Continuous fathers of the church

Waiting did not drag out. The Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church for the election of the successor of the died down Alexy the Second is appointed on January 28-29. Now experts have received the moral right to guess about who will become the new Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church. The appointment of the Patriarchal throne by the Locumber of the not -promising candidate (according to experts - but not the "public") of Metropolitan Kirill (Gundyaev) only gives these fortune -tellings additional interest.

Who can claim the place of the patriarch? According to the charter of the Russian Orthodox Church (part IV, p. 17),

"A candidate for the patriarchs must meet the following requirements:

a) be the bishop of the Russian Orthodox Church;

b) to possess the highest theological education, sufficient experience in diocesan administration, to differ in commitment to the canonical law and order;

c) use the good reputation and trust of the hierarchs, clergy and people;

d) "have a good evidence from the external" (1 Tim. 3, 7);

e) have age at least 40 years. "

Since almost all the bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church have a higher theological education and almost more than forty years old, more than a hundred candidates meet formal restrictions. The situation is different with the restrictions on the content. What is "sufficient experience of diocesan management"? Who determines whether the candidate is distinguished by a "commitment to the canonical law and order"? How to establish whether the candidate enjoys the "good reputation and trust of the hierarchs, clergy and people"? And finally, that the “external” are meant and in what form should they present that necessary “good evidence”?

If we talk about Metropolitan Cyril, he clearly does not have a “good reputation and trust”: in the church people he is hated for “ecumenism” and discrediting the church by commercial scams, and “external” perceives him as a “tobacco metropolitan”. Nevertheless, he received the position of the locomotive, and with her - the real chances of becoming a patriarch. This shows that only those bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church can truly advance to the patriarchs, who has sufficient administrative opportunities to convince the counterparts of their ability to take this place. And that canonical demands can be sacrificed to political expediency.

The candidates will be the same who always: representatives of the highest managerial link in the church are permanent members of the Holy Synod and, perhaps, one of the leaders of autonomous churches who are not part of the Synod (for example, ROCS). Of course, it is impossible to exclude the self-nomination of some hot head from the ordinary episcopate, but almost certain such daredevil will be “banned” in the first round. Among the usual bishops, there are not a single one who would respond among any significant number of counterparts. This is different from 1990, when Vladyka Anthony (Bloom) was removed only due to the fact that he was not a citizen of the USSR.

There were seven permanent members of the Holy Synod after the death of the Patriarch. Obviously impassable figures among them are:

Metropolitan Chisinau and All Moldovan Vladimir (Kantoryan). In the knowledgeable and decisive part of the church, he has a reputation as a good diocesan driver, a combination of circumstances of the department. He is the only one of the independent church players who, for the past twenty years, was deliberately oriented towards Metropolitan Cyril, who was the patron saint of the Orthodox Church of Moldova.

Metropolitan St. Petersburg and Ladoga Vladimir (Kotlyarov). The old (79 years) and an overly scandalous character, famous for both ultraliberal by the standards of the Church by initiatives and a bad character - stinginess, whims, pride. He is the only one of all senior in age members of the Synod who has no team at all.

Metropolitan Krutitsky and Kolomensky Juvenal (Poyarkov). An elderly (73 years) and a sick person with a reputation, soaked both liberalism and ecumenism, and other sins, again well -known church public. At the same time, as a person close to the Patriarch in the 2000s, he was able to advance a significant number of his proteges to the episcopate, which makes him the owner of a significant package of votes in the upcoming elections.

Metropolitan Vladimir Kyiv (Sabodan). In all respects, the Ukrainian copy of Juvenal, but with fewer liberalism, but with a greater alcoholism. In addition, in the past year and a half, he headed for the provision of canonical autocephaly, which is not enthusiastic about his Russian counterparts. At the same time, not only his personal nominees (which have recently been significantly increased) stand behind him, but also supporters of his new church and political course of which in the episcopate of Ukraine are many.

In addition to the already mentioned Metropolitan Kirill, two more hierarchs can be attributed to the passage figures.

Metropolitan Kaluga and Borovsky Clement (Kapalin). The second most young (59 years old) and the youngest in experience (since 2003) a permanent member of the Synod. For a long time he was the first deputy Cyril in the department of external church ties of the Moscow Patriarchate and was considered the "hand of the Patriarch" in this church superinception. He was engaged in administrative work there, avoiding bad glory on the basis of scandalous financial transactions with tobacco and alcohol. As a manager of the affairs of the Moscow Patriarchate, he, of course, deals with the highest state authorities and, apparently, finds mutual understanding with them. He does not have his own support among the episcopate - with the exception of his brother Demetrius, the archbishop of Tobolsky and Tyumen. But since Clement is the only one among the "Synodals" a clear conservative and is rare among the episcopate, but with modesty so valued in the church, he has good chances to get a lot of votes of provincial delegations.

Metropolitan Minsk and Slutsky Filaret (Vakhromeyev). Favorite among experts, as well as different layers of the Orthodox community (except for a small but mediocre group of supporters of "political Orthodoxy" who have long focused on Cyril). It comes from a family of large merchants who received the nobility shortly before the revolution, grew up in the center of Moscow, made a rapid career under the auspices of Patriarch Alexy I, but then was active in the circle of "ecumenists". The only one who had a good reputation in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, who traditionally was to the "ecumenists" in the opposition and gave a lot of their nominees to the episcopate in the 1990s. Being the head of the Belarusian exarchate, he managed to establish relations with the absurd “Orthodox atheist” Alexander Lukashenko, to calm the conflicts between the Belarusian and Russians nationalistically tuned priests and at the same time give him a more civilized and modern appearance of the church controlled by him compared to Russian and Ukrainian dioceses. And it was innovation that did not cause rejection. Therefore, for Filaret, the elections will probably be cast in the votes not only of electors from Belarus, but also the supporters of his old ally Metropolitan Juvenal, as well as many other electors. However, little is known about the state of health of the 73-year-old hierarch, and this problem can be determined by the gerontocratic synod: before the election of the patriarch, candidates still need to survive.

The display of the official website of the Belarusian Orthodox Church and other Belarusian Orthodox Internet sources (for example, the Tsarkva network newspaper) gives in this regard a forecast that is very unfavorable for Metropolitan Filaret. His last appearance in public in Minsk took place on October 25 - then the visit to Belarus of Patriarch Alexy II ended. In the photographs, the Metropolitan with huge bruises under the eyes and a darkened face welcomes the guest and even performs the service with him. More than a month before, and the next one and a half he does not hold any services. A meeting with the dean of the Minsk diocese personally led by him on November 27 was without him. And even after the death of the Patriarch, he did not perform a memorial service in the Cathedral. Moreover, reporting the funeral of the Patriarch, the diocesan press service emphasized that the metropolitan will participate in all the alleged events, as if other options could be for a permanent member of the Synod. And perhaps they could. And it is possible that this explains the election of Metropolitan Cyril by the Locumber. And if Metropolitan Filaret cannot nominate his candidacy, then Cyril's chances of patriarchate are sharply increased.