The connection is profound, marked by a symbiotic relationship that some perceive as parasitic while others consider commensalism. Regardless of the viewpoint, it is evident that the Russian people are firmly entwined in this intricate and incestuous Church-State relationship, with no discernible alternative reality, since the inception of the Muscovite church, which customarily pursues its desires without concern for consequences. In defiance of Orthodox Canons, Moscow's primary driving force appears to be rooted in ego, as evidenced by a series of actions, including self-initiation, unilateral declarations of self-rule or autocephaly, and the self-assertion of Patriarchal titles. These actions span various historical moments, including the unauthorized relocation of the canonical Throne from Kyiv to Vladimir to Moscow in 1325, the pivotal illegal event in 1448, when Jonah became Metropolitan of Kyiv and all Rus', and unilaterally changed his title to "Metropolitan of Moscow and all Russia" during his tenure eventually declared autocephaly a historical first self-appointed autocephaly, the acquisition of the Patriarchal title through questionable means in 1448, the self-authorized expansion beyond the territory integrity authorized in Golden Tomos, self-initiated establishment of a patriarchate in 1917, and the controversial reestablishment in 1943. These actions and numerous other "de facto" assumptions collectively clearly violate Orthodox Canons. Throughout history, Russian ecclesiology has relied on extortion and the "de facto" method of ecclesiology. This “Russian de facto ecclesiology” implies that Russian Orthodox practices or the prevailing status quo often deviate from Orthodox phronema, irrespective of their adherence to or conformity with canonical norms. The Russian Orthodox Church has firmly established itself within the Russian government in charge (Czar, Soviet, modern). To understand this connection, we must trace its origins to the Christianization of Kievan Rus' in 988. During that period, Moscow was a remote, insignificant backwater town on the western outskirts of the subordinate Vladimir-Suzdal principality. Its reputation was limited to serving as a gathering point for ruffians, lacking significance as a power hub with no culture or valuable assets. It wasn't until 1263 that a Rus nobleman, Daniel, inherited this territory, and it took until 1282 for him to be self-recognized as an independent prince of Moscow. Interestingly, despite Moscow's relatively peripheral status, Muscovite princes began styling themselves as "Byzantine Princes." Over time, they expanded through conquest and territorial acquisition; this self-granted title evolved into "the (Megas) Grand Prince Sovereign of Moscow and all Rus." In 1308, Boleslaw-Yuri II of Galicia, King of Ruthenia, nominated Peter for the vacant position of Metropolitan of Kyiv and all Rus', a role that was subsequently appointed by the Patriarch of Constantinople. Peter embarked on a journey to Constantinople, where Patriarch Athanasius consecrated him as the Metropolitan of Kyiv, outfitting him with the requisite hierarchal vestments, staff, and paperwork for Kyiv. After a year-long absence, Metropolitan Peter returned to Rus' in 1308, first arriving in Kyiv and later proceeding to Vladimir. However, tensions escalated when the Grand Prince of Vladimir and Tver, Mikhail Yaroslavich, attempted to promote his preferred candidate for this prestigious position. Peter's appointment ignited prolonged animosity between Mikhail and Peter, leading to a situation where Peter sought protection from the Prince of Moscow in 1325. This began the Church-state relationship that evolved into the Russian Orthodox Church. Metropolitan Peter then unilaterally relocated his metropolitan throne from Kyiv to Vladimir. Subsequently, in 1325, following negotiations with the Grand Prince of Moscow, Ivan Kalita, Metropolitan Peter once again, without canonical approval, moved the metropolitan cathedra (chair) from Vladimir to Moscow as part of a mutually beneficial agreement inaugurating centuries of Russian abuse of canon law. The embryonic court of Muscovite Russia's cultural influences were deeply rooted in Kyiv and the (Roman) Byzantine cultural milieus, as it lacked a distinct cultural identity beyond warlike character, emerging from a confluence of illiterate Slavic tribes. In this context, supernatural beliefs and practices were, and still are, integral to daily life in Muscovite Russia. In 1339, Ivan rebuilt the Kremlin in oak, becoming the royal court's residence, including church authorities and local self-appointed bishop. In 1366, Dmitri Donskoi replaced the oak palisade with a strong citadel of white limestone, which became the foundation of the current walls encompassing Moscow's royal court and bishopric. From 1370 to 1650, the Russian Church was crucial in developing the Russian state. Throughout this era, the Russian Church occupied a privileged status, even as some areas of Russia were under Mongol rule from the 13th to the 15th century. The Church played a pivotal role in aiding the nation in enduring the years of Tartar oppression and promoting economic and spirituality. Around 1656, the Kremlin housed a Patriarchal residence and military barracks, and since then, this amalgamation has played a central role in Russian religious and political affairs. Today, the Kremlin's distinctive twelve golden domes and the adjoining Church of the Twelve Apostles remain prominent even though the Patriarch no longer resides within its walls. The Russian Church and military work in tandem to establish Russian outposts for commerce By 1721, Peter the Great abolished the corrupt and politically influential patriarchate and introduced a new synodal system governed by the Czar's representatives. It wasn't until 1917 that a Patriarchate was unilaterally reestablished, again adopting a "De Facto" approach. It was the first instance in history where Orthodox hierarchs in Moscow granted itself authority that did not exist, with a synod claiming a self-anointed Patriarchal title and resorting to extortion to maintain this pseudo-legitimacy. Whatever their intentions, this short-lived endeavor led to numerous anti-Moscow Russian sects sprouting up around the globe that further diverged from orthodox practices. As the heir to Peter's vision of Western acceptance, the 1770s marked the beginning of another challenge to Orthodoxy as the Russian Orthodox Church imbedded in a symbiotic relationship with corrupt state authorities. This trend became particularly pronounced with the ascent of Catherine "the Great" to the Russian throne, who willingly utilized the synodal apparatus. Having been influenced by Kyivan and Constantinople court traditions, Catherine continued to look to the West for recognition and support. Witnessing the transformative changes in the Western world, she sought to modernize Russian society. Her efforts commenced with architectural developments, embracing Neoclassical architecture. Subsequently, art transformed, starting with a vibrant introduction of religious art distinct from Orthodox Liturgical iconography. Even traditional iconography was influenced by this new paradigm, leading to its gradual displacement. This influence extended even to Mount Athos, where the adoption of the unique style was vigorously promoted, benefiting significantly from the financial support provided by Russia. All the while, it was contaminating our Orthodox inheritance. The 18th century witnessed the emergence of "starchestvo" under the Ukrainian-born Paisius Velichkovsky and his followers at the Optina Monastery, Russia's last stronghold of Constantinopolitan Orthodox Athonite traditions. Though not immune to the neoclassic artistic influences, this signaled the commencement of a profound spiritual reawakening within the Russian Church following an extended phase of modernization, which would further the 19th-century fin-de-siècle political upheavals culminating in the Bolshevik revolution. To illustrate how Russian soft power worked in 1842, thanks to the patronage of Tsar Nicolas I of Russia. Let us see how Russkiy Mir infiltrated Mount Athos by expanding a simple monastic cell known as St. Anthony right outside the capitol center of Athos, Karyes. This expansion led to Patriarch Anthimus IV of Constantinople recognizing the St. Anthony Cell as a skete in 1849. The term "skete" was chosen in adherence to the customs and regulations of Mount Athos, which prohibited the establishment of new monasteries beyond those of the Byzantine era as the skete continued to grow, both in terms of the number of monastics and its physical presence, a central church was erected in honor of Saint Andrew in 1867. This Church was consecrated in 1900 by Patriarch Joachim III of Constantinople. This Church is the largest on Mount Athos and ranks among the largest in the Balkans. Soon thereafter, Moscow took control of the ancient Kyivan monastery of St Pantelimon and, by 1913, had over 2,000 monks installed on the Kyivan premises. Eventually erasing Ukrainian identity presence from Holy Athos. Monks were no longer allowed to use the Ukrainian language, replaced with Russian, the sole language of the Moscow Patriarchate, irrespective of the traditional Orthodox use of the vernacular. In just a few decades, the commissioning of thousands of Neoclassic icons from various ateliers nearly eradicated millennia-old traditions. The systematic erasure of Hellenic Romiosini's heritage by Moscow continues today, reflecting Russia's expansive soft power reach from Estonia to Sinai, including Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Cyprus, and the entire Great Nation under Constantinople's Omophorion. Moscow's relentless pursuit of altering the Orthodox Ethos is a battle it fervently embraces. The Orthodox mindset, known as phronema, was so profoundly infected and manipulated by this new Neoclassical Russian influence that it took a century for a significant shift. It was only when American restorers began their work on Agia Sophia and Chora, coinciding with the decline of the Ottoman Empire, the fall of the Czardom, the emergence of visionary Ecumenical Patriarchs, and the individual contributions of artists like Fotis Kontoglou, Stylianos Kartakes, Leonid Uspensky, and others who rediscovered authentic iconography on Mount Athos, and a revival of Byzantine prototypes embraced universally. This revival manifested in various facets of culture, including art, architecture, intellectual thought, musical composition, and notation… This cleansing continues in the Orthodox world today. I will explore this in another essay. It wasn't until 1943, during Stalin's reign, that the Russian Church was reestablished. After instilling a new canon, the practice of informing on one's neighbors within the Church, Stalin deliberately selected the former Nazi Germany embassy in Moscow as the Patriarch's residence. This move was a deliberate message to the Russian Orthodox Church, suggesting that, in Stalin's eyes, their authority was not substantially superior to that of the Nazis. To this day, the Patriarch continues to reside in the same building. However, Patriarch Cyril has invested a substantial amount, at least 40 million dollars, in constructing a lavish private residential compound, one of many. The difference is the inherent Soviet Russian Church is substantially more potent than it has ever been in history. The "extortionist de facto" ecclesiology of the Russian Orthodox Church dominates the processes by which it rules Moscow. The list of corruption is long and unjust. Since Cyril has been in office since 2009, not including the many wristwatch or cigarette scandals Cyril is engaged in, he has utilized many uncanonical egregious conspiracies in leading the Russian Church. Here are recent examples:
Today, criminal activities persist within the Russian Church. Bearing similarities to the mafia, in a striking parallel, the Russian Orthodox Church employs tactics reminiscent of Nazi and Soviet propaganda, wherein the magnitude of falsehoods makes them difficult to challenge or dispute the facts presented, given their endorsement and promotion by the "Holy Orthodox" Church. The simulacrum Patriarch Cyril's cathedra has directly emulated Goebbels' playbook, further exacerbating the situation.
1 Comment
Ioannis Prodromos
1/6/2024 12:22:29 pm
The Russian Orthodox Church is basically a 2nd kremlin infested with freemasons and KGB agents at the helm. kremlin controls all of them........and kirill dares to call himself the defender of Orthodoxy!!!
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Most Popular Posts
Archives
April 2024
Categories
All
Αγιογράφος
Ηλίας Δαμιανάκης Άρχων Μαΐστωρ της Μεγάλης του Χριστού Εκκλησίας AuthorBy the Grace of God Archon Elias Damianakis has ministered in the study of Holy Iconography since 1980. In his biography you can read about Elias' life and on his portfolio page you can see where he has rendered some of his hand painted iconography or visit the photo galleries to see some of his work. There is a complete list of featured articles, awards and testimonials which you can visit, as well as a list of notable achievements here below. Please contact Elias for more information or suggestions for this website, thank you and God Bless. |