves. The countries are the Northern European UK, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Poland and the three tiny Baltic statelets. The combined population of these latter three is only one tenth of France’s, which has a UN seat, and yet their voices are heeded far more than France’s. All these eight countries amount to no more than three or four of the fifty US States. However, all over Europe a revolt has begun against the oppressive US-run elites in the breaking down UK and among the European Union Commissars who are the new Pilates, the New Roman governors.

Western European Resistance

However, so far only 25% of Europeans of left or right are revolting against US oppression. The Globalist Uniparty, whatever it may call itself, Labour, Conservative, Social, Democratic, holds sway. Most Europeans have been brainwashed by the US-run and, in the case of the BBC, pedophile media into believing that the only alternative to being slaves of the American Empire is to be subject to the bogeymen of Russia and China. These, apparently, are ‘authoritarian’, ‘autocratic’ and ‘Fascist’.

And most citizens are so zombified that they actually believe such lies. With their ‘leaders’ in bondage to the US, the majority of Western Europeans are brainwashed by bread and circuses and left ignorant. Europe has made itself irrelevant on the world stage, ideologically, politically, diplomatically, economically, socially, culturally and, most significantly, spiritually and morally. It is a sad time in European history. Western Europe is dying – through its own choice.

Free Europe: De-Americanisation

Since the 1940s Western Europe, like Japan, has been occupied by US troops. As a result, over the last eighty years, Western Europe has been thoroughly americanised, colonised and vassalised, coca-cola-ised, macdonald-ised, netflix-ised, singing in American, and reclothed in the unisex American uniform of jeans, T-shirts and trainers. There is the attempt to create a highly centralised United States of Europe, at present called the EU and run by the US-trained elite of unelected Eurocommissars.

The US aim is to destroy the strength of industry in Western Europe through its illegal sanctions ‘against Russia’, in reality against Western Europe, destroying its economies, as it destroyed the Nordstream pipeline. The only hope for Western Europe is, probably nation by nation, to be abandoned by the US, just as Soviet-controlled Europe was abandoned by the USSR, like a row of dominos between 1989 and 1991. Western Europe will then have to de-americanise itself, by turning to the multipolar BRICS Alliance, ejecting its US imperialist masters

The Alliance

This Alliance, with a BRICS Security Council of Five and soon perhaps fifty associate members, is becoming a new and at last real and independent United Nations. Only in BRICS will nations be allowed to keep their own identities, but also to reintegrate Eurasia and benefit from Russian natural resources and Chinese investment. Let it be made clear, Russia will not liberate Western Europe; its interests stop at the Polish border, where East Slavdom ends. Russia has turned its back on aggressive and now unimportant Western Europe.

Western Europe must help itself, liberating itself. Russians are tired of going to liberate Paris and Berlin and seeing its soldiers die there. No more. However, de-americanisation is only the first of the two stages in the process of the self-liberation of Western Europe. Before the US intervened in Western Europe in 1917, having in 1916 ordered Great Britain to overthrow the Tsar’s Russia before its long-prepared entry into the War, it was already and again at war with itself. It has constantly made war with itself and with others. Only Western Europe can liberate itself from this.

Free Europe: De-Frankisation

After all, the USA is itself a Western European invention, resulting from the aggressive Western European invasion and occupation of the lands of the original Asian settlers there. Ther huge territories had belonged to them for thousands of years before Western Europeans settled them. The fundamental process, which must probably happen before Western European nations join BRICS, is ‘de-frankisation’, which I will explain below. This is indicated in the above quotation from Cobden, that ‘the British, the greatest blood-shedders of all, had been then involved in more wars than the rest of Europe put together’.

For this he blamed the ever-aggressive British aristocracy, which he declared had ‘converted the combativeness of the English race to its own ends’. Now the British aristocracy are of Viking origin, the Vikings, called in history Northmen or Normans, used as shock-troops for the spread of the imperialism of the Frankish ruling class of Continental Western Europe. It is this same Frankish and, in the British Isles and Ireland, its local Norman variant, that controls politics, the media and the arms trade throughout Western Europe. Until it is removed from power, which is possibly peacefully, its wars of aggression will continue.

Conclusion: Towards a Great England and a Great Europe

Those who are anti-imperialist in England are often accused of being ‘Little Englanders’, rather than ‘Great Britainists’. Our values are in fact neither Great British Imperialism, essentially Fascist, nor Little England bigotry, essentially Ignorance. Rather, because we are actual Christians, we believe in a ‘Great England’, an England made Great because it prizes above all Love and Truth, that is, Patriotism and Peace, and not the Anti-Patriotism of Globalism and its forever wars. And these words apply to each and every other people of Western Europe.