The anathema is removed, but the volume is postponed

The Synod of the Patriarchate of Constantinople took the next step towards the autocephaly of the Ukrainian Church, but the question has not yet completely closed the question

In Constantinople they can hold intrigue - in the best traditions of Byzantium. Until the very last minute, the synod, who met the chairmanship of Patriarch Bartholomew on October 9–11, did not allow any leaks regarding the main issue of modern Orthodoxy: or there will be no autocephaly of the Ukrainian Church. Recall that the two largest centers of world Orthodoxy-Moscow and Constantinople-consider it its own, and the Russian Orthodox Church has already partially broken the canonical communication with the Ecumenical Patriarchate due to the latest Ukrainian autocephaly preparation.

Closer to the evening of October 11, the first “intermediate” news appeared: Constantinople removed the anathema from the unrecognized Kyiv Patriarch Filaret (Denisenko), which was imposed in 1997 for the split of the Moscow Patriarchate. It is Filaret that is the most obvious candidate for the post of Primate of the Unified Autocephalous Church ...

Two Constantinople exarch is preparing autocephaly in Kyiv - Archbishop Daniel and Bishop Ilarion. The report on their work that began in Kyiv in mid -September, they presented the Synod in Istanbul on October 10.

Already the purpose of the exarchs in Moscow was called an act of aggression: the invasion of Constantinople on its “canonical territory”.

On October 11, this view was confirmed by the press secretary of the President of the Russian Federation, who fully supported the Russian Orthodox Church. It is not known about the report of the Exarchs to the report, but, according to rumors, it was quite restrained: in particular, the expectations of the exarchs regarding the massive support of autocephaly by bishops of the Ukrainian Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UOC MP) were not justified.

The delay in the provision of tomos about autocephaly is due to the fact that the exarchs need extra time to implement their mandate, the main content of which is the powers to convene the cathedral of all bishops who want to accept autocephaly from Constantinople, and help them choose the Primate, which will receive Tomos. At the same time, both the Patriarchate of Constantinople himself and his political sponsors in the United States repeatedly made it clear that the issue would be resolved before the beginning of the presidential campaign in Ukraine: the church plot should not directly correlate with the political one. And the beginning of the election campaign is scheduled for December 31, which means that theoretically, the Constantinople Synod, which gathers once a month, has two meetings in reserve.

Despite the small “peaceful respite”, the general development of the Ukrainian church process works to further weaken the positions of Patriarch Kirill (Gundyaev).

The month that passed after his failure with Patriarch Bartholomew in Istanbul showed that the Russian Orthodox Church could not be enlisted with intelligible support of at least one local church. At a festive dinner in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra on October 8, the Patriarch even admitted that “we (that is, the Russian Orthodox Church) went for a split” with universal Orthodoxy. On the eve of the current Synod, the Patriarch of Constantinople rejected the last compromise of Moscow: to put the question of Ukraine to the synaxis of the Primate of all local churches. This initiative was officially rejected even by the Bulgarian Patriarchate, previously very dependent on the Russian Orthodox Church material. Another traditional ally of the Russian Orthodox Church - the Georgian Patriarchate - takes a waiting position. On October 5, Tbilisi was visited by the speaker of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Andrei Parubiy, to whom Patriarch Elijah promised not to protest against autocephaly.

Several ambiguous movements are made by the Alexandrian and Antioch Patriarchs, but analysts tend to consider them as the last attempt to get a generous Moscow “help” before a rupture likely in the foreseeable future. So, the Patriarch visited the Alexandria in early October Odessa, swore love for the UOC MP, but did not mention autocephaly in a word. The Antioch Patriarchate on the eve of the Constantinople Synod accepted the statement, as if in support of the Russian Orthodox Church, but not too confident and too belated. Commenting on this statement, Protodiacon Andrei Kuraev remarked: “Did you want Antioch that the Greeks would listen to her in this matter? No. Fanar [in the Orthodox world is called the Patriarchate of Constantinople], she needs in her Bodania with Jerusalem about the Qatari diocese. To spoil the Ukrainian banquet fanar, therefore, she is not with her hands. " Yes, Constantinople supports Antioch in the fight against Jerusalem for the Bulf of the Persian Gulf of Bread.

The transfer of a decision on autocephaly until November is a very wise and far -sighted decision, and it does not at all strengthen the position of the Russian Orthodox Church. The fact is that on October 14, clashes were pronons in the “iconic” monasteries and temples, which supposedly were supposed to be transferred from the UOC -MP of the autocephalous church. Under these clashes, Moscow even allocated some fees to its Ukrainian partners.

It is important to release this aggression in a whistle and not to play along with the supporters of the new inter -church war in Ukraine. Delay with tomos is perhaps the most obvious way to do this.