"Patriarch Bartholomew will be remembered as a teacher of schism"

The First Deputy Chairman of the Synodal Department of the Moscow Patriarchate for relations with Society and the Media, and member of the Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation, Professor of the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University – Aleksandr Shchipkov, in an exclusive interview with RIA Novosti, commented on the latest actions of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, and in light of them – the theme of Ukrainian Autocephaly. Interviewed by Sergey Stafanov.


Aleksandr Vladimirovich, just recently, on August 31, we witnessed the meeting of Patriarchs Kirill and Bartholomew in Istanbul, and in the follow-up to the meeting, it was described as being of a fraternal character, which passed in the spirit of mutual understanding.

However the very next day, the Council [Synaxis] of the bishops of Constantinople began its work, and Patriarch Bartholomew made rather harsh statements with relation to the Moscow Patriarchate. How can this be put together and understood?

On the part of Patriarch Kirill, the attitude to the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew was and remains fraternal. The calm, patient behavior of Patriarch Kirill testifies to this brotherly attitude. And up until the very last moment, Patriarch Kirill tried to solve the existing problems in fraternal dialog, which, in his words: “occurs within a single body – the Body of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church <…> and imposes on us a certain accountability and duty, but also gives us strength and inspiration.”

After yesterday’s [September 7, 2018] appointment of the Exarchs by Constantinople, is it possible to talk about the granting of autocephaly to the Ukrainian church as a final decision [by Constantinople]?

—Without a doubt, this is the first step on this path.

Yesterday, commenting on this decision, the Moscow Patriarchate noted that this step will not remain without response by the Russian Orthodox Church. What could this response be?

—In order to understand what the response might be, our reader should understand the general situation. Ukraine is the canonical territory of the Moscow Patriarchate. According to the canons of the Second Ecumenical Council1, bishops do not have the right to transgress the boundary of someone else’s canonical territory without an invitation. In this given situation, two exarchs—Daniel and Hilarion—were sent to Kiev without the agreement of Metropolitan Onufry! This is a direct violation of ancient canons!

Therefore I regard this as a direct declaration of War. Remember the words: “Kiev has been bombed! They declared to us that the war has begun!2” Now it’s the same thing, only it’s a religious war.

What is lurking behind this action of Patriarch Bartholomew?

—Patriarch Bartholomew is obsessed with the idea of Eastern Papism. He dreams of becoming the single head of all Universal [Ecumenical] Orthodoxy, analogous with the Roman Catholic Church [and their Pope.—Trans.].

Bartholomew formulated the following idea: He said that Constantinople possesses a certain mystical exclusivity in comparison with other Orthodox Churches, that Constantinople is the “Ethos of Orthodoxy3”.

Photo: www.eurotopics.net Photo: www.eurotopics.net

The key word is Ethos. What is it? Ethos is a certain stable, universal, and immutable character trait of a person, a nation, a social group. Patriarch Bartholomew states that he is the holder of the very standard of the Ethos of Orthodoxy. This immediately implies that all other churches are imperfect and must obey the Phanar. This curious example of religious racism will certainly enter the future textbooks of political science.

How will other churches react to this? Naturally – negatively!

On September 7, 2018, Patriarch Bartholomew went down in the history of the Orthodox Church as a teacher of schism!

I am speaking at first about intellectual concepts and semantic things; I am speaking theoretically. But canonical issues are extremely important, since we are not talking about animals, but people—Christians who are living on this territory.

This is not the first time Constantinople has moved towards a schism; if we look in history, then we remember it was Constantinople who initiated a transition in Orthodoxy to the New Style calendar.

This calendar split has still not been healed to this very moment. Some parts of the Local Churches under the influence of Constantinople passed into the New Style, some, such as in the Russian Orthodox Church, did not. Inside the Church of Greece, in Greece, millions of believers did not recognize this reform.

As for the relation between Constantinople and Moscow, I don’t know if our readers are in the know, but in the 1920s, Constantinople supported the “Renovationist Schism4” in the USSR.

This schism was artificially created and supported by Trotsky and the other Bolsheviks. Constantinople then demanded that a saint of our Church, Patriarch Tikhon, relinquish his authority and retire. At that time, our church, under the most difficult of conditions preserved the purity of Orthodoxy.

So what do we end up with today? It is known that Constantinople preaches a liberal trend in Orthodoxy. There is talk of joint prayers with Protestants and Catholics, which, to put it mildly, is not welcome in Orthodoxy.

Bartholomew just now allowed for second marriages for clergy—which is also forbidden by the canons of the Holy Fathers of the Church. They are constantly releasing semi-transparent hints and signals about the permissibility of unconventional sexual orientations and so forth.

Moscow, on the contrary, embodies the conservative, traditionalist path of development in Orthodoxy, and defends the purity of dogma. But scientific-theological discussions are one thing, while the direct invasion of someone else’s home is a totally separate matter.

The 7th of September will go down in history as a lamentable date. On this day, the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew proclaimed and signaled a schism in Universal Orthodoxy, along the liberal and conservative lines. And he is officially headed in a liberal direction.

What kind of reaction can this cause in the Orthodox World? How might events develop further?

—Undoubtedly, this will cause a very harsh reaction in different Churches. Patriarch Bartholomew will develop his “Eastern Papism”; the Russian Church will not be able to agree with this liberalization of dogma and the disintegration of the ecclesiastical system of life.

First, in my personal opinion: it is necessary to form an inter-Orthodox ecclesiastical court, and make judgments about the anti-canonical actions and heretical ideas of Patriarch Bartholomew.

Second, in my opinion, inevitably the question of ecclesiastical eucharistic communion will arise. There is a high probability this will happen. Proceeding from this, certain practical actions will follow. A huge number of our flock is outside their fatherland, and particularly in Turkey. Today, they [can] go to the Churches of the Constantinople Patriarchate, and have the ability to confess and take communion there.

In the event of the interruption of this communion, they will no longer have such a possibility. Consequently, our Church will have to take some steps to take care of the Russians abroad. We will have to open parishes there, build churches, and send clergy there. We cannot abandon our children.

The actions of Patriarch Bartholomew carry with them very far-reaching consequences, which will take decades to heal.

Earlier, the Metropolitan of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, and the Moscow Patriarchate expressed similar views—that Patriarch Bartholomew is engaged in political games. In your opinion, how great is the influence of foreign political forces on the Primate [Bartholomew], in reference to certain foreign states, and was it decisive in the case of Ukrainian Autocephly?

—Turn your attention to the origins of the exarchs sent to Kiev. Bishop Daniel of Pamphilon arrived in Kiev from the United States of America; Bishop Hilarion of Edmonton was sent from Canada. These circumstances alone cause us to reflect on who is behind Bartholomew.

There is a great suspicion among many, that it is not Bartholomew who rules Bishops Daniel and Hilarion, but rather Bishops Daniel and Hilarion who are controlling Bartholomew. And who controls them… we can only guess.

The US, as we see, is now ramping up the military-political situation in Syria and Ukraine, using all sorts of methods—from false flag chemical attacks [in Syria.—Trans.], to instigating religious wars.

I believe that there are many participants in this game, among them: Patriarch Bartholomew, the Pope of Rome, and the American “deep state”. I think that in the near future, we will also talk about this.

Alexander Shchipkov
Translation by Matfey Shaheen



1 The Second Canon of the Second Ecumenical Council states, among other things, that “…bishops are not to go beyond their dioceses to churches lying outside of their bounds…” https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.ix.viii.iii.html

2 These are the words of a famous WW2 song “Двадцать второго июня, ровно в 4 часа” about the Nazi surprise attack on Russia beginning in Ukraine. Like anything relating to the Great Patriotic War, our Slavic people cannot help but take those words emotionally. It reflects the Nazi invasion of the territory of the Soviet Union, which occurred at 4:00 in the morning, on June 22, hence the title (22 of June Song). Rus’ people will never forget the words “без всякого объявления войны” which was how the famous announcement that WW2 began played out: the Nazis invaded Ukraine “without any declaration of war”. In the same way the proclamation of sending Exarchs to Ukraine was without warning.

It is also worth noting that Russians always saw this in a spiritual light. The Soviet Union was invaded on June 22, the day of All Saints in the Russian Lands, and victory was given on Saint George the Victorious Day. According to Patriarch Kirill, this was no coincidence, but a spiritual sign: http://www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/1154861.html Likewise, this invasion of the Canonical territory of Ukraine bears some parallels. The “invasion” of church territory occurred close to the Feast of the Meeting (Sretenie) of the Theotokos of Kiev-Vladimir in Moscow, at the site of Sretensky Monastery. The Icon of the Theotokos of Vladimir, which was transferred from Constantinople, to Kiev, to Vladimir, and finally to Moscow, is considered The Protectress of All Rus’… That is an interesting fact to bear in mind, given everything presented and everything that has happened.—Trans.

3 In an official statement from the meeting in Constantinople, the Ecumenical Patriarchate declared “Some people falsely believe that they can love the Orthodox Church, but not the Ecumenical Patriarchate, forgetting that it incarnates the authentic ecclesiastical ethos of Orthodoxy…” https://www.uocofusa.org/news_180901_1.html

4 Also called the “Living Church”, it was a fake Bolshevik controlled church, with the goal of undermining the Russian Orthodox Church, which had virtually no long-term popular support.

John8/21/2021 5:30 pm
We all, Christians, are all actually in great sin because we call each other as sinners and schismatics, even though Christ and all the Epistles of the Apostles have taught us repeatedly not to. The West and the East at the time of the Arian, Nestorian, Iconoclastic schisms, condemned each others' personages, but still their Churches were still one; they were in Communion with each other. This is the Great Error of Thinking happening since that time. Our pride and prejudice were always getting better ahead of us. The thinking of "Us" and "You". And personally I don't know how this will all end. Even at the Second Coming of Christ we will still all be in the wrong.
Turkish Christians Network11/1/2018 9:33 am
Istanbul Patriarchate has also been teaching false trinity doctrine: http://www.uzmantv.com/baba-ogul-ve-kutsal-ruh-uclu-birlik-ne-anlama-gelir
Andrej Tuca10/25/2018 7:58 pm
Everyone knows that Patriarch Bartholomew is an ecumenist modernist, innovator and now a schismatic. All His scandals...when praying with heterodox, ecumenical meetings, violence against the monks of esphigmenou etc.

Anaxios....depose this schismatic
Pavlos10/17/2018 2:14 pm
Constantine, apparently he said it in 1998 during the enthronement feast. It was mentioned in "Ekklisiastiki Alithia" (Ecclesiastical Truth), edition of 16/2/1998. It goes as follows:
Οικουμενικός Πατριάρχης Βαρθολομαίος:

"Our repentance for the past is necessary. We shouldn't wast our time in the search for responsibilities. Our forefathers who left us with division were victims of the serpent who is the chief of all evils and they already find themselves in the hands of the rightly judging God. We ask God to have mercy upon them, but we are obliged to Him to rectify their errors"
Editor10/9/2018 6:44 pm
Craig, it's true, the history of the Church has been confusing more than once. But so that we would not be disappointed the Lord has told us that "The gate of hell shall not prevail against it. This has proven true over and over.
Craig Mouldey10/9/2018 6:41 pm
Though an older man I am a very young Christian, having been baptized into the Orthodox Church last December16. Still an infant, if you like. Even I can see how wrong this is. And now to find out that a Bishop from Canada where I live is involved in this? Why is the Orthodox Church in North America supporting this evil? And where is this going to leave me? I know my priest is aware of all this. I've brought it up to him before. He tried to assure me not to worry about it. Bishops come and go and as one has said, the road to hell is lined with them. But now this is more serious because the Orthodox Church where I live is also involving itself with this heretic!!
Constantine10/5/2018 8:01 pm
Pavlos: I have heard and seen with my own eyes, how he loves the quran, but did he really call the Holy Fathers victims of the devil? Are you sure about this? Would this man go that far in showing his true colors? Does anyone have proof of this statement? If he did say such a thing, is it not a call to defrock him??

Again I ask, does anyone have proof that he said this about the Holy Fathers? Did he say this regarding St. Mark of Ephesus?
Pavlos Dams9/24/2018 5:13 pm
Only if one is blind, one does not see the worldly powers pushing this. One does then not see that Bart is but a useful tool in the way to the achievement of these worldly powers' goal. That comes as no surprise for the orthodox christian. What does come as a surprise is that so seemingly many orthodox Christians are still defending Bart. They foam at the mere suggestion of critical utterance towards the actions of Bart, who tramples upon canons so fanatically that one would suspect him for doing it even in his sleep, who gives qURANS as gifts and calls them holy, who called the Fathers at the time of the Great Schism unfortunate victims of the serpent who is the chief of all evils (!!!)
PYCb9/17/2018 6:17 am
Untrue, Mr. Toribio! The heresies of old were not solved by the See of Rome, but by the Ecumenical Councils, not one of which was held anywhere near Rome.

These Councils also condemned Rome, which fell into heresy several times. Rome wallowed in heresy for 100 years, refusing to accept the 5th Council, and fell into heresy again & was condemned by the 6th for Monothelitism, before falling again into the heresy of Arian-influenced Filioquism.

If Constantinople is in error here, it's because they have been influenced by the papist heresy that grace is limited to certain geographical coordinates, demonstrating one again that Rome has nothing to offer the Orthodox except wrong thinking.
Joseph9/13/2018 9:05 pm
Eddy: Yes, the antichrist will also be offering a very simple solution. But God save us from accepting it.
Eddy J. Toribio9/13/2018 8:59 pm
Why would the East be surprised by this? It is not the first time in history that the Patriarch of Constantinople goes against "the ancient canons." In fact, in the past, the entire Orthodox East helped and encouraged the good Patriarch in this type of ambition, as long as it was directed against the West. Now, they don't want him to interfere at all ... what goes around, comes around!

They should all just do what the Early Church did and that was to be in union and communion with the Roman See. That would solve the problem more quickly, as all the problems of the early great (Eastern) heresies were solved in the past (by the See of Rome).
anthony9/13/2018 3:02 pm
I think the primary cause of Bart's actions are his paymasters the CIA. He was already exposed by wikileaks as being one of their agents and his finances are propped up by them. This is all part of their hybrid warfare against Russia. The problem for Bart is that in creating schism, he wages war against God. His ecumenist behaviour including 'prayers' with papists and African witchdoctors is further proof of whom he really serves. Some fools opine about what a cross this heretic carries, being under siege by turks etc. He knew it was a cross when he accepted the throne. Saints like Maximos the Confessor and Mark of Ephesus withstood the world for Truth. Bart is a traitor who serves mammon.
Here you can leave your comment on the present article, not exceeding 4000 characters. All comments will be read by the editors of OrthoChristian.Com.
Enter through FaceBook
Your name:
Your e-mail:
Enter the digits, seen on picture:

Characters remaining: 4000

to our mailing list

* indicates required