Military Review

So how many Orthodox churches will be in Ukraine? Reaction of Constantinople (Istanbul)

63
Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew responded to the requests of Petro Poroshenko to create a single autocephalous church in Ukraine, that is, to actually recognize the UOC of the Kiev Patriarchate, which is currently considered divisive. From the statement of Bartholomew (quoted by UNIAN):
According to the Divine and Holy Canons, as well as the age-old church order and the Holy Tradition, the Ecumenical Patriarchate is interested in preserving the general Orthodox unity and care for the Orthodox Churches throughout the world, especially the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which received Christianity from the Constantinople and saving baptism. Thus, as a true mother church, the Ecumenical Patriarchate considered issues relating to the church situation in Ukraine.



According to the Patriarch of Constantinople, he intends to start discussing this issue with the "sister churches."

Recall that in Ukraine there are two Ukrainian Orthodox churches. One of them - the UOC of the Moscow Patriarchate - recognized in the world, the other - the UOC of the Kyiv Patriarchate (not officially recognized in the world).

Recently, the President of Ukraine, speaking in the Rada, said that Ukraine is close to receiving its autocephalous church. He also met with the head of the UOC-MP, Metropolitan Onufri of Kiev. From the message press service UOC MP:
The President informed His Beatitude about his visit to Istanbul, where he met with the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and members of the Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. The President of Ukraine and the Primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church exchanged views on the intensification of interfaith dialogue in Ukraine.


So how many Orthodox churches will be in Ukraine? Reaction of Constantinople (Istanbul)


Details of the reaction of Onufriy Poroshenko’s initiative is not given. Recall that under the constitution Ukraine is a secular state, and the president, by definition, cannot interfere in church affairs. But who in Ukraine ever paid attention to the constitution? ..
Photos used:
Twitter
63 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. aszzz888
    aszzz888 April 23 2018 07: 27
    +4
    Recall that under the constitution, Ukraine is a secular state, and the president, by definition, cannot interfere in church affairs.

    ... and who explained to the Peksko-drunk ?, it is always drunk because it carries what is not falling! laughing
    1. Thrall
      Thrall April 23 2018 07: 31
      +25
      No one will give them autocephaly. The decision is made only unanimously, and the Russian Church is present there. Dot.
      Petya nervously thumps aside ...
      1. Ushly_bashkort
        Ushly_bashkort April 23 2018 07: 42
        +4
        And where is the guarantee that ours will be against? Do not we now invest most of all in Ukraine?
        1. Teberii
          Teberii April 23 2018 07: 52
          +2
          The Patriarch of Constantinople without the approval of Moscow is unlikely to go into conflict.
          1. hrych
            hrych April 23 2018 08: 58
            +6
            Quote: Teberii
            hardly going to conflict

            Firstly, the Ecumenical Patriarch is not in essence, but in name. Moreover, not even planetary, not even the solar system, but the Ecumenical laughing Residents of Proxima Centauri will be greatly surprised. The Patriarch of Constantinople itself cannot even be called that way; there was no city with that name. The city was called New Rome, then it was renamed to Istanbul. Worse than the Greek priests, liars do not exist. They declared the Eastern Roman Empire Byzantium, and New Rome in the Greek manner by Constantinople was the most ridiculous, much later, after the fall of this city and state. Of course on the pages of their little books. There is also doubt whether they belong to the Greeks. The Romans replaced the Macedonian empire in the region, which ceased the Persian Empire, which in turn captured Interfluve, Anatolia and Egypt. Outwardly, these Greek priests are blackish, which is not characteristic of either the Romans, Hellenes, Persians, or even the Egyptians, and let the black wigs of the Egyptians and mummies of the pharaohs not bother them. Also, the cult of these priests is very doubtful, here the venomous venom, in the form of bones, strange nightly rituals, etc. are revered. Russia never obeyed the Patriarch Romeev, did not use either Latin or Greek mov. Immediately used the Russian language. The Nikon schism is connected with the intrigues of these people when they wanted the Holy Russian Church to subjugate these Greek priests. Therefore, one can expect everything from these people, the schism of the Russian and Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia has been overcome, a complex process is now under way to overcome differences with the Old Believers. And these are interested in the weakness of aftokephaly, for their significance.
            1. Ushly_bashkort
              Ushly_bashkort April 23 2018 09: 57
              +2
              ROCOR, these are the ones that Adika blessed on a campaign against the USSR? Wonderful partners, you can’t say anything.
              Well, about the plot it’s wonderful of course, the main thing is not to remove the cap from the foil =)
              1. hrych
                hrych April 23 2018 11: 06
                +3
                The Ecumenical Patriarch generally collaborated with the Ottomans, Islamists and Satanists. Therefore, the NSDAP against their background does not look much worse. And the fact that now the French invasion of 1812 is perceived calmly, and Napoleon is respected, so time heals. The participants of the last Great War are still alive, and 30-40 years will pass and the indicated character of German history will be noted in the textbooks as a great military leader and effective manager. Especially since the Germans have African-Arab friends who profess the dogma of killing infidels and crippling children with rituals, they will soon recall the past military valor and at least Christian values. It is also time to overcome the church schism and ethnic strife of all Europeans against the background of obscurantism and the invasion of others. And finally remember that "They fought for Odin." laughing
                1. Ushly_bashkort
                  Ushly_bashkort April 23 2018 11: 50
                  0
                  I don’t remember Napoleon arranging genocides and dividing people into varieties.
                  1. hrych
                    hrych April 23 2018 12: 37
                    +3
                    You just need to carefully read the story. Then it was the norm, Africans were transported in the holds, the Chinese were poisoned with opium, and Napoleon was forced to rip open the belly of the Arabs in the Egyptian company, so that they would not hide pearls and gems in their stomachs. One way or another, they did not consider anyone but Europeans to be people at all, even before the advent of racial theories. Napoleonic hordes were atrocities no less, there was simply less time and space seized, there was no front along the road to Moscow, then they fled back along this road. Burned villages and cities, slaughtered peasants and townspeople. True, almost all were killed and only the Emperor returned with a bunch of guards.
            2. Normal ok
              Normal ok April 23 2018 14: 55
              0
              Quote: hrych
              The city was called New Rome, then it was renamed Istanbul ... They declared the Eastern Roman Empire Byzantium ...

              Mixed into a bunch of horses and people. The city was originally called Bisanton (Byzantium), then Constantinople (in the 5-6 centuries, the name New Rome was simultaneously used), then Istanbul.
              As for the history of the Byzantine Empire itself, read anyone other than Fomenko.
              Russia never obeyed the Patriarch of Romeev, did not use either Latin or Greek mov.

              Finally funny. First, Russia (in the form of Kievan Rus) received the Christianity of the Eastern rite from Byzantium, and not from a vacuum. Secondly, the Moscow Patriarchate has historically been an impostor. Read at least the “History of the Russian Church” by N. Nikolsky (the Soviet textbook for the historical faculties of universities) or the “Historical Path of Orthodoxy” by Protopresbyter Schmeman (although he is from the white emigrants - ROCOR, but a very respected person in Orthodoxy).
              Regarding "Mova", the Old Slavic language is much closer to Ukrainian than modern Russian (Russian developed more).
              1. hrych
                hrych April 23 2018 15: 32
                +1
                So you are a typical victim of the propaganda of the Greek priests, when the Romans and the Roman Empire were identified with the Greeks and their filthy names and language. I repeat, Constantine built a city under the sole name New Rome, he had no other name. And the Roman will never call the city the Greek name and speak their language, there is its own Latin. Everything else is the accepted name of historiography, which, by the way, is not hidden. This time. Also, the pro-Greek PVL explicitly says that Christianity in Russia begins with the Apostle Andrew. The official translation by Kiryukha and Mythodius was made into Church Slavonic. Vladimir, however, was not baptized according to the Eastern rite, but according to the rite of the Roman Orthodox Church, but in the Slavic language, and not in Latin, and even less so in Greek. Orthodoxy is a purely Russian term; it has an indirect meaning to Roman Orthodox. In fact, the baptism of Rus did not occur according to the traditions of the orthodox. The difference between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Orthodox is huge, in particular, we have our own saints, such as Alexander Nevsky, Andrey Bogolyubsky, the same Vladimir, Boris, Gleb, etc. I don’t even want to speak about your Ukrainian language, because there isn’t language, and a mixture of the artificial Polish-Hungarian language of the Galicians and the Surzhik of the Little Russians is not the same thing. Ancient Russian from modern Russian is practically no different and any Russian can read the text of medieval Russia without difficulty. As dobatyevskie chronicles, "The Word of Igor’s Regiment", "Zadonshchina" and other monuments of ancient Russian literature. There is also Church Slavonic language, it is already slightly different, it is close to South Slavic, i.e. to Serbo-Bulgarian, but by no means unequivocally. On mov, a helicopter is a helicopter, what else to talk about. Surzhik yes, there is a place to be, but he is closer to Russian than to Polish, although the Polish language is related.
                1. Normal ok
                  Normal ok April 23 2018 23: 07
                  0
                  Quote: hrych
                  when the Romans and the Roman Empire were identified with the Greeks and their filthy names and language

                  Why are the Greeks "filthy"? How did they offend you so much?
                  Quote: hrych
                  the Roman will never call the city the Greek name and speak their language, there is its own Latin

                  In Rome, there was an opinion that we defeated Greece at the military-political level, and she defeated us culturally. In the sense that already by 100. after R.X. Greek culture was perceived in Rome as a sign of good taste. Knowledge of Greek was a must for an educated person. In all the rich Roman homes, the teachers were Greek. Read at least the Soviet manual for universities, "People, manners, customs of ancient Greece and Rome" by L. Vinnichuk. Greek was the common language for most of the Roman Empire (therefore, most of the epistles of the apostles are written in Greek), such as Russian in the USSR.
                  Quote: hrych
                  Vladimir, however, was not baptized according to the Eastern rite, but according to the rite of the Roman Orthodox Church, but in the Slavic language, and not in Latin, and especially not in Greek

                  During the baptism of Vladimir, the Western and Eastern Christian churches were still not completely divided. Although there were already theological differences and the struggle for primacy in the Christian world. The cut of the priests' clothes, language and order of service also varied. As for the baptism of Vladimir, I did not mention him at all. Read my comment carefully. It said that "Kievan Rus received Christianity of the Eastern rite from Byzantium", i.e. what in fact we have.
                  Quote: hrych
                  Orthodoxy is a purely Russian term; it has an indirect meaning to Roman Orthodox. In fact, the baptism of Rus did not occur according to the traditions of the orthodox. The difference between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Orthodox is huge, in particular, we have our own saints, such as Alexander Nevsky, Andrey Bogolyubsky, the same Vladimir, Boris, Gleb, etc.

                  You simply juggle the words “Orthodox” and “Orthodox”, without taking into account their specific meaning in the religious aspect. "Orthodoxy" is a truly purely Russian term. But, it is on 100% is synonymous with the word "orthodox" in the case of the designation of the church. In all but the countries of the former USSR, the "Orthodox" world, the "Orthodox" church is called the "Orthodox Church." By the way, "orthodox" is a Greek and not a Latin word)) and this is by no means a curse word. Your negativity to the word "orthodoxy" comes purely from its modern understanding, the root of which is precisely the liberal rejection of firm convictions. The Roman church calls itself ecumenical (Catholic). In general, to avoid all this leapfrog with self-names, historians now most often use the concepts of "Church of the Eastern Rite" and "Church of the Western Rite".
                  Quote: hrych
                  The official translation by Kiryukha and Mythodius was made in Church Slavonic ... I don’t even want to talk about your Ukrainian language, because there is no such language, and the mixture of artificial Polish-Hungarian is not the same among Galicians and Surzhik of Little Russians. Ancient Russian from modern Russian is practically no different and any Russian can read the text of medieval Russia without difficulty. As dobatyevskie chronicles, "The Word of Igor’s Regiment", "Zadonshchina" and other monuments of ancient Russian literature. There is also Church Slavonic language, it is already slightly different, it is close to South Slavic, i.e. to Serbo-Bulgarian, but by no means unequivocally. On mov, a helicopter is a helicopter, what else to talk about.

                  As for the "MOV", then it is as mine as yours. Just unlike most of the inhabitants of the site, I do not suffer from great-power chauvinism and do not try to pass off wishful thinking by pulling an owl on a globe. For that matter, the Church Slavonic is closer to modern Ukrainian than to modern Russian. An example from the Synodal translation of the Bible: “Then come and judge, saith the Lord. If your sins are like scarlet, they will be white like snow; if they are red like purple, like wave I’ll whitewash. ”The majority of modern Russian-speaking readers have no idea that the word“ wave ”here means wool. Whereas for those who know Ukrainian, this is not a problem, because“ Vova ”is wool in Ukrainian. And there are many such examples.
                  Regarding the "helicopter" - this is generally a juggle. Because loan words, that in Russian, that in Ukrainian, that in any other language - a huge amount. And this has nothing to do with the ancient Slavic linguistic roots. By the way, in the Ukrainian language, the word helicopter has several synonyms, for example, "gvintokryl".
                  1. hrych
                    hrych April 24 2018 13: 31
                    0
                    I’m not talking about the Macedonians who conquered Egypt, Persia, Anatolia, Mesopotamia, etc. I’m talking about people called the Greeks of the last 500 years who have nothing to do with the Macedonians. Rome can indeed be considered a successor of the Macedonian heritage in cultural terms, which is called ancient culture. But the fact that the Greek tradition of orthodox obscurantism, known to us today, is propagating to ancient culture, philosophy, architecture and sciences has nothing to do. Their racial identity is also questionable. This is something disgusting in comparison with the same Russian Orthodox Church, where Russian culture reigns with the remnants of Roman culture hailing from Constantinople. What do you say about the ancient Greek language, about Greek (most likely Macedonian) scholars revered in Rome, like, say, how ancient sculpture, busts and bas-reliefs do not refer to the current Greek priests and not to Greece, as a territorial entity. Alexandria became the main center of ancient culture, and it was in Egypt, where the Macedonians brought all the wisdom from Egypt and the Persian Empire (where Egypt actually belonged). Therefore, the Macedonians created the ancient culture from the symbiosis of the centers subject to the Macedonians, which were inherited by the Ptolemies and Seleucids. Whose traditions Rome continued by conquering Egypt, etc. And now we return to the so-called Late Greeks, who went to the Ottomans as a whole (before that, the so-called Greeks helped the Ottomans against the Romans). Geographically, how the present Greece was captured by the Ottomans in 1453, and gained independence in 1830. Everything, then we deal with the new Greeks, with the new Greek language (not Macedonian, not ancient Greek), the new Greek culture, which has nothing to do with antiquity, the orthodox tradition with black robes, dark rooms, the cult of bones and decay predominates here, mournful chants, etc.
                    1. Normal ok
                      Normal ok April 24 2018 22: 56
                      0
                      Quote: hrych
                      I am talking about people called the Greeks for the last 500 years who have nothing to do with the Macedonians.

                      So nobody argues with this. Where in my comment there was even a hint of modern Greeks (although why I don’t like them, I still don’t understand). Read carefully what I am writing about. Namely, that Byzantium (East Roman Empire) was a bridge through which religion and culture of the "West" of that time))) got into Kievan Rus and then spread further to all small, white and great, etc. etc.
                  2. hrych
                    hrych April 24 2018 14: 11
                    0
                    If you take Wikipedia and immediately pay attention to Byzantium, where:
                    Byzantine Empire, Byzantine Empire, Eastern Roman Empire, self-name Roman Empire Those. the Romans themselves, i.e. the Romans called their empire of course Roman, with the capital New Rome. The old Russian name of the Romans, also historical juggling, just not to be called simply the Romans. And so there is a substitution of concepts, literary magicians. A similar situation with the new Russians, i.e. people of a certain nationality tried to capture the legacy of the Rus, including their name. It’s just that the Russians didn’t allow this, the political situation has changed and the term has disappeared by itself. And it was by the standards of history zilch. The same situation with these privatizers, they called themselves Greeks, by the way the Greeks did not call themselves Greeks, they called themselves Hellenes wassat , but not on the territory where mountain goats walk. The empire, as you know, was called the Macedonian, but while Alexander was still alive, then the dyadohs were divided into their own states. Territorial Greece itself was captured by Philip. Closer to the topic. Let's go back to Wikipedia, not to Fomenko, as you put it, but to the official history:
                    The name "Byzantine" the Eastern Roman Empire received in the writings of Roman historians (Priscus, Malchus, Jordan) immediately after its emergence - in this way they contrasted it with the Western, Hesperian Empire, and after the fall of the latter in 476, the term actually went out of use. Western European historians returned it to scientific use after the fall of Byzantium. The adjective “Byzantine” comes from the original name of Constantinople - Byzantium (Greek Βυζάντιον, Latin Byzantium), where the Roman emperor Constantine I transferred the capital of the Roman Empire in 330, officially renaming the city “New Rome” [3]. The Byzantines themselves called themselves Romans - in Greek, “Romans” [3], and their power - the "Roman (" Rome ") empire" (in the Greek (Byzantine) language - Βασιλεία Ῥωμαίων, Vasily Romemeon) or briefly “Romany” (анией , Romania). Western sources for most of Byzantine history called it the "empire of the Greeks."
                    Those. the unequivocal conclusion is that the Romans called themselves Romans, the Roman Emperor Constantine built the city of New Rome (by the way, not in the place of Byzantium or still later villages, but in the place of Troy, because the Romans considered themselves descendants of the Trojans, Alexander the Great observed the ruins of Troy, and the foundation of his fortress was built the fortress of Tsargrad itself, and not the slop hill of Gisarlyk that the fraudster Schlieman was digging and gave out fakes for Priam’s treasures). And everyone called Constantinople, Byzantium, etc., but not the Romans themselves, i.e. the Romans. And the term Byzantine Empire appeared ... after the fall of New Rome and the Roman Empire. In addition to the new Russians (not accustomed), there are Romania and Romanians, i.e. some people called themselves Romania, and themselves romances, i.e. by the Romans, moreover, the world community recognized this, and the language of the Mauiform was called Roman, and after all, no one canceled Latin. Then another Romans appeared - the Romans wassat My incompetent opinion is that the Greeks of today and the Greeks are ancient, the same kindred as the Romanians, but the Romans to the Romans. There is absolutely no ethnic affinity, no common language, no common culture, no imperial building mentality and military organization and valor.
                  3. hrych
                    hrych April 24 2018 14: 19
                    0
                    Can there be these ... descendants of the great warriors and imperials of antiquity wassat

                    Surzhik is a true Little Russian, if you want the Ukrainian language. But this is ... the Russian language, this is a dialect of the Russian language. A mov was written by the Austrians 100 years ago. Quote but about another surzhik:
                    ...... Austro-Hungarian ... German-Polish surzhik, concocted in haste for a month by Bandera with the help of Western intelligence agencies ....... well, it doesn’t pull in the state language. ..........
                    ........ In the museum of T. G. Shevchenko there is his passport and it is clearly written there - THE ORTHODOX Little Russian!
                    And in the passports of Ivan Franko and Lesya Ukrainka (Kosach) there is a record RUSIN and RUSINKA!
                    And in the universal to the Cossacks B. Khmelnitsky writes: "I command the hereditary Russian nobleman ...."
                    A.G. The frying pan wrote to himself: "I am a barefoot Russian philosopher" (citations).
                    I.Franko wrote in his diary: "Today I was vitally formed (insulted - Polish.) They called me a Ukrainian, although everyone knows that I am RUSIN (quote).
                    For information, before the Revolution, Ukrainians called themselves only those who renounced the Orthodox faith and converted to Greek Catholics (Uniates). The word "Ukrainian" was not a nationality, but a religion.
                    1. Normal ok
                      Normal ok April 24 2018 22: 58
                      0
                      Quote: hrych
                      Can there be these ... descendants of the great warriors and imperials of antiquity

                      "nature rests on the children of geniuses")) BUT, they are still heirs, albeit worthless. The same can be said about the Spaniards, and about the Portuguese, etc.
              2. Conrad
                Conrad April 23 2018 18: 49
                0
                Quote: Normal ok
                Regarding "Mova", the Old Slavic language is much closer to Ukrainian than modern Russian (Russian developed more).

                I strongly disagree! Church Slavonic in general does not look like “Ukrainian”! C-S is a "high style" language, while "Ukrainian" is (sorry) a means of communication between peasants. (For fun, translate or listen to “Our Father” in “Ukrainian” - this is “something with something” for those, of course, who understand what is read in the church)
          2. Orionvit
            Orionvit April 23 2018 17: 33
            0
            Quote: Teberii
            The Patriarch of Constantinople without the approval of Moscow is unlikely to go into conflict.

            And here we will see who is higher in our world, Lord God, or the interests of the United States. Bartholomew will drive under America.
        2. Logall
          Logall April 23 2018 07: 57
          +4
          Quote: Ushly_bashkort
          And where is the guarantee that ours will be against? Do not we now invest most of all in Ukraine?

          Russia is also a secular state, the church does not conduct state affairs. Or is Patriarch Kirill an agent of the Kremlin (God forgive me)?
          1. hrych
            hrych April 23 2018 08: 33
            +4
            Quote: Logall
            church does not do business state

            In theory. And Poroshenko must of course already declare himself a Mission (for a flock of football fans of Messi)

            Delov then, nimbuses to add.
            1. Dormidont
              Dormidont April 23 2018 09: 24
              +1
              The main thing is not to watch it below the belt
            2. NIKNN
              NIKNN April 23 2018 13: 40
              +2
              Quote: hrych
              Delov then, nimbuses to add.
              Alcostol Peter .... In the USSR for such separate "churches" were built ... LTP were called ...
          2. Ushly_bashkort
            Ushly_bashkort April 23 2018 09: 54
            +1
            And in a secular state, the lessons of Orthodoxy can be in schools? Can theology be called official science? Legislatively allow people in robes to engage in the seizure of immovables under the pretext that once upon a time something church was standing there? To exempt non-business people from taxes? Catholics, by the way, pay taxes to themselves in the West.
        3. Slovak
          Slovak April 23 2018 21: 38
          +1
          in the photo, in the foreground is a eunuch with an icon, who is this?
      2. 210ox
        210ox April 23 2018 07: 43
        +3
        So he before crowing necessarily crowing joyfully ..
        Quote: Thrall
        No one will give them autocephaly. The decision is made only unanimously, and the Russian Church is present there. Dot.
        Petya nervously thumps aside ...
      3. Serge Gorely
        Serge Gorely April 23 2018 10: 15
        0

        Prince Vladimir preferred Orthodoxy, since the Orthodox Church does not prohibit the use of wine and even uses the latter in the sacrament rite.
      4. Normal ok
        Normal ok April 23 2018 14: 41
        0
        Quote: Thrall
        No one will give them autocephaly

        Do not give me a gop ... All sorts of options are possible.
    2. Scoun
      Scoun April 23 2018 07: 54
      +3
      Quote: aszzz888
      .and who explained to the alcoholic drunk ?,

      And it’s somehow more interesting to me, why not intergalactic or ... interuniverse?
      as well as the centuries-old church order and the Holy Tradition, Ecumenical Patriarchate

      Although ... probably in other universes rule others or is this speech turnover ....
      But still, it sounds powerful - Ecumenical.
      1. parathyron
        parathyron April 23 2018 10: 11
        +2
        Ecumenical - a translation of the Greek word Οικουμένη - the inhabited part of the world, Christian civilization (barbarians did not enter here). So he has nothing to do with outer space, but his requests and ambitions are definitely universal. He claims to be the pope, which no one gave him. This is not the mother Church for Ukraine; for her we are the mother, the ancient independent patriarchy. And the general principle in Orthodoxy is collegiality. The Russian Church will not give consent in any way, so the venture is empty or, if Constantinople persists, fraught with a new split.
    3. ancestors from Don
      ancestors from Don April 23 2018 07: 57
      +3
      Petyune can only create a schismatic sect of “witnesses to the glory of Ukraine” which he will lead, Marina will be an accountant with her, children singing in the choir.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 April 23 2018 08: 03
        +2
        Dark forest with a weak prospect of enlightenment!
        However, when the striped and other enlighteners roll into the asphalt and enlightenment will immediately come!
        Not the first time, we can do it!
    4. Nyrobsky
      Nyrobsky April 23 2018 11: 20
      +1
      Quote: aszzz888
      ... and who explained to the Peksko-drunk ?, it is always drunk because it carries what is not falling!

      Yeah, he still sees the squirrel and spends the evening with green features, and he rushes into the temple himself - devilish offspring.
  2. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter April 23 2018 07: 30
    +6
    They still lack "Bartholomew’s night"? And so the Civil War unleashed, so also wants a religious?
  3. Dmitry Potapov
    Dmitry Potapov April 23 2018 07: 41
    0
    Waltzman is an Orthodox Christian ?! Or is it a photo montage?
    1. Egoza
      Egoza April 23 2018 07: 46
      +3
      Quote: Dmitry Potapov
      Waltzman is an Orthodox Christian ?! Or is it a photo montage?

      Not! He is a parishioner of all churches in Ukraine - Orthodox, Catholic, autocephalous, etc. On holidays, all churches celebrate. In short, it is strange that he has not yet appointed himself the patriarch of all Ukraine.
      1. ancestors from Don
        ancestors from Don April 23 2018 07: 59
        +1
        He will put your Pedro on a pile and they only saw him, other countries beckon him, and for the pastor you have Turchinov.
      2. true_rover
        true_rover April 23 2018 08: 02
        +1
        He takes communion there
        1. ul_vitalii
          ul_vitalii April 23 2018 08: 21
          +2
          We need to turn to the friends of our forum, let them take patronage over Valtsman and return him to the fold of their faith. In the west, earlier, out of mercy, they were burned at the stake. Maybe not everything is lost yet.
      3. Weyland
        Weyland April 23 2018 16: 27
        0
        Quote: Egoza
        In short, it is strange that he has not yet appointed himself the patriarch of all Ukraine.

        "As an honorable saint, honorary great martyr, honorary Pope of Rome of our kingdom, I proceed to the sacrament of rite!" ("Ordinary Miracle")
  4. Altona
    Altona April 23 2018 07: 42
    +1
    Quote: Thrall
    No one will give them autocephaly. The decision is made only unanimously, and the Russian Church is present there. Dot.

    ----------------------------------
    Over time, years through the chain, you still have to provide, a separate state has the right, as it were. But I have the impression that Ukraine (and Belarus too) must be returned to Russia, this country cannot live on its own. Otherwise, all these church castles will lead to the fact that instead of the church there will be a parody of something or Uniate sects.
    1. Heterocapsa
      Heterocapsa April 23 2018 07: 51
      +3
      you don’t have to return anyone anywhere. Because to return someone to a country where the mess itself is going on it will immediately be whining supposedly a prison of nations and all that. Now we are unhappy with the country and if you are still a Belarusian you will immediately have thoughts, but what's the point joining it was.
  5. Masya masya
    Masya masya April 23 2018 07: 55
    +3
    The battlefield is religion ...
    1. Dormidont
      Dormidont April 23 2018 09: 23
      +1
      The battlefield is the human soul
      1. Salomet
        Salomet April 23 2018 10: 13
        +1
        Faith saves the soul, not religion. These are unfortunately completely different things in the modern world. Here are all Western presidents - very religious people. The bearded men are also very religious. Everyone to Paradise? recourse
  6. bald
    bald April 23 2018 08: 06
    0
    A good exorcist of this "fraternity" is also necessary on the backside of the belt.
  7. Denis Obukhov
    Denis Obukhov April 23 2018 08: 16
    0
    Once again I am convinced, as an Orthodox Communist and neo-Marxist, that the emphasis in the ideology of the USSR on materialism was destructive. But I do not completely remove the responsibility for this destructive from the Russian Orthodox Church, especially its actions in the synodal, Romanov period. But today, anyone who attacks Russia will try to bring down statehood and religious institutions, by the way the Islamic factor here is the most vulnerable, although they have reached Orthodoxy.
  8. bogart047
    bogart047 April 23 2018 08: 40
    0
    obscurantists again intensified. How good it was before, when they were all pressed to the nail, forced to pay taxes
  9. evil partisan
    evil partisan April 23 2018 08: 48
    +1
    And what is there in the Gunpowder on the icon depicted? An hour of visa-free travel? what
    1. Dormidont
      Dormidont April 23 2018 09: 23
      +1
      This is a photo of Kolomoisky
  10. BAI
    BAI April 23 2018 08: 49
    0
    how many Orthodox churches will be in Ukraine?

    There will be 2 - UAOC and Kiev Patriarchate.
  11. Dormidont
    Dormidont April 23 2018 09: 22
    0
    For our Middle Eastern partners, Orthodoxy is worse than death
  12. Vitaly Anisimov
    Vitaly Anisimov April 23 2018 09: 23
    0
    Waltzman took up the destruction of the Orthodox faith in Ukraine .. This is worse than the bombing of the Donbass and barking towards Russia!
  13. AlexYa
    AlexYa April 23 2018 09: 52
    0
    In fact, the Ecumenical Patriarch said that he had considered the letter, but did not start the procedures for granting autocephaly. Found what to refer to - UNIAN. Refer to Channel 5 as well.
  14. Berkut24
    Berkut24 April 23 2018 10: 09
    +2
    Recall that in Ukraine there are two Ukrainian Orthodox churches.

    In Ukraine there is only one Orthodox Church! A sect organized by the state, where right-wing militants and the heavenly thousand are worshiped as saints, and which is led by former priests who were shamefully excommunicated for not observing church principles, schism and passion for personal enrichment due to the church treasury, cannot be considered a church by definition.
    It remains to note that the Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew, whom the Ukrainian authorities so tearfully refer to not by status, is the head of one of the smallest parishes in the world of Orthodoxy. In view of this, this dwarf patriarchy is constantly in need of money, is fed from the hands of the State Department and is accountable to it about its work. And this is not counting his gradual drift towards a union with the Vatican. The trouble is not that a question has been put up for consideration, which according to the canons cannot be considered in principle, but in that. that with this procedure, Americans can destroy the unity of the entire Orthodox world.
  15. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 April 23 2018 10: 28
    +1
    declared that Ukraine is close to receiving its autocephalous church
    As close to the EU and NATO. Once again, Poroshenko puts himself in an uncomfortable position before the Ukrainians, who (even his supporters) have lost faith in his loud and pathos promises.
  16. demo
    demo April 23 2018 14: 55
    +1
    Surrender to Olga, get rich!
    Step back Father Onufriy, I will tear off the appendage!

    Imechko the priest is not so hot!
    1. Weyland
      Weyland April 23 2018 16: 28
      0
      The name as a name is ancient Egyptian, by the way ("nofer" = good)
  17. midshipman
    midshipman April 23 2018 17: 21
    +1
    It is nice to see yavreya with an Orthodox icon.
  18. Antares
    Antares April 23 2018 19: 35
    0
    A single Local Church may appear in Ukraine to celebrate the 1030th anniversary of the baptism of Kievan Rus, that is, until the end of July.
    And then it will be interesting. The fact that connections are torn wherever they can, but here everything in the same Lavra will leave for Ukraine.
    There even the relics of Ilya of Muromets and other saints and not very much.
    What people do not do to reinforce the separation.
    Although religion was not dividing here, it was unifying. But now Moscow will lose one more lever.
    The last time Khmelnitsky tried so hard but from Poland. (Sagaidachny started)
    The wheel of history before our eyes.
  19. nikoliski
    nikoliski April 24 2018 03: 20
    -1
    A split, then what, heresy of ovalization? it seems that this is just the beginning, then the Turchynov sectarians of all remaining believers in Ukraine (already 60% atheists) will be transferred to sectarianism - they will forbid icons, crosses will begin to serve as Catholics, in general everything to be in all similar Poles and in anything hated Russia (then and abortion would be forbidden after the Poles, otherwise it would be cheaper to have an abortion in Ukraine than to cure your teeth), and the Athos elders say that this is a modern sacrifice to moloch, the Carthaginians sinned because newborn babies were sacrificed to an idol, obviously today’s idol the honor of whom the children are killed (in all religions the Fetus already has a soul) is the concern for their own well-being, where the children are clearly superfluous ... Thus, the countries of the Western world are destroying themselves, in 50 years France will consist of blacks, Britain too (you are on France’s national football team 50 years ago and now take a look) Britain even sends blacks to Eurovision (probably the original English have already taken everyone out?) Ukraine and Russia are doing the same thing it has already been calculated that soon every 4 inhabitants of Russia will be a CHINESE! And when faith, blood leaves, what remains with the state? nothing at all, just fields and forests, they are inhabited by other peoples and other countries are obtained, which became with Great Mongolia, an empire that stretched for hundreds of years from sea to sea (it was larger than the USSR in area and longer), it completely degenerated and fell into pieces. ..
  20. nikoliski
    nikoliski April 24 2018 03: 25
    -1
    Changes are already visible when countries do not protect their identities, in the photo the French team in the 20th century and 2016
  21. Shuttle
    Shuttle April 24 2018 10: 47
    0
    Yes, take away already these idiots matches! They'll all over Ukraine.