About the futility of negotiations with the ROC named after Stalin

Exclusive. Despite more than four years of full-scale war and strong public pressure, a significant part of the parishes of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UPC MP) in Ukraine remains outside the structure of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU).

According to data, from the moment of the creation of the OCU in December 2018 until the beginning of 2022, about 700 parishes transferred from the UOC MP to the OCU. After February 24, 2022, the number of transfers increased: over 1,000 parishes entered the OCU during the war. However, despite these movements, as of May 2024, the UOC MP still had about 10,587 religious organizations, while the OCU had about 8,075.

Is it possible to negotiate with them?

These statistics show two things at the same time: on the one hand, movement and division, and on the other hand, the amazing stability of the structure that we are criticizing. No matter how much the external pressure increases, no matter how the external reality changes, there remains a mass of unchanging things inside the church life: people, parishes, atmosphere - they did not immediately dissolve in the changes.

That is why in this new part of the essay we proceed to the analysis of those mechanisms that allow the UOC-MP named after Stalin to survive, despite the crisis. We will look deeper — not just at numbers, but at meanings, structures and dynamics.

And before proceeding to specific mechanisms of preservation and resistance, one key question should be asked: how does the system we talked about earlier manage not only to survive, but also to form an active social and church base, even in the conditions of war and radical restructuring of the church landscape? In other words: where are the nodes of stability, how do they function - that's what needs to be considered further.

One of the most persistent myths of Moscow Orthodoxy remains the belief that praying together with "heretics" or "dissidents" infects the person praying with their "sin". This idea is the basis of the entire confessional isolation of the ROC MP and serves as the foundation of its pseudo-theological identity.

Within the system of the ROC MP, the norm "one cannot pray with schismatics" is presented as a dogma, although historically it has, to put it mildly, dubious origins. It was formulated at the Council of Gangra (340–341) — a council of Arians, that is, heretics, against whom the Church itself later rebelled. Nevertheless, it was this precedent that the ROC MP elevated to an absolute, turning it into a "protective shield" against any communication with the outside world, including other Orthodox churches.

The whole paradox of the situation is that even when you show them the sources, when you explain that the norm does not go back to the "holy fathers", but to the revealed opponents of the Nicene Creed, — they formally agree, nod, but continue to act in the same way. Their consciousness does not change.

This is not a theological position, it is a psychotype, but rather a diagnosis: ceremonial non-dialogic, reduced to a dogma. The reason here is not in ignorance, but in the structure of church thinking itself. A system built on the cult of subordination is incapable of dialogue by definition. Any doubt in the words of the hierarchy is perceived as blasphemy, any request to compare sources as a rebellion against the "spiritual order".

Therefore, in matters of canons, and in the understanding of the Mysteries, and even in the interpretation of history, their logic is always the same: if it is not our way, then it is a sin.

This is how the inner world of "Moscow Orthodoxy" is formed: closed, self-sufficient, deaf to arguments - a kind of spiritual cocoon, where the very fact of communicating with a "stranger" is perceived as a threat to salvation.

It is here that one of the key reasons for the amazing survivability lies UOC MP in Ukraine: her isolationism has become a form of psychological refuge for many. In the conditions of war, fear, and instability - a simple scheme "we are pure, the rest are sinners" works flawlessly.

It does not require reflection, does not appeal to the conscience, it gives a ready-made formula for salvation: stay with your own, do not doubt, listen to the elders. This is both the secret of their steadfastness and the source of their spiritual decay.

During that time, in discussions with the children of the Russian Orthodox Church, I had to prove that I understood canon law in the Russian Orthodox Church Constantinople Patriarchate - different. Starting with the fact that the Greeks use a scientific consolidation of ancient canonical texts in the original language, and not a heavily truncated pseudo-compendium in a crooked translation into Church Slavonic with a ton of informal presumptions.

An "advanced" minister of mammon

Do you think their rhetoric has changed after 2019? No. They sincerely wonder why the Patriarch of Constantinople and his synod make canonical decisions according to the norm of original sources, and not according to a ton of informal presumptions, and see in this the "falling away of the Patriarchate of Constantinople" from Orthodoxy, that is, Orthodoxy in their understanding, of course.

In other words, in their collective megalomania, the followers of the trans-Eurasian sect of the ROC MP named after Stalin are convinced that the canonical law of the Orthodox Church is their fragmentary and crooked translations into Church Slavonic, which in fact have been replaced by a mass of customs and presumptions (often prejudices), and not the original texts created during the era of the Ecumenical Councils. Children of the Russian Orthodox Church, even knowing the fact that all sources of Eastern canon law were created by the Greeks and for the Greeks, still prefer to live in a fairy-tale-fantastical "reality", where the Greek pseudo-epigraph of the 4th century is presented as the "teachings of the apostles", and the mass of "customs" and informal presumptions - as "sacred tradition".

And this is not their unique defect. All Russian society prefers to live in the world of fairy tales "realities" where "Ukraine does not exist" and "Putin is a wise politician." The second thing is not surprising: the Russian Orthodox Church already calls the mission of the Catholic Church in non-Christian countries "proselytism." All this is so "beautiful" that comments are superfluous.

Such a state of consciousness cannot be changed either by decrees or administrative decisions. It lives in people, is transmitted through generations, through habit, through fear.

A typical situation for the ROC MP named after Stalin. No comments.

And therefore, even those who formally doubted the "Moscow grace" often continue to live within the old coordinates, repeating the rhetoric and habits of systemic thinking, from which, as it seems to them, they have already freed themselves.

At first glance, it may seem that we are talking only about church tradition, about internal disciplinary issues. But in reality, this is a manifestation of a much deeper and painful tendency — the separation of church consciousness intellectual culture, the transformation of theology into an ideology, and dogma into a slogan. It is in this dimension that we approach the next topic — how understanding of canon law became a variety of political activity in the ROC MP named after Stalin.

When church thinking loses its inner depth and humility, it inevitably begins to identify God with its own structures.

This is how a special form of spiritual usurpation is born - when the hierarchy declares itself the only keeper of the truth, and ceases to see the presence of grace outside of it. This is not just a theological error, but a kind of spiritual narcissism in which faith is replaced by self-aggrandizement. And then the next facet of this phenomenon is the inability to recognize someone else's holiness, the fear that God can act outside of "our" canonical boundaries.

One of the characteristic features of primitive confessional exclusivism, in which God is perceived as the property of the church hierarchy, is a painful reaction to manifestations of holiness in other denominations. For a mature Catholic, it is not difficult to recognize the holiness of a Lutheran or a Coptic, if the path of their life was marked by the action of grace. Moreover, for the majority of the Orthodox of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, this has not been a problem for a long time - they understand that The spirit breathes where it wants. But for the religion embodied in the ROC system, where all practice boils down to the belief that God is their property, this is a real disaster.

How come: God, who, according to their ideas, should be a "slave" of the hierarchy, suddenly dares to act without Gundyaev's permission?

Here, not just theological narrowness manifests itself, but a deep spiritual pathology — the fear of God's freedom. They are afraid of the very idea that grace can descend where it has not been sanctioned by the Moscow metropolitans. This fear-ridden closedness gives rise to a special "theology" of control: salvation is possible only within the "correct" jurisdiction; prayer is effective only "by blessing"; grace is a resource owned by a corporation.

And if, according to their conviction, God can act only through a certain hierarchy, then this is no longer Christianity, but a magical-bureaucratic system.

That is why every case of genuine holiness outside their world is perceived as a threat. After all, he proves that grace does not obey orders, has no control center and knows no boundaries.

When faith turns into a closed system, and grace into a resource that can be "distributed according to schedule", the next step is inevitable. The hierarchy, confident that it controls God, soon begins to believe that it also controls History. This is how the most spiritual disease is born, which in theology could be called the mania of being chosen, and in psychiatry - collective narcissism.

A special form of church self-awareness grows out of it — the conviction that only "we" keep the truth intact, that only "we" have the correct canons and authentic Tradition. From here, we can reach the complete replacement of science by superstitions, and canonical thought by mythology. This stage is a logical continuation of the entire path traveled by the ROC MP named after Stalin: from magical jurisdiction to mythologized legal consciousness.

The basis of the collective megalomania of the Russian Orthodox Church is the belief that they and only they are recognized"custodians of intact Orthodoxy".

This idea lives not only in the things of hierarchs, but also in the very fabric of church thinking, where knowledge is replaced by confidence, and criticism is anathema. Observing the representatives of the church "landlordism" with a bias towards Old Believers and Duginism, one can see the same thing: for them it is completely unimportant what is really written in the original text of the canons.

Much more important is how it was understood in the Moscow kingdom before the Petrovsky era. They argue: "a translation sanctified by centuries becomes the original." This formula, in fact, is a kind of postmodern game, only dressed in a robe. The same logic applies to the "Rules of the Holy Apostles", which the Russian Orthodox Church uses as a club against the OCU. These "rules" are just an insert in the "Apostolic Constitutions", itself a pseudo-epigraphic text, created no earlier than the end of the IV century. But the adepts of "Moscow Orthodoxy" are indifferent to historical reality: they are driven not by knowledge, but by hatred, lack of faith, and fear of freedom of thought. This is where their special type of theology grows — dogmatic folklore, where every norm turns into a spell, and any other interpretation into heresy.

This is how a closed mythological system is created, in which reality is subject to translation, and translation to the mood of the era. As a result, canon law, which once served as an instrument of order and spiritual sanity, becomes in the hands of the Russian Orthodox Church a weapon against all those who think otherwise. Therefore, their faith in "intact Orthodoxy" is not a sign of strength, but a sign of deafness. This is not the preservation of the truth, but the worship of one's own echo.

When the "translation becomes the original" and the tradition is a self-sufficient mirror, the degradation of thought itself inevitably begins. Any living tradition rests on the ability to understand and correct itself, but if canonical law is turned into a ritual, then the next step is obvious - a war against reason. Where truth is replaced by loyalty, and knowledge by suspicion, thought becomes the enemy.

This is how what can be called is born gnoseophobia — a pathological fear of the mind, before any form of intellectual movement. This is the logical conclusion "Moscow Orthodoxy": faith without thought, tradition without understanding, "theology" without God. Hatred of intelligence is almost the main nerve of the ROC system. It has long since become not a side effect, but a principle around which its entire internal ideology is built.

This hatred is not an accident, but a natural result of three interrelated processes.

The first is the idealization of monasticism. In the tradition of the Russian Orthodox Church, monasticism has turned from a personal feat into a model for everyone. Hence the demand for naive, almost childish fideism: believes without understanding; obey without thinking. Monastic isolation and distrust of reason became the norm for the laity, and the mind became a suspicious manifestation of pride.

The second is hierarchical kakistocracy. The administrative structure of the Russian Orthodox Church is a primitive vertical without reverse relations, where the main dignity of the clergy is personal devotion to the superiors. Hence the personnel logic: the lower the intelligence, the higher the chance for the episcopate. This is how the phenomenon is born church management elite, composed of people who are afraid of the thought of being a threat to their status. Anyone who can analyze is dangerous; anyone who is capable of doubting is suspicious. It is not by chance that characters prevail at the top of the "ROC". like Pasha's "Mercedes" or Mr. Sudakov are demonstrably cynical and anti-intellectual figures for whom the concept of "humility" has long been replaced by complacency.

The third is the search for primitive solutions. Kakistocracy is not able to respond to the challenges of modernity: too complicated a world causes it horror. Instead of dialogue with the era, it offers the slogan - "everything has already been said by the holy fathers." But knowledge of the texts of the holy fathers requires intelligence and honesty, and this is suspicious among them. Therefore, they prefer not to read, but to quote, not to understand, but to repeat. Hence the active propaganda of ignorance under the guise of "protecting tradition": lowering the level of education, mistrust of science, bans on foreign languages, replacing schools with "patriotism education". Ideally, according to them, a citizen should be a being who sincerely considers himself the property of the state and the church, cannot think, but is ready to obey. This is how the Russian Orthodox Church turns into an ideological laboratory of the new darkness, where faith without knowledge is proclaimed a virtue, and thought a sin.

And if in the state such a model of power leads to tyranny, then in religion it leads to a spiritual desert. A desert where instead of a living God there is only the noise of dances around the golden idol of obedience.

As a result, one of the decisions of the ROC MP named after Stalin is to lobby for a decrease in the level of general education, a ban on the teaching or minimization of foreign languages. In general, the actual propaganda of gnoseophobia in the Russian Federation is the work of the Russian Orthodox Church. Ideally, their goal is to replace education with an ideological "patriotic" (in a post-Syrian sense) education. Ideally, a Russian citizen, in their opinion, should be an individual who sincerely considers himself the property of the state and the church hierarchy, ready to mindlessly obey any orders.

Light and darkness never fight "on equal terms". Darkness has no nature of its own - it is only a space from which light has gone. Therefore, any imperial religion that replaces living faith with administrative discipline exists only as long as people believe in its monopoly on grace.

The Russian Orthodox Church in all its incarnations - from the Moscow Patriarchate to its Ukrainian branch - is not just an institute. It is an ideological matrix created for the reproduction of subjugation. It does not carry the Gospel - it offers a control mechanism, a ceremonial replacement of thinking, sacralized fear.

Its "theology" has long ceased to be a search for truth: it has become a blasphemy for self-preservation, where each formula serves one purpose - to justify the empire. During the war years, this illusion began to crack. Hundreds of parishes left the Moscow jurisdiction, thousands of believers saw that the "grace" they were told about was only corporate fuel for the engine of spiritual aggression.

And still, tens of thousands of others remained where their faith had long since turned into a service of fear. Not because they don't see. And because fear and habit are stronger than the truth, if the truth does not have its form, its living spiritual support nearby.

In this process, Ukraine is experiencing not just a war — it is experiencing the catechization of the nation. This is the moment when everyone is forced to answer to himself: what exactly do I believe? To God, who is Love, or to a structure that requires submission? To the light that frees, or to the darkness that promises peace? And here it becomes clear: religious independence is part of political freedom.

He who is spiritually subjugated cannot be free in anything else. Russian church ideology proved this better than any treatise: where theology is transformed into propaganda, the state becomes a cult.

Therefore, the fight against Moscow pseudo-Orthodoxy is not a war of confessions, but a fight for the dignity of thinking. For the right believes without intermediaries between man and God. For the right to think and love without asking the "synod" for a blessing. The Russian Orthodox Church has lost not only its morals, but also its soul. Its hierarchs quote philosophers who have not been read and bless rockets that kill those whom Christ called "little brothers". Her "theology" is no longer about the Resurrection, but about power; her sermons are not about love, but about fear.

Ukraine, which has gone through the Holodomor, repression, Chernobyl and war, can no longer leave its spiritual territory under the control of a foreign metropolis. Her Church must speak with the voice of freedom, not submission. And then a new spiritual culture is born - not "anti-Moscow", but post-Moscow: the Church of an open heart, a free mind and a living prayer. After all, true Orthodoxy is not about gasoline and not about canonical cards. It is about Christ, who removes shackles and does not impose them. And in this sense, the struggle for Ukrainian Orthodoxy is a continuation of the historical struggle for freedom. The light does not need permission to shine. Truth does not ask for blessings from lies. Grace is not a license, but the breath of God.

So, the time of the Moscow pseudo-spiritual empires is coming to an end - not because someone destroys them, but because the world is returning. And where light appears, darkness simply ceases to exist. When the war ends - and it will inevitably end - Ukraine will face new, no less difficult tasks.Victory at the front does not mean automatic victory in the spiritual and value sphere.

With the end of the shooting, the second, quiet, but persistent struggle will begin - for the purification of public consciousness from ideas of "Russian world". The number of transitions from the UOC (MP) to the OCU will certainly increase, but at the same time those who have never left the imperial logic will become more active.

Adepts of Moscow pseudo-Christianity will begin to promote the usual formulas: about "forgiveness", "restoration of unity", "peace between fraternal nations". These words will sound beautiful, but in fact they will be a restoration of colonial thinking, an attempt to return Ukraine to the old subjugation - now under the banner of "spiritual reconciliation". They will not disappear after the defeat of Mordor. They will remain - in parishes, in monasteries, in Wednesdays, brought up for decades in the spirit of obedience and nostalgia for the empire. That is why, after the war, the Russian Orthodox Church and its ideological legacy will become a long-term challenge for the state and society.

Ukraine has no right to repeat the old mistake - "don't touch", "give time", "don't rock the boat". This is not a question of religion - it is a question of national security and cultural sovereignty. And when ethno-modified "human rights defenders" calling for "comprehensive reconciliation" or "useful idiots" from Moscow and foreign institutions who will measure the Ukrainian experience by the standards of liberal pacifism enter the arena, Ukraine must answer firmly: forgiveness does not mean oblivion, peace does not mean the return of colonial slavery, and freedom does not need a blessing from Moscow. Only then will this war end not only on on the map, but also in consciousness. And only then will the people who have withstood the bombs withstand the temptations of "soft capitulation."

Ivan Verstianyuk, columnist Newsky on religious matters.