Patriarchate of Constantinople: history and position in the modern world. But what can this Tomos lead to? When did this idea of an “Orthodox Vatican” appear?

22.08.2019

“What kind of Patriarchate of Constantinople is this?”

They say that a religious war is brewing in Ukraine, and is this connected with the actions of some Patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew? What really happened?

Indeed, the situation in Ukraine, already explosive, has become more complicated. The primate (leader) of one of the Orthodox Churches - Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople - intervened in the life of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (a self-governing but integral part of the Russian Orthodox Church - the Moscow Patriarchate). Contrary to the canonical rules (immutable church-legal norms), without the invitation of our Church, whose canonical territory is Ukraine, Patriarch Bartholomew sent two of his representatives - “exarchs” - to Kyiv. With the wording: “in preparation for the granting of autocephaly to the Orthodox Church in Ukraine.”

Wait, what does “Constantinople” mean? Even from a school history textbook it is known that Constantinople fell long ago, and in its place is the Turkish city of Istanbul?

Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew I. Photo: www.globallookpress.com

That's right. The capital of the first Christian Empire - the Roman Kingdom (Byzantium) - fell back in 1453, but the Patriarchate of Constantinople survived under Turkish rule. Since then, the Russian State has helped the Patriarchs of Constantinople a lot, both financially and politically. Despite the fact that after the fall of Constantinople, Moscow assumed the role of the Third Rome (the center of the Orthodox world), the Russian Church did not challenge the status of Constantinople as “first among equals” and the designation of its primates “Ecumenical”. However, a number of Patriarchs of Constantinople did not appreciate this support and did everything to weaken the Russian Church. Although in reality they themselves were representatives of only Phanar - a small Istanbul district where the residence of the Patriarch of Constantinople is located.

Read also:

“Patriarch Bartholomew is three times worthy of trial and defrocking”: The Patriarchate of Constantinople dances to the tune of the United States Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople is escalating the conflict with the Russian Orthodox Church...

This is a disguised impostor. Once upon a time, in Soviet years, this native of Donbass, who practically did not know Ukrainian language, was indeed the legitimate Metropolitan of Kyiv, a hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church (although even in those years there were many unpleasant rumors about the personal life of Metropolitan Philaret). But when he was not elected Patriarch of Moscow in 1990, he harbored a grudge. And as a result, on the wave of nationalist sentiments, he created his own nationalist sect - the “Kiev Patriarchate”.

This man (whose name according to his passport is Mikhail Antonovich Denisenko) was first defrocked for causing a schism, and then completely anathematized, that is, excommunicated from the Church. The fact that False Philaret (he was deprived of his monastic name 20 years ago, at the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1997) wears patriarchal robes and periodically performs actions identical to Orthodox sacred rites speaks exclusively of the artistic abilities of this already middle-aged man, as well as - his personal ambitions.

And does the Patriarchate of Constantinople want to give autocephaly to such characters in order to weaken the Russian Church? Really Orthodox people will they follow them?

Unfortunately, a significant part of the Ukrainian population has little understanding of the intricacies of canon law. And therefore, when old man with a gray-haired beard in a patriarchal headdress says that Ukraine has the right to a “single local Ukrainian Orthodox Church” (UPOC), then many believe him. And of course, state nationalist Russophobic propaganda is doing its job. But even in these difficult circumstances, the majority of Orthodox Christians in Ukraine remain children of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

At the same time, Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople never formally recognized the Ukrainian nationalist schisms. Moreover, relatively recently, in 2016, one of the official representatives of the Patriarchate of Constantinople (according to some sources, a CIA agent and at the same time right hand Patriarch Bartholomew) Father Alexander Karloutsos stated:

As you know, the Ecumenical Patriarch recognizes only Patriarch Kirill as the spiritual head of all Rus', which means, of course, also Ukraine.

However, recently Patriarch Bartholomew has intensified his activities to destroy the unity of the Russian Orthodox Church, for which he is doing everything to unite nationalist sects and, apparently, after their oath to him, provide them with the coveted Tomos (Decree) of Ukrainian autocephaly.

“Tomos of Autocephaly” as an “axe of war”

- But what can this Tomos lead to?

To the most terrible consequences. Ukrainian schisms, despite the statements of Patriarch Bartholomew, this will not heal, but will strengthen existing ones. And the worst thing is that it will give them additional grounds to demand their churches and monasteries, as well as other property, from the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Over the past few years, dozens of Orthodox shrines were captured by schismatics, including using physical strength. If the Patriarchate of Constantinople legalizes these nationalist sects, a real religious war could begin.

- How do other Orthodox Churches feel about Ukrainian autocephaly? Are there many of them?

Yes, there are 15 of them, and representatives of a number of them have repeatedly spoken out on this matter. Here are just a few quotes from primates and representatives of Local Orthodox Churches on Ukrainian topics.

Patriarch of Alexandria and All Africa Theodore II:

Let's pray to the Lord, who does everything for our good, who will guide us on the path to solving these problems. If the schismatic Denisenko wants to return to the fold of the Church, he must return to where he left.

(that is, to the Russian Orthodox Church - ed.).

Patriarch of Antioch and All the East John X:

The Antioch Patriarchate stands together with the Russian Church and speaks out against church schism in Ukraine".

Primate of the Orthodox Church of Jerusalem Patriarch Theophilos III:

We most categorically condemn actions directed against parishes of the canonical Orthodox Church in Ukraine. It is not for nothing that the Holy Fathers of the Church remind us that the destruction of the unity of the Church is a mortal sin.

Primate of the Serbian Orthodox Church Patriarch Irinej:

A very dangerous and even catastrophic situation, probably fatal for the unity of Orthodoxy [is the possible] act of honoring and restoring schismatics to the rank of bishops, especially arch-schismatics such as the “Kiev Patriarch” Filaret Denisenko. Bringing them to liturgical service and communion without repentance and return to the bosom of the Russian Church, which they renounced. And all this without Moscow’s consent and coordination with them.”

Besides, in exclusive interview Representative for the Tsargrad TV channel Patriarchate of Jerusalem Archbishop Theodosius (Hanna) gave an even clearer description of what was happening:

The problem of Ukraine and the problem of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine is an example of the interference of politicians in church affairs. Unfortunately, this is where the implementation of American goals and interests takes place. US policy has targeted Ukraine and the Orthodox Church in Ukraine. The Ukrainian Church has always historically been together with the Russian Church, was one Church with it, and this must be protected and preserved.

"Who are these strange 'exarchs'?"

But let us return to the fact that the Patriarch of Constantinople sent two of his representatives, the so-called “exarchs,” to Ukraine. It is already clear that this is illegal. Who are they, and who will receive them in Kyiv?

These two people, quite young by episcopal standards (both are under 50), are natives of Western Ukraine, where nationalist and Russophobic sentiments are especially strong. Even in their youth, both found themselves abroad, where they eventually found themselves part of two semi-schismatic jurisdictions - the “UOC in the USA” and the “UOC in Canada” (at one time these were Ukrainian nationalist sects, which were granted legal status by the same Patriarchate of Constantinople). So, a little more about each.

1) Archbishop Daniel (Zelinsky), cleric of the UOC in the USA. In the past - a Uniate, in the rank of Greek Catholic deacon he transferred to this American Ukrainian nationalist “Church”, where he made a career.

2) Bishop Hilarion (Rudnik), cleric of the “UOC in Canada.” Known as a radical Russophobe and supporter Chechen terrorists. Thus, it is known that “on June 9, 2005, while in Turkey, where he was a translator during the meeting of Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople with the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko, he was detained by the Turkish police. The bishop was accused of traveling on false documents and being a “Chechen rebel.” Subsequently, this figure was released, and now, together with Archbishop Daniel (Zelinsky), he became the “exarch” of the Patriarch of Constantinople in Ukraine.

Of course, as “uninvited guests,” they should not even be accepted into the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church. They will receive and, apparently, solemnly, at state level Poroshenko and his associates. And of course, the leaders of pseudo-Orthodox sects will turn to them with joy (and maybe even a bow). There is no doubt that it will look like a nationalist booth with an abundance of “zhovto-blakit” and Bandera banners and shouts of “Glory to Ukraine!” To the question of what relation this has to patristic Orthodoxy, it is not difficult to answer: none.

In June 1924, the Patriarch had to face the danger associated with the policy of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. In the Orthodox world, the Patriarch of Constantinople is traditionally considered first among equals, which, however, does not mean that he has any rights in relation to the Local Orthodox Churches. In the early 1920s. The policy of the Patriarchs of Constantinople changed dramatically and began to diverge from the Orthodox tradition. This manifested itself especially sharply during the years of the patriarchate of Meletios (Metaxakis) (1923-1924), who was a supporter of radical innovations in church life, akin to those introduced by Russian renovationists. In addition, Patriarch Meletius openly interfered with the jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate, uncanonically declaring autocephalous parts of the Russian Church in Finland, Poland and Estonia.

Patriarch Meletios convened his “Pan-Orthodox Council” in May-July 1923, which was held in Constantinople. Hardly more than a dozen people gathered for this “Pan-Orthodox Council,” none of whom officially represented any of the Patriarchates. The “Council” replaced the Julian calendar with the Gregorian calendar, it decided to change the Paschalia, forever established in the Orthodox Church by the definition of the First Ecumenical Council, allowed clergy to cut their hair and abolished the mandatory wearing of cassocks; introduced non-canonical marriage and bigamy for priests, thereby upsetting the order and unity that prevailed in the autocephalous Orthodox Churches.

Patriarch Meletius benefited from the fact that the renovationist movement had strengthened in Russia." Living Church"with a program of modernist reforms very similar to his own. And, on the occasion of his election as Patriarch of Alexandria, the synod of the "Living Church" wrote to Meletius: "The Holy Synod (of the Renovationists - D.S.) with sincere Best wishes remembers the moral support that Your Beatitude gave us when you were still the Patriarch of Constantinople, entering into communion with us as the only legitimate ruling body of the Russian Orthodox Church." Moreover, his successors Gregory VII and Constantine VI remained in communion with the "Living Church "(communication was interrupted only in 1929), and Gregory even called for the resignation of Patriarch Tikhon.

Not content with this, Gregory demanded “from the Russian archbishops Anastasius and Alexander, who were in Constantinople at that time, to stop speaking out against Soviet power, not to mention Patriarch Tikhon, and gave them advice to recognize the power of the Bolsheviks. Having not met sympathy on their part, he ordered an investigation and banned them in the priesthood. He appealed to the Serbian Patriarch Dimitri with a request to close the Russian Synod of Bishops in Sremski Karlovci, which was refused.

In the summer of 1924, the Evdokimov Synod, naturally with the support of the GPU, vigorously spread rumors in the press that the Ecumenical Patriarch had removed Patriarch Tikhon from the Administration Russian Church(Izvestia No. 124, June 1, 1924) and even banned him from the priesthood.

The plan of the GPU was to support the Renovationists through the mouth of the Ecumenical Patriarch as the core of the Russian Church, and to convince Patriarch Tikhon that it was better for him to retire from the Patriarchate. The GPU used its capabilities to ensure that in the eyes of the Ecumenical Patriarch it was the renovationists who looked legitimate Church. However, it should be emphasized that canonically the Patriarch of Constantinople has only primacy of honor before the Russian Patriarch, but has no power over him. Moreover, 2nd rule II Ecumenical Council prohibits the bishop from interfering in the affairs of another diocese. However, despite this, the GPU and the renovationists still hoped to use the Patriarch of Constantinople to remove Patriarch Tikhon.

On April 17, 1924, at a meeting of the Synod in Constantinople, a decision was made to send a special mission to Russia to study the state of church affairs, and from the message it follows that the Patriarch understands the manifestations of Russian churchliness to be reduced to the Living Church. Simultaneously with the implementation of the plan for the introduction of the Krasnitsky GPU, a plan was carried out to discredit Patriarch Tikhon in the eyes of the Patriarch of Constantinople and incline him to the side of the “Living Church”. On April 30, the composition of the commission was approved, and on May 6, in his speech before the Synod, Patriarch Gregory VII of Constantinople called on Patriarch Tikhon to voluntarily renounce the Patriarchate and immediately retire from the Church Administration. The Synod decided that the commission in its work “would definitely rely on church movements loyal to the Government of the USSR”, i.e. against the Renovationists, the Synod also spoke in favor of the abdication of the Patriarch and the abolition of the patriarchate in Russia. The work of the commission in the USSR, according to the plan of the GPU, was designed to support the renovationist movement and put additional pressure on the Patriarch during negotiations with Krasnitsky.

However, not all Local Orthodox Churches were inclined to support renovationism. So back in February 1924, a delegation of the Jerusalem Patriarchate visited Russia. Its members assessed the church situation in Russia objectively; the head of the delegation, Konstantin Grigoriadi, definitely spoke out in support of the legitimate head of the Church, Patriarch Tikhon, and for condemning all trends of renovationism.

It is interesting to note that all the documents cited above were deposited in the fund of the secretariat of E. Yaroslavsky, which suggests that the ARC was actively interested in the situation of inter-Orthodox contacts. The ARC and the GPU were very interested in strengthening the international authority of the Renovationists and in creating the appearance of their support from world Orthodoxy.

On June 6, with a letter from the representative of the Patriarch of Constantinople in Russia, Vasily Dimopulo, the Patriarch received extracts from the minutes of the meetings of the Synod in Constantinople, which contained a call on him to renounce the Patriarchate. On June 18, as follows from the message of Metropolitans Peter and Seraphim, Patriarch Tikhon wrote a letter to Gregory VII, in which he pointed out the uncanonical nature of Gregory VII’s intervention in the affairs of the Russian Church, refused to renounce the Patriarchate, since “the latter will only please the schismatic renovationists,” the Patriarch wrote : "The people are not with schismatics, but with their lawful and Orthodox Patriarch" and spoke out against the abolition of the patriarchate.

After this letter, Gregory VII broke off communication with Patriarch Tikhon and henceforth carried out all his contacts with the Evdokimov Synod as the supposedly legitimate governing body of the Russian Church. His example was followed, not without pressure exerted through Soviet foreign policy channels, by other Eastern Patriarchs. Soviet authorities managed to achieve external isolation of the Patriarchal Church, which posed an undoubted danger for universal Orthodoxy. The convening of the Pan-Orthodox Council in Constantinople was scheduled for 1925, which was preparing to become a renovationist false council. The Evdokimov Renovationists were actively preparing for this cathedral.

On June 10, a pre-conciliar meeting opened in Moscow under the chairmanship of Evdokim, who made a decision to liquidate the institution of the patriarchate. According to a summary compiled by Tuchkov on the work of the department in 1924, “156 priests, 83 bishops and 84 laymen” were present at the congress. The same report indicated that 126 secret GPU informants were sent to the meeting, i.e. about 40% of the meeting.

The period of April - July 1924 was extremely difficult for the Patriarch. The GPU launched a massive offensive against the Patriarch, which was carried out in the following main directions: 1) mass arrests of the episcopate loyal to the Patriarch; 2) an attempt to introduce Krasnitsky into Church Administration with the aim of splitting the Church and compromising the Patriarch; 3) declination Eastern Patriarchs on the side of renovationism, achieving international isolation of the Patriarch; 4) a massive campaign to discredit the Patriarch in the press. However, Patriarch Tikhon managed to survive, preserve the unity of the Church, and managed to largely destroy these plans.

Bishop PHOTIUS. The 70th Anniversary of the Pan-Orthodox Congress in Constantinople // Orthodox Life. No. 1. 1994. P. 42.
RGASPI. F.89. Op.4. D.89. L.12; Published: Russian Orthodox Church and the communist state. 1917-1941. Documents and photographic materials. M., 1996. P.189-190.
RGASPI. F.89. Op.4. D.89. L.13; Published: Russian Orthodox Church and the communist state. P.190-191.
RGASPI. F.89. Op.4. D.89. L.14; Published: Russian Orthodox Church and the communist state. P.193 -194.
RGASPI. F.89. Op.4. D.89. L.17; Published: Russian Orthodox Church and the communist state. P.195-196.
Investigative case of Patriarch Tikhon. Collection of documents based on materials from the Central Election Commission of the FSB. M., 2000. P. 773.
CA FSB D. N-1780. T.13. L.53; Publ.: Investigative case. P.377.
FSB Central Election Commission. F.2. Op.4. D.372. L.201.

On May 22, the visit of Patriarch of the Orthodox Church of Constantinople Bartholomew to Russia begins.

Patriarch Bartholomew the First, arriving on Saturday on an official visit to the Russian Orthodox Church, is the 232nd bishop in the ancient see of the once capital of the Byzantine Empire and, as such, “first among equals” among all the heads of the Orthodox Churches of the world. His title is Archbishop of Constantinople - New Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch.

Today, under the direct jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople, there are only a few thousand Orthodox Greeks who remain to live in modern Turkey, as well as much more numerous and influential Greek Orthodox dioceses in the diaspora, primarily in the United States. The Patriarch of Constantinople is also, by virtue of his historical position and the personal qualities of Patriarch Bartholomew, an extremely authoritative figure for all the Greek Orthodox Churches and the entire Hellenistic world.

IN last decades the Russian Orthodox Church had difficult relationship with the Patriarchate of Constantinople, mainly due to controversial issues on jurisdiction in the diaspora. In 1995, there was even a short-term break in Eucharistic communion (the joint service of the Liturgy) between the two Churches due to the establishment by the Patriarchate of Constantinople of its jurisdiction in Estonia, which the Moscow Patriarchate considers part of its canonical territory. Particularly important for the Moscow Patriarchate is the non-interference of Constantinople in the church situation in Ukraine, to which Patriarch Bartholomew was pushed by a number of Ukrainian politicians. After the visit to Istanbul in July 2009 of the newly elected Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Kirill, representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church announced a radical improvement in relations and a new stage in communication between the two Churches. also in last years The process of preparation for the Pan-Orthodox Conference has intensified, which should resolve the organizational problems existing between the Orthodox churches of the world.

Patriarch Bartholomew (in the world Dimitrios Archondonis) was born on February 29 (according to the official website of the Patriarchate of Constantinople), according to other sources - on March 12, 1940 on the Turkish island of Imvros in the village of Agioi Theodoroi.

After completing his secondary education in his homeland and at the Zograf Lyceum of Istanbul, he entered the famous Theological School (Seminary) on the island of Halki (Heybeliada) in Istanbul, from which he graduated with honors in 1961, after which he immediately took monastic vows and became a deacon under named after Bartholomew.

From 1961 to 1963, Deacon Bartholomew served military service in the Turkish Armed Forces.

From 1963 to 1968 he studied canon law at the Ecumenical Institute in Bosse (Switzerland) and at the University of Munich. He holds a doctorate from the Gregorian University in Rome for his dissertation “On the Codification of Sacred Canons and Canonical Orders in the Eastern Church.”

In 1969, upon returning from Western Europe, Bartholomew was appointed to the post of assistant dean of the Theological School on the island of Halki, where he was soon elevated to the rank of priest. Six months later, the Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras elevated the young priest to the rank of archimandrite of the Patriarchal Chapel of St. Andrey.

After Patriarch Demetrius ascended the throne of Constantinople in 1972, the Personal Patriarchal Office was formed. Archimandrite Bartholomew was invited to the position of head, who on December 25, 1973 was consecrated bishop with the title Metropolitan of Philadelphia. His Eminence Bartholomew remained in the position of head of the chancellery until 1990.

From March 1974 until his ascension to the Ecumenical Throne, Bartholomew was a member Holy Synod, as well as many synodal commissions.

In 1990, Bartholomew was appointed Metropolitan of Chalcedon, and on October 22, 1991, after the death of Patriarch Demetrius, he was elected Primate of the Church of Constantinople. The ceremony of his enthronement took place on November 2.

The Patriarchal residence and the Cathedral in the name of the Holy Great Martyr George the Victorious are located in Phanar, one of the districts of Istanbul (in Orthodox tradition‑ Constantinople).

Patriarch Bartholomew I speaks Greek, Turkish, Latin, Italian, English, French and German languages. He is one of the founders of the Law Society of the Eastern Churches and for a number of years was its vice-president. For 15 years he was a member and 8 years deputy chairman of the “Faith and Church Order” commission of the World Council of Churches (WCC).

Patriarch Bartholomew I is famous for his active participation in various activities aimed at protecting the environment, thanks to which he received the unofficial title of “green Patriarch”. It regularly organizes international seminars to discuss ways to mobilize all possible means to achieve harmony between humanity and nature. In 2005, Patriarch Bartholomew I for his services in protecting environment was awarded the UN Prize "Fighter for the Protection of Planet Earth".

Patriarch Bartholomew I - Honorary Member of the Pro Oriente Foundation (Vienna), Honorary Doctor of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Athens, Moscow Theological Academy, Faculty of Philosophy of the University of Crete, Department of Environmental Protection of the University of the Aegean (Lesbos), University of London, Catholic University of Leuven (Belgium) , Orthodox St. Sergius Institute (Paris), Faculty of Canon Law of the University of Eze-en-Provence (France), University of Edinburgh, Holy Cross Theological School (Boston), St. Vladimir Theological Academy (New York), Faculty of Theology of the University of Yass (Romania), five departments of the University of Thessaloniki, American universities Georgetown, Tuft, Southern Methodist, Democritus University of Xanthi (Greece) and many others.

Previously, Patriarch Bartholomew visited the Russian Orthodox Church in 1993 (Moscow, St. Petersburg), in 1997 (Odessa), in 2003 (Baku), twice in 2008 (Kyiv; Moscow - in connection with the burial of Patriarch Alexy II) .

The material was prepared based on information from RIA Novosti and open sources

On May 22, the visit of Patriarch of the Orthodox Church of Constantinople Bartholomew to Russia begins.

Today, the direct jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople includes only a few thousand Greek Orthodox Christians who remain to live in modern Turkey, as well as much more numerous and influential Greek Orthodox dioceses in the diaspora, primarily in the United States. The Patriarch of Constantinople is also, by virtue of his historical position and the personal qualities of Patriarch Bartholomew, an extremely authoritative figure for all the Greek Orthodox Churches and the entire Hellenistic world.

In recent decades, the Russian Orthodox Church has had a difficult relationship with the Patriarchate of Constantinople, mainly due to controversial issues of jurisdiction in the diaspora. In 1995, there was even a short-term break in Eucharistic communion (the joint service of the Liturgy) between the two Churches due to the establishment by the Patriarchate of Constantinople of its jurisdiction in Estonia, which the Moscow Patriarchate considers part of its canonical territory. Particularly important for the Moscow Patriarchate is the non-interference of Constantinople in the church situation in Ukraine, to which Patriarch Bartholomew was pushed by a number of Ukrainian politicians. After the visit to Istanbul in July 2009 of the newly elected Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Kirill, representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church announced a radical improvement in relations and a new stage in communication between the two Churches. Also in recent years, the process of preparation for the Pan-Orthodox Conference has intensified, which should resolve the organizational problems existing between the Orthodox churches of the world.

From 1961 to 1963, Deacon Bartholomew served in the Turkish Armed Forces.

In 1969, upon returning from Western Europe, Bartholomew was appointed assistant dean of the Theological School on the island of Halki, where he was soon elevated to the priesthood. Six months later, the Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras elevated the young priest to the rank of archimandrite of the Patriarchal Chapel of St. Andrey.

From March 1974 until his ascension to the Ecumenical Throne, Bartholomew was a member of the Holy Synod, as well as many synodal commissions.

The Patriarchal residence and the Cathedral in the name of the Holy Great Martyr George the Victorious are located in Phanar, one of the districts of Istanbul (in the Orthodox tradition, Constantinople).

Patriarch Bartholomew I speaks Greek, Turkish, Latin, Italian, English, French and German. He is one of the founders of the Law Society of the Eastern Churches and for a number of years was its vice-president. For 15 years he was a member and 8 years deputy chairman of the “Faith and Church Order” commission of the World Council of Churches (WCC).

Patriarch Bartholomew I is known for his active participation in various activities aimed at protecting the environment, thanks to which he received the unofficial title of “green Patriarch”. It regularly organizes international seminars to discuss ways to mobilize all possible means to achieve harmony between humanity and nature. In 2005, Patriarch Bartholomew I was awarded the UN Prize “Fighter for the Protection of Planet Earth” for his services to protecting the environment.

The material was prepared based on information from RIA Novosti and open sources

Nowadays, a lot is changing on the political map of the world. For the first time in many years, the successors to the work of Ataturk, the founder of the modern Turkish state, were replaced by the Islamic Justice and Development Party. She also declares her commitment to the secular principles of Turkey, but it is obvious that changes are taking place in Turkey as well. The famous Turkish writer and publicist Khaldun Taner wrote: “What are we Turks? Some strange cross between a fez and a hat. The knot, the focus of the contradictions between Eastern mysticism and Western rationalism, part of one and part of the other.”

No matter how the Turkish hand reaches out again for the fez, banned by Ataturk in 1925. It is unclear how such a change of course will affect the process of Turkey's entry into the United Europe. Turkey is a member of NATO, the country was ruled by the military for many years, and this government was secular and pro-Western, but anti-Western and especially anti-American sentiments are very strong in the country. And recently, the Eastern adventure has made Turkey a global outcast. And thanks to the efforts of the Western world, good neighborly relations with Russia and seemingly strong economic ties were severed.

If the future of Turkey as part of Europe is unclear, then the future of the Patriarch of Constantinople does not seem mysterious. He will have to withstand pressure from the Turkish authorities. Not long ago, the Patriarch was already summoned to the prosecutor's office to testify in connection with his official statements that the Patriarchate of Constantinople has ecumenical status. And the Patriarchate of Constantinople, which is allowed to reside on the territory of Turkey, is the object of local law, and Patriarch Bartholomew can be prosecuted in a criminal case on the basis of Article 219 of the Turkish Criminal Code - “negligence in the performance of the duties of a clergyman,” which provides imprisonment for a period from one month to a year. Should not be given of great importance danger of imprisonment for the patriarch, but it should be noted that the Turkish authorities act in a completely legal way, and it will not be easy for the patriarch to defend his title, because he has no (other than historical) grounds for staying on the territory of the Turkish Republic.

The historical foundations are clear to everyone: Asia Minor once belonged to the Byzantine Orthodox kingdom. But in 1453, Byzantium, exhausted by internal strife and church intrigues with Catholics, fell. Although the church did not suffer particularly from this, and in a material sense even benefited, since the Patriarch of Constantinople became an ethnarch, as well as the heads of the Armenian, Jewish and other communities. That is, the patriarch began to have, in addition to church, also secular power over the numerous Greek people throughout the entire territory of the Ottoman Empire. But in the 19th century, relations between the Turkish government and the church began to deteriorate, because some patriarchs supported the liberation struggle of the Greek people. And relations were already deteriorating when, after the end of the First World War, Turkey was occupied by England, France, Italy and Greece. At that time, the then Patriarch of Constantinople Meletios Metaxakis, notorious in the Orthodox world as a reformer, declared that the Church of Constantinople no longer belonged to the Ottoman Empire, but belonged to Greece. During the same period, the Greeks conceived the idea that Istanbul was to become for them the “New Athens”. To implement it, they wanted to use Entente troops, believing that the occupation of the imperial capital would only be temporary, and after the withdrawal of troops, the capital would become Greek. But as a result of the bloody war, the Kemalists, supporters of Ataturk, won, the Greeks were expelled from the territory of Turkey, exchanging them for the Hellenic Turks, the history of the Ottoman Empire ended and the history of the secular Republic of Turkey began. In an exchange in February 1923, Patriarch Constantine VI was removed from Istanbul-Constantinople, and the history of the Patriarchate of Constantinople actually ended, in addition, several thousand Orthodox Greeks remained in Turkey. But Western politicians sensed the benefits that could be derived from the presence of a Greek patriarch, burdened with titles but deprived of a flock, in the Muslim city of Istanbul and a few months later achieved the election of a new patriarch, Basil II.

“After this, the Lausanne Peace Treaty was signed, where the Turkish delegation insisted that the Patriarch of Constantinople remain only the leader of the Orthodox community in Turkey and not extend its jurisdiction to other countries, to which the consent of England and its Entente allies was obtained. This is recorded in the protocols of the agreement. The new republican leaders of Turkey did not want world powers to interfere in the internal affairs of their country because of the patriarch; at the same time, they did not want the Patriarch of Constantinople (Istanbul) to interfere in the life of other countries and societies. This is fixed and international treaties, and the internal legislation of our country,” says Deniz Berktay, a correspondent for the Turkish newspaper Cumhuriyet (“Republic”) in Ukraine. - The newspaper was founded by one of the comrades-in-arms of the founder of our republic Mustafa Kemal (Atatürk) - Yunus Nadi - and adheres to the policy of Atatürk, who created precisely the secular, and not religious state on the territory of Turkey. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, the Turkish leadership did not interfere in the affairs of the Phanar community, provided that its Primate did not interfere in the life of other countries and Orthodox Churches.”

Undoubtedly, the Western “friends” of Orthodoxy cared least about the church and, of course, did not and do not expect the return of Christianity to the territory of Asia Minor. Moscow Archpriest Vsevolod Shpiller wrote in 1953: “As for his (the Patriarch of Constantinople’s) position in Turkey, that is, in his diocese, it deteriorated catastrophically as a result of this game, and he, in essence, barely remained in Constantinople. But the connections with the Entente formed back in the last century (during Russian-Turkish wars) strongly strengthened, especially along the Masonic line. The Patriarch of Constantinople tried to rely on these connections for his claims during this period.” Western “friends” did not dream that church services would ever begin again in Hagia Sophia. How the Greeks and other Orthodox peoples dream about this. They understood how they could benefit from the creation of a controlled Orthodox Vatican in Turkey. And the “Vatican” did not hesitate, and immediately began to act. For example, in 1924 against Orthodoxy in Russia, when Patriarch Gregory VII was even invited by the Bolsheviks to replace the allegedly deposed Patriarch Tikhon. Later, the Americans began to manage this historical center of Orthodoxy.

After World War II, relations between the USSR and Turkey deteriorated noticeably. At that time, the positions of the leaders of the Turkish Republic coincided with the position of the United States. When the state policy towards the Church changed in the USSR and a new patriarch was elected, in the West this was regarded as new way strengthening the influence of the USSR on Europe and the East. The then Patriarch of Constantinople Maxim V spoke positively about the Greek communists, for which he was accused of friendship with the Soviet Union and propaganda of communism. Therefore, the leadership of Turkey and the United States forced him to leave his post in order to avoid conflicts.

And then, in 1949, Archbishop Athenagoras, managing director, was elected the new Patriarch of Constantinople Orthodox parishes in USA. After his election, he flew to Turkey on the personal plane of US President Harry Truman and immediately received citizenship. In one of his interviews, Athenagoras openly spoke about himself as a religious “component of the Truman Doctrine,” aimed against the spread of the influence of the USSR and communism in the Middle East and Europe. After that American politicians began to interfere in the affairs of Turkey and the Patriarchate of Constantinople, focusing on the title “ecumenical” to strengthen the influence of the patriarch on Orthodox communities Europe and the Middle East, pursuing their policies. That is, in essence, they used the Patriarchate of Constantinople (Istanbul) as a base for promoting their interests in the Middle East and Europe.

There was such a case. In 1967, the Turkish government wanted to check the finances of the Constantinople (Istanbul) Patriarchate. It was then that the United States was planning to transfer two warships to Turkey, and the condition for their transfer was the cessation of all financial checks of the Patriarchate. Which is what the government did. This is written in the memoirs of the then Turkish Foreign Minister Ihsan Sabri Caglayangil. Now there is a change in the consciousness of influential circles in Turkey in relation to the United States. It became obvious to everyone that they were applying for the position of world gendarme. Moreover, they want to use this position to their advantage. It’s no longer a secret that the power of the United States rests on unsecured pieces of paper worth a few pence. And in order for people to mistake these bills for hundred-dollar bills, you need to properly threaten the client with your fist. But a time comes when many peoples and states no longer like this.

With regard to the Patriarch of Constantinople, our country and especially the Russian Orthodox Church are in an ambiguous position. On the one hand, he is the primate of the local Orthodox Church, on the other, he is increasingly interested in politics, and anti-Russian politics. To do this, he tries to play on the unhealthy nationalism of the Greeks, on the delusional great idea of creating a Greek state within the borders of the Byzantine Empire. Passion for this idea had already led the Greek people to disaster in 1923, when, after the failure of the operation to capture Constantinople and other areas of Turkey, they were forced to leave Asia Minor. Anti-Russian sentiments also dictated the patriarch’s statements about the “Moscow - Third Rome” theory, as a crazy idea, interference in the affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church in Estonia, England and Ukraine. The Patriarch of Constantinople believes that the ancient Kiev Metropolis is his jurisdiction! “Such activities of the Constantinople (Istanbul) Patriarchate harm the image of Turkey and complicate our international relations. We don't want the territory Turkish Republic was the center of provocations against the Orthodox countries of Europe,” says Deniz Berktay in an interview with the newspaper “Orthodox Ukraine”.

Today in the Orthodox world the situation has worsened significantly in connection with the so-called Ecumenical Council. Firstly, this council meets without any necessity, and in ancient times councils were not convened without urgent need, especially universal ones. Secondly, the aggravation of relations between East and West clearly indicates that this cathedral is “political”. Thirdly, doesn’t a child today know that the Patriarchate of Constantinople is supervised by the United States? And everyone knows about US interests in relation to Russia

Patriarch Bartholomew lured the Orthodox Churches, and, first of all, the Russian Church, into a kind of trap. It would seem that eternal conversations about the cathedral would continue for centuries, and everyone agreed to the draft documents, which, roughly speaking, “in Byzantine style,” were handed to the Local Churches. And everyone, without reading it carefully and without thinking about the consequences, willingly agreed on them, without counting on their application. Then, the Patriarchate of Constantinople, quite “Byzantine”, declared that since the projects were agreed upon by the bureaucrats, they would go into action regardless of whether they changed their mind about participating in the council Local Churches or not. The Council is needed by the Patriarch of Constantinople in order to de facto establish himself as the head of the universal Orthodox Church, that is, the Eastern Pope, which neither the Russian Orthodox Church nor other Local Churches have ever recognized. The satanic character of such ecclesiology is clear to everyone. It is clear why the United States needs this: a blow to the Church is a blow to Russia. By avoiding participation in such a council, our Church avoided a schism. But the program continues...

Obviously, the “Byzantines” and the Americans took aim at Ukraine. The explosion of insane nationalism, the favorite weapon of the West, will lead to ecclesiastical madness. Some of the Ukrainian clergy, with joy, in order to get rid of the Muscovites, will rush under the omophorion of the Patriarch of Constantinople as “metropolitans of the Pontic, Asian and Thracian districts.” And in addition, “the bishops of the foreigners of the above-mentioned districts” will agree to be appointed “from the above-mentioned most holy throne of the most holy church of Constantinople” (28th canon of the 4th Ecumenical Council). When to achieve political result, then you can act as zealots of the ancient statutes. To deal with the “barbarians” from Russia, we can recall the “pentarchy” dear to the Greek heart, according to the 28th rule of the Fourth Council (the Roman Church is mentioned there, but the Russian one is not).

Playing on the injured Greek national feeling takes no last place in an anti-Russian and actually anti-Orthodox ensemble. Alas, the Greeks demonize the Turks and cannot understand that the cause of the Byzantine catastrophe lies not in the Turks, but in internal sins: Uniatism, discord, etc. In this sense, Russia, which survived a similar catastrophe, but repented and managed to convert a significant, if not overwhelming number of Tatars and Mongols to Orthodoxy and was not fixated on the desecrated national feeling, revealed itself as the Third Rome, a sound about which the modern Greek does not want to hear. And the idea of restoring the Second (old) Rome with the hands of hapless “barbarians” from Russia has long lived in Greek minds. The politicians from Constantinople and the forces behind them are trying to rely on it.

For Russians, eternally deprived of cunning diplomats defending national interests, all that remains is to stand in the Truth and for the truth, following the words of the great Russian saint Alexander Nevsky. And such a program has never failed Russia.

Patriarchate of Constantinople: history and position in the modern world. But what can this Tomos lead to? When did this idea of ​​an “Orthodox Vatican” appear?

Patriarchate of Constantinople: history and position in the modern world. But what can this Tomos lead to? When did this idea of an “Orthodox Vatican” appear?