Original taken from andreyvadjra in How Denisenko became a “patriarch”: “Filaret is a mafia. He will stop at nothing."
It is 25 years since the events that became fateful for millions of Orthodox Christians in Ukraine. On May 27-28, 1992, the Council of Bishops of the UOC (MP) elected a new primate, banning the former Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Ukraine Filaret Denisenko from the priesthood.
But this, as time has shown, was not the final victory of Orthodoxy in Ukraine.
Born in a lie
On May 3, 1990, Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Pimen passed away. Metropolitan Filaret of Kiev (in the world Mikhail Antonovich Denisenko) was elected locum tenens of the Patriarchal Throne. This practically meant his election as Primate of the Russian Church (which, moreover, was guaranteed to the locum tenens by responsible comrades from the Ideological Department of the CPSU Central Committee). Filaret, who moved to the Mother See, already ordered the patriarchal kukol.
Everything seemed to be going just fine for the ambitious bishop. Moreover, he was becoming more and more uncomfortable in Kyiv.
In the course of Gorbachev’s “democratization,” the so-called “revival” began. “Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church” (“UAOC”). So-called because the true Church, according to its own doctrine, was created by Christ himself in the 1st century. AD, while the “UAOC” was established on the territory of the occupied Ukrainian SSR according to the plan of Reich Minister Rosenberg, approved by Hitler on May 8, 1942. In the German convoy, the leaders of the “autocephalous” left Germany, and from there, as usual, they moved to the USA and Canada.
At the end of 1989, one of the leaders of Hitler’s generation “UAOC”, Petliura’s nephew Mstislav Skrypnik, who fled overseas, the “autocephalians” of Gorbachev’s “call” declared their primate. Six months later, the “All-Ukrainian Council of the UAOC” took place in the Kiev House of Cinema, which announced the transformation of this structure into the so-called. "Kyiv Patriarchate". Skrypnik, accordingly, became a “patriarch” (although he was never recognized by any church in the world as even a simple clergyman).
But in those same days, Filaret, on the contrary, experienced a collapse of hopes.
The Politburo decided not to interfere in the election of the patriarch. The fact is that the locum tenens was, of course, “their man” (a KGB agent with the operational call sign “Comrade Antonov”), but he became very close to the Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of the Ukrainian SSR Kravchuk, who showed separatist inclinations (just a month later the Rada will adopt a declaration on sovereignty). As a result, Filaret miserably lost the elections not only to the elected Patriarch Alexy II, but also to Metropolitan Vladimir Sabodan, who took second place. The participants of the council could not help but know that Filaret had been reporting to the “curators” about the brother bishops for two decades and even in some places assisted the head of the ideological department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine, Kravchuk, in his war with the Church. In addition, Mikhail Antonovich clearly did not lead a monastic lifestyle, and he was simply known as a tyrant.
« Upon returning to Kyiv, Filaret was depressed, - recalls the then manager of the UOC (MP), Metropolitan Jonathan. - One day he sat gloomily in the altar of the Vladimir Cathedral. Protodeacon Nikita Pasenko approached him with words of consolation: “Vladyka! You shouldn’t be so upset...” He raised his head and muffledly repeated several times: “Father Nikita! Ukraine we give him[Pat. Alexy] we won't give it up!»
And indeed, soon Filaret convened a hierarchal meeting of the Ukrainian Exarchate, at which he “made it clear” that Moscow, they say, “blessed” the creation of an autonomous Ukrainian church. Seeing the taken aback faces of the bishops, he hastened to assure that there was no talk of any real autonomy, and all this was “just a smoke screen for nationalists.”
Filaret began to blackmail the Patriarchate with horror stories about the allegedly rapid Banderization of the mass consciousness of Orthodox Christians in Ukraine. They say that if the Ukrainian exarchate is not given the status of an autonomous church, they will run over to the “autocephalous” and Uniates, because they themselves passionately desire separation from Moscow. Thus, during the first archpastoral visit of Patriarch Alexy to the Ukrainian SSR, the organ of the Communist Party of Ukraine “Truth of Ukraine” published (obviously, by order of Kravchuk), the so-called. " Appeal of the Ukrainian episcopate to the Patriarch with a request to grant the Ukrainian Exarchate broad autonomy. “By fabricating this document, Filaret again deceived the Ukrainian bishops, saying that he was doing this only to divert the eyes of the Rukhovites from our Church and to fight the union, which declared itself as the national Ukrainian Church, - assures Metropolitan. Jonathan. - They still believed him, and therefore no one thought about the consequences... Then the former Primate will more than once refer to “documents” obtained in such a dishonest way, justifying his schismatic activities with the opinion of the “majority».
Patriarch Alexy believed (or simply gave in) to Filaret’s monstrous lies (especially about the autocephalous aspirations of the Orthodox in Ukraine) and blessed the creation within the MP of an independent UOC in its governance.
Not anathema yet, already mafia
Already in the status of primate, Filaret began to “cleanse” the Ukrainian “spiritual field” from a competitor in the person of “Patriarch Mstislav” and other revived collaborators - the Uniates. " Leaders of illegal autocephaly take nationalist and separatist positions, - he really denounced the separatists, whom he now faithfully serves, now calling separatists those who are fighting for the reunification of the country in which he - Mikhail Denisenko - was born. " Using the political situation, separatist forces contribute to the spread of schism throughout Ukraine, setting themselves the goal of eliminating the UOC, which is in canonical unity with the Moscow Patriarchate“- Filaret was indignant (“Orthodox Bulletin” No. 10 of 1990).
In his address to the Presidium of the Verkhovna Rada, he drew the attention of legislators to “ illegal and hooligan actions of groups of extremists who call themselves autocephalists and Greek Catholics, specially brought from the western regions of Ukraine».
Legislators, however, by that time had adopted a declaration of independence for Ukraine. And after “gaining independence” as a result of the failure of the State Emergency Committee in Moscow, Filaret realized that he again had room to grow. Moreover, information about the unseemly life and activities of “comrade. Antonov” began to leak into the Russian press, and he understood that the only guarantee to stay afloat was to stick to Kravchuk. And how, without five minutes, the president of a “sovereign European power” desperately needed a “sovereign church.” Preferably, not tainted by fascism, and even better - canonical. Therefore, at the beginning of October 1991, the council of the UOC (MP), led by Philaret, accepted an appeal to the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Alexy II with a request to grant autocephaly to the UOC.
This act, to put it mildly, was not accepted by the entire Church in Ukraine, which only strengthened the Orthodox discontent with Philaret. Patriarch Alexy began to receive telegrams and minutes of parish meetings from dioceses with a request to accept them under his direct jurisdiction. Filaret responded by sending out a circular on the mandatory holding of clergy meetings in support of the decision of the UOC Council. Lists of clergy participants with their signatures were ordered to be delivered to the office of the Kyiv Metropolis.
Bishops Onuphry of Bukovina, Sergius of Ternopil and Alypius of Donetsk and the entire brethren of the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra, led by their viceroy, Archimandrite Elevfery Didenko, opposed such methods, which violated the principles of conciliarity of the Orthodox Church. For this, the rulers were removed from their cathedras (and Metropolitan Agafangel of Odessa was removed from his cathedra even earlier for opposing the course of autocephaly). But the believers put the diocesan administrations “under siege,” without releasing their archpastors. And although the latter managed to persuade the flock to obey this decision of the primate, Orthodox parishes and entire dioceses began protests. The name of Filaret in many parishes was no longer commemorated during services.
In the end, Bishops Onufry Berezovsky and Sergius Gensitsky sent messages to the Patriarch in which they announced their refusal to sign the petition of the UOC Council for autocephaly.
The question arises, why did they, not to mention other bishops of the UOC (MP), previously put their signatures on such documents? The patriarch will answer this in 1992: “ Filaret is a mafia. He will stop at nothing, even physical violence" Denisenko will demonstrate how powerful this mafia is already in 1994 - by sending militants to the Caucasus, opening offshore companies and banks to swindle funds from the “cutting” of Western humanitarian aid for poor Ukrainians.
Caliph for a moment
For the April 1992 Bishops' Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, the Kiev Metropolitan prepared another blackmail: if the UOC is not given autocephaly, the Ukrainian delegation leaves the hall, thereby disrupting the council.
And when “the hour has come,” no one followed the head of the Ukrainian delegation, heading towards the exit (about five people stood up, but looked at the hall and immediately sat down)! The entire operation, which had been carefully planned over the course of two years, was lost in an instant! Filaret had to return to the presidium without leaving the hall.
And here, “without slowing down the pace of the counter-offensive,” the council participants raised the question of changing the primate of the UOC, as “ does not meet the requirements for a person capable of uniting around himself all Orthodox clergy and laity in Ukraine" “Meeting” the wishes of the episcopate, Patriarch Alexy turned to Metropolitan Philaret with a request “ for the good of Orthodoxy in Ukraine, for the sake of saving the Church in Ukraine, resign from his post and give the bishops of Ukraine the opportunity to choose a new primate" There was nothing left for him to do but before the Cross and the Gospel to assure the council that “in the name of church peace” he will convene a bishops’ council of the UOC (MP), at which he will submit a petition for release from his duties as primate. He sealed his promise with a reference to the covenant of Christ “let your word be: “Yes, yes”; "no no"; and anything beyond this is from the evil one.”
With a new god - “purely” Ukrainian
Returning to Kyiv, Filaret convened a press conference at which he announced that... “Ukrainian Orthodoxy was given by God,” and, accordingly, he could not leave the throne. By “god” he now obviously meant the President of Ukraine, which was indirectly indicated by the week-long period of Mikhail Antonovich’s rethinking of his existence. As the “monk’s” daughter Filaret Vera said, before the press conference her dad managed to confer with Kravchuk and his long-time partner Evgenia Petrovna (Vera’s mother). The latter allegedly stated: “ Misha, do you want to let me in here?(to the residence of the Primate of the UOC on Pushkinskaya Street) another?! If you do this, I’ll send you around the world with my knapsack: I’ll tell you everything about our relationship!“And “Misha” himself later admitted in an interview with the newspaper “Boulevard” that he decided to take this step on the advice of his old friend Kravchuk.
Filaret believed that the Ukrainian bishops would not dare to oppose his mafia, which was also strengthened by the “authority” of the president and the Verkhovna Rada (whose support he also managed to secure). However, with the blessing of the Patriarch of Moscow, the oldest ordained bishop of the UOC (MP), Metropolitan Nikodim of Kharkov, “dared” to convene a council of bishops of the UOC (MP) on May 27, 1992. By the decision of the council, to which Filaret did not appear, he was removed from the Kyiv See and from the post of head of the UOC, and was also banned from the priesthood. Even earlier, on May 6-7, 1992, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church at its extended meeting (to which Filaret also did not appear, although he was invited twice) prohibited the Kiev Metropolitan from acting as Primate in the period before the Council of Bishops of the UOC, namely: convening the Synod, ordain bishops, issue decrees and appeals concerning the UOC.” As an exception, the “convening of the Bishops’ Council of the UOC to accept his resignation and elect a new Primate” was indicated.
Of the two dozen bishops of the UOC, only one took Philaret’s side - Bishop Jacob of Pochaev. But for the ordination of clergy in the Church, at least three ruling bishops are required, Jacob was only a suffragan, and Philaret himself had already been deposed from the episcopal rank. This couple could not even ordain ordinary priests. In addition, on June 11, 1992, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church deprived Panchuk of all degrees of the priesthood. So the Filaret-Kravchuk project failed.
A non-fascist church with even a hint of canonicity did not take place. Therefore, it is probably wrong to call Denisenko’s act a split. He and Jacob did not create a new church structure. It can't even be called a "breakaway." After all, Filaret had already been banned from the priesthood.
And yet the split took place
On June 21, 1992, five pro-Kravchuk Rada deputies, led by the notorious Chervoniy (the same future Rivne governor who would fall victim to lightning after declaring that the Moscow Patriarch would visit Rivne only through his corpse) and employees appeared at the “Kyiv Patriarchate of the UAOC” the President's Office. The delegation demanded to immediately convene a “council of bishops” to admit Filaret to the UAOC. “This is the President’s order!” - was stated to the dumbfounded manager of the “Kyiv Patriarchate of the UAOC” Anthony Masendich. However, the treasury of the UOC (MP) stolen by Filaret, as well as the building of the Kiev Metropolis and the Vladimir Cathedral seized by the militants of the Ukrainian National Self-Defense (UNSO) of Dmitry Korchinsky were offered as a “dowry”.
The next day, without notifying his “patriarch” (living in the USA), Masendich urgently summoned the “bishops of the UAOC” to Kyiv.
On June 25-26, 1992, a meeting of several “UAOC bishops” and deputies of the Verkhovna Rada took place, called the “unification council of the UOC and UAOC-KP.” By the decision of the “council”, both structures were “abolished”, and all their property and finances were declared the property of the newly created “UOC-KP”. Skrypnik remained the “Patriarch” (still unaware of the abolition of his “church”), and Filaret was appointed his deputy (a position previously unprecedented in the history of the Church).
Three “UAOC bishops” refused to participate in the scam and left the meeting.
This was the beginning of the split. But not the Church in Ukraine, but the so-called. "Ukrainian Orthodoxy". Which the same Filaret so furiously exposed just a couple of years before leaving for anti-canonical “autocephaly”.
« Autocephaly must be recognized by other Orthodox Churches, he quite rightly asserted in newspaper "Soviet Ukraine" dated May 9, 1989 - As you know, during the civil war the Ukrainian Autocephalous Church was created, but this act was illegal. Therefore, the people called it the self-sanctified Church. Then it was dissolved, and during the war years, during the temporary Nazi occupation of Ukraine, it was restored, and now separate parishes exist abroad. Other Orthodox Churches did not recognize them. So why do we need to break away from the Orthodox world now? Why do we need a Church that fences us off from people? ...They say we need the Ukrainian Church. But there is an obvious intent in such a production.. Our Church began to be called Russian since the time of Prince Vladimir, that is, from the time when there were no separate Ukrainians, Belarusians, or Russians. It has been bearing this name for 1000 years. Now it includes Estonians, Latvians, Mordovians, Moldovans, and others... The church is multinational and has the name that it received back in the days of Kievan Rus ».
And even in 1991 he denounced the “UAOC”: “Today, supporters of the so-called “Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church”... with the support extremist forces are being torn apart Not only tunic of the One, Catholic and Apostolic Church, But sow hostility and brotherly hatred among the Ukrainian people ».
In the same " Orthodox Bulletin No. 1 for 1991) got from Filaret and his new boss: “All the so-called sacred rites performed by the priests and bishops of this “church” are ungraceful. This is evidenced by the fact that in the United States of America not a single jurisdiction recognizes the church of Mstislav Skrypnik... In the USA there is a Conference of Canonical Bishops, to which Skrypnik is simply not admitted because they are not recognized as a canonical bishop. Moreover, his name is Patriarch of Kiev and all Ukraine(which Denisenko himself is now called - D.S.) - this is a mockery of the Church... To assign patriarchal dignity to the Local Church is the right of the entire Orthodox Church... With the so-called “patriarch” Mstislav Skrypnik, not a single Orthodox bishop can serve the Divine Liturgy, neither in Ukraine, nor in the USA, nor in any other country, because his church does not belong to the family of Orthodox Churches... Therefore, I believe that the UAOC is truly independent, but independent of all Orthodoxy"("Orthodox Bulletin" No. 1, 1991).
On July 1, 1992, the mentioned Skrypnik arrived to sort things out in Ukraine, where... he was immediately isolated in the former sanatorium of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine near Kiev. The next day he met with President Kravchuk. Mstislav stated to the latter that the “unification council” has nothing to do with the “Kyiv Patriarchate of the UAOC.” This, they say, is nothing more than a personal matter between Denisenko and “unscrupulous politicians.” Without reaching an agreement with Kravchuk, and even less so with Filaret, Skrypnik left for the United States.
However, the Council for Religious Affairs under the Cabinet of Ministers accepted the documents of the “unification council.” Their registration was so hasty that it turned out to be sealed for six months as a non-existent Council for Religious Affairs under the Council of Ministers of the Ukrainian SSR. Therefore, it had no legal force.
On October 20, 1992, “patriarch” Mstyslav Skrypnyk distributed an Appeal to “the episcopate, clergy and laity of the UAOC,” in which he called not to recognize the “unification.” The appeal was accepted for execution by the “Cathedral of Bishops of the UAOC of Western Europe.”
On November 10, 1992, parishioners of the first “UAOC” community in Kyiv addressed the Council for Religious Affairs with an open letter, also condemning the “unification council.”
The next day Mstislav flies to Ukraine again. This time, journalists are allowed to see him, to whom he complains that he “doesn’t even have a place to stay the night.”
At the same time, the “bishops’ council of the UOC-KP” is taking place. Of course, without the blessing of her supposed “patriarch,” to which he refuses to attend. The “Council” adopts a provision assigning the duties of the “patriarch” to the “synod” in connection with the “permanent stay of the patriarch outside the country.”
Skrypnyk, who is “within the country”, submits an application addressed to President Kravchuk, Prime Minister Kuchma and Prosecutor General Shishkin with a demand to cancel the decision to liquidate the “UAOC”, return all rights to the “legally elected Patriarch of the Local Council of the UAOC”, and also bring to criminal liability the organizers of the “UOC” -KP.” After which he leaves for the United States, where six months later he dies without waiting for a decision on his application. Which followed literally a week after his death.
Based on a statement from People's Deputy Golovaty (now a member of the Venice Commission), the Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine filed a protest against the registration of the UOC-KP. However, the case did not go to trial - Prosecutor General Shishkin was removed from office at the insistence of Kravchuk, and the Collegium of the Prosecutor General's Office was dissolved.
In the fall of the same year, Berkut dispersed a demonstration of supporters of the UAOC near the Presidential Administration. The next day, seven “UAOC bishops” were detained for protesting against legal arbitrariness against the “UAOC” and demanding the return of property, including the “patriarchy” building.
And again a bummer
In October 1993, elections for a new “patriarch of the UAOC” took place. And again, the ex-KGB agent was given a ride (in which the successors of the collaborators can be understood). In order to avoid complete failure of the idea with the “UOC-KP”, Deputy Prime Minister Zhulynsky gave a telephone command to elect as “patriarch” the former OUN member and Soviet dissident (though also an informer, which, however, not many knew about) Vasyl Romanyuk But the stolen treasury The UOC (MP) remained under the “deputy patriarch” (not to mention the “disappeared” party money, invested in advance by Kravchuk in Filaret and increased by the latter in his own bank). Therefore, the banquet on the occasion of the enthronement of the new “Ukrainian patriarch”, which Filaret prepared in honor of himself, was canceled without warning. The Ukrainian “elite” could only kiss the locks on the gates of the Mariinsky Palace.
At the end of October 1993, Kravchuk sent an Appeal to the Patriarch of Constantinople with a request to contribute to “the establishment of the Autocephalous Orthodox Church (UOC-KP) in Ukraine.” However, immediately the subject of the petition began to fall apart from the inside. Within a month, five “bishops”, led by the “revivalist father” Anthony Masendich, left the UOC-KP. Moreover, they all issued a repentant appeal, in which they called on their former flock to return to the canonical Church, for Philaret and his false church were “leading them to eternal destruction.”
Romanyuk was thinking about the same thing. “He did not value his “patriarchate” at all, knowing its value,” admitted his closest assistant, “the governor of the patriarchal courtyard, Archimandrite Vikenty,” “he did not call Filareta anything other than “a brute.” In the last months of his life, he wanted to send Filaret to rest, issued a decree on his dismissal, came into contact with the hierarchs of the canonical Church, wanted to unite on canonical principles, with repentance.” By the way, the late Skrypnik on December 19, 1992, at a meeting with representatives of local authorities in Kharkov, stated that with the primate of the UOC (MP), Met. Vladimir “you can have a real contact, not a fake one.”
It is unlikely that this was a desire to annex the “UAOC” specifically to the Moscow Patriarchate. As the head of the press service of the UOC (MP), Vasily Anisimov, who personally knew Romanyuk, writes, “he did not harbor any illusions about his “patriarchal grace,” saying, not without humor, that “we have it on our noses,” but Romanyuk did not hide the fact that The goal of the “UOC-KP” is not serving God, but “fighting Moscow.” Most likely, in communication with the new primate of the UOC (MP), the latter’s inclination to take action to gain canonical autocephaly for the UOC (MP) was felt.
Was it due to communication with Met. Vladimir Sabodan or for more practical reasons, but Romanyuk began to search for the “privatized” treasury of the UOC (MP). In 1995, he asked for assistance from the Department for Combating Organized Crime, pointing out that Filaret had converted 3 billion rubles even before the collapse of the USSR. and placed them in foreign accounts. Romanyuk also asked for security, assuring that Filaret would try to “poison or deal with him.” The petitioner was provided with round-the-clock security for three days of preparation and holding of the “synod of the UOC-KP.” During this time (including at night), five attempts by Filaret members and deputies to attack the “patriarch” were stopped (as recorded in the police report). And yet, in the end, on May 4, 1995, Filaret was dismissed from the post of “deputy patriarch.”
And ten days later, the “patriarch” was found dead in the botanical garden with broken ribs and traces of injections in the heart. As the then head of the Department of External Church Relations of the UOC-KP said, Archimandrite. Vikenty, “Shortly before his death, Romanyuk broke down some door on Pushkinskaya and finally found Filaret’s archive, where there were copies of Filaret’s reports to the KGB of Ukraine for many years and even an appeal that he played some outstanding role in the Czechoslovak events of 1968 , and the government does not solve his housing and everyday problems.” According to the “archimandrite,” “Romanyuk was very happy about this find, since Filaret always boasted that he had incriminating evidence on everyone collected by the KGB, but here it turned out to be incriminating evidence on Filaret himself.”
Attempt No. 5
Denisenko’s dream of a patriarchal doll sewn back in 1990 (albeit of a Moscow cut) finally came true on October 21, 1995, when at the “local council of the UOC-KP” he elected himself “patriarch”. “To avoid misunderstandings” that occurred during the previous four attempts, the “elections” were held on a non-alternative basis. But “misunderstandings” were quite expected (on August 10, the “council of dean dioceses of the UOC-KP of western Ukraine” addressed Filaret with a demand to withdraw his candidacy for the patriarchal throne and “intensify dialogue” with the canonical Church) and they did happen: in protest against the “election Philaret" the next part of the "bishopric of the UOC-KP" (representing two-thirds of the "dioceses") went straight from the "council" to the "UAOC". The latter was officially restored on June 5, 1995 by the Council for Religious Affairs, for which Kravchuk, who had lost his presidential post, was no longer an authority.
Filaret again remained in the minority overwhelming his ambitions. Therefore, on October 22, 1995, when he ascended the “throne,” in his first sermon as a false patriarch, he passionately called for a “dialogue of love” with the Uniates. The same ones with which he frightened the Moscow Patriarchate, demanding first autonomy and then autocephaly for the Church in Ukraine.
However, “love with the Uniates” is a completely new page in the development of “Ukrainian Orthodoxy.” Worthy of separate study.
Dmitry Skvortsov,
specially for alternatio.org
Patriarch of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate
Education
Born on January 23, 1929 in the village of Blagodatnoye, Amvrosievsky district, Donetsk region, in the family of a miner. His name in the world is Mikhail Antonovich Denisenko. In 1946, after graduating from high school, he entered the third grade of the Odessa Theological Seminary, from which he graduated with honors. In 1952 he graduated from the Moscow Theological Academy with an academic degree of candidate of theology.Clergy career
On January 1, 1950, he took monastic vows with the name Filaret.On January 15, 1950, His Holiness Patriarch Alexy of Moscow and All Rus' was ordained to the rank of hierodeacon, and on June 18, 1951 - to the rank of hieromonk.
Since 1953 - teacher at the Moscow Theological Academy.
In 1956, he was appointed inspector of the Saratov Theological Seminary and elevated to the rank of abbot.
In 1957, he was transferred to the position of inspector of the Kyiv Theological Seminary, and on July 12, 1958, he was elevated to the rank of archimandrite and appointed rector of the Kyiv Theological Seminary.
In 1960, he was appointed manager of the affairs of the Ukrainian Exarchate and rector of the St. Vladimir Cathedral in Kyiv.
1961-1962 - rector of the metochion of the Russian Orthodox Church at the Patriarchate of Alexandria in the city of Alexandria (United Arab Republic).
In February 1962, by decision of His Holiness Patriarch Alexy and the Holy Synod, he became Bishop of Luga, vicar of the Leningrad diocese, with instructions to govern the Riga diocese.
From June to October 1962 he served as Exarch of Central Europe. After the formation of the diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church on the territory of Austria in October 1962, he was appointed Bishop of Vienna and Austria. On December 12, 1964, he was appointed Bishop of Dmitrov, vicar of the Moscow diocese, and rector of the Moscow Theological Academy and Seminary. On May 14, 1966, he was elevated to the rank of archbishop and appointed Exarch of Ukraine, Archbishop of Kyiv and Galicia, and a permanent member of the Holy Synod.
On February 25, 1968, Patriarch Alexy elevated him to the rank of metropolitan. In 1971, Patriarch Pimen awarded the right to wear two panagias.
After the death of Patriarch Pimen on May 3, 1990, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church by secret ballot elected Metropolitan Philaret as Locum Tenens to the Moscow Patriarchal Throne. He was the chairman of the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, held on June 7–8, 1990.
Filaret initiated an appeal to the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Alexy II to grant the Ukrainian Orthodox Church autonomy and independence in governance. On October 25-27, 1990, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church granted the UOC autonomy and independence in governance, and Metropolitan Philaret was unanimously elected by the Ukrainian episcopate as the Primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church with the title Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine.
The fight for autocephaly
After the Supreme Soviet of the Ukrainian SSR proclaimed the independence of Ukraine on August 24, 1991, the Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine became its first president. Like Kravchuk, Metropolitan Filaret abruptly changes his beliefs to radically opposite ones and begins to act under the motto “in an independent state, an independent church.” On November 1, 1991, the Bishops' Council of the UOC unanimously adopted a decision on complete independence, that is, autocephaly, of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and turned to Patriarch Alexy II and the episcopate of the Russian Orthodox Church for approval of this decision. However, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church on April 2, 1992 transferred consideration of the issue to the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church. Accused of not meeting the requirements for a person capable of uniting around himself all Orthodox clergy and laity in Ukraine, Filaret gave his archpastoral word to resign. However, having returned to Kyiv, he announced to the flock that he did not recognize the charges brought against him allegedly for his request to grant independence to the Ukrainian Church and that he would lead the Ukrainian Orthodox Church until the end of his days, since he was “given by God to Ukrainian Orthodoxy.”In 1991-1992, the Russian media began to disseminate materials about the violation of monastic vows by the Primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, about his tyranny, etc. Information also appeared that Filaret (Denisenko) was closely connected with the KGB, in whose reports he appeared as agent under the pseudonym "Antonov". He himself does not deny his past contacts with the Soviet secret police and espionage agencies: “As for the KGB, it must be said that all the bishops without exception were connected with the State Security Committee. All without exception! In Soviet times, no one could become a bishop unless the KGB gave consent. Therefore, it would be untrue to say that I was not connected with the KGB. He was tied up like everyone else."
On May 27, 1992, under the chairmanship of Metropolitan Nikodim (Rusnak) of Kharkov, the Council of Bishops of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Kharkov (consisting of 18 bishops) “expressed no confidence in Metropolitan Philaret (Denisenko) and dismissed him from the Kyiv See<…>prohibited him from serving in the priesthood until the decision of the Bishops' Council of the Mother Church"
Defamation and anathema
On June 11, 1992, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church decided to “expel Metropolitan Philaret (Denisenko) from his existing rank, depriving him of all degrees of the priesthood and all rights associated with being in the clergy” for “cruel and arrogant attitude towards the subordinate clergy, dictatorship and blackmail (Tit. 1, 7-8; Holy Apostles canon 27), bringing temptation into the environment of believers by one’s behavior and personal life (Matthew 18, 7; First Ecumenical Council canon 3-e, Fifth-Sixth Ecumenical Council canon 5- e), perjury (canon 25 of the Holy Apostles), public slander and blasphemy against the Council of Bishops (Second Ecumenical Council, canon 6), performing sacred rites, including ordinations while prohibited (canon 28 of the Holy Apostles), causing a schism in Church (Twice Council, rule 15th).” Filaret did not admit his guilt and did not obey the decision of the Council, calling it uncanonical and illegal.On February 21, 1997, at the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church in the St. Daniel Monastery in Moscow, he was excommunicated and anathematized. The resolution of the Council charged Philaret with the following: “Monk Philaret did not heed the call to repentance addressed to him on behalf of the Mother Church and continued during the inter-council period schismatic activity, which he extended beyond the borders of the Russian Orthodox Church, contributing to the deepening of the schism in the Bulgarian Orthodox Church and accepting communication of schismatics from other Local Orthodox Churches.” Filaret does not recognize the excommunication, since, from his point of view, it was committed for political reasons, thus being invalid.
Activities in the UOC KP
On June 25, 1992, the All-Ukrainian Local Council took place, at which the unification of part of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church into a single one was proclaimed. The Council declared the decision of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church illegal and elected Metropolitan Mstislav (Skripnik) Patriarch of Kyiv and All Rus'-Ukraine. Metropolitan Philaret was elected deputy of the Patriarch of Kyiv and All Rus'-Ukraine, Patriarch Mstislav (Skripnik).In October 1995, at the All-Ukrainian Local Council, Metropolitan Philaret was elected Patriarch of Kyiv and All Rus'-Ukraine. The enthronement took place on October 22, 1995 at the Vladimir Cathedral in Kyiv.
Metropolitan Philaret is fighting for the creation of the Local Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate in Ukraine. On his initiative, all liturgical books were translated into Ukrainian.
MOSCOW, December 1 – RIA Novosti. The head of the self-proclaimed Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate, Filaret Denisenko, said that the UOC-KP will never return to the Moscow Patriarchate, and he himself will never repent of his actions.
“I want to declare to the Russian episcopate: the Ukrainian church will never return to the Moscow Patriarchate, because we have our own state. Just as they have their own state, so do we. There will never be a return,” he said.
According to Filaret, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church misinterpreted his appeal.
“Reconciliation did not happen because the council, taking advantage of my appeal, directed it not towards reconciliation and resolving the issue of autocephaly of the Ukrainian Church, but at the fact that we supposedly want to return to the Moscow Patriarchate. It is not us, but they who want us to return ", - he said.
Moreover, he emphasized that he would never leave his post, even if it would help the dialogue on autocephaly.
“I will not renounce the Kyiv pulpit until death,” said Filaret.
Dialogue without reconciliation?
The day before, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church, which is being held these days in Moscow, adopted a resolution in which it outlined the request of the head of the self-proclaimed UOC-KP to restore prayerful and Eucharistic communion with Christians in the Ukrainian church schism. The Council considered this letter “a step towards overcoming the schism” and created a special commission for negotiations with the Kyiv Patriarchate.
Filaret explained that he approached the Council of Bishops with a proposal for reconciliation for the sake of creating an autocephalous Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
“We are interested in the autocephaly of the entire Ukrainian church. For the sake of creating a single local Orthodox church in Ukraine, we agreed to this reconciliation,” he said, adding that he did not agree on the text of the appeal with the Ukrainian authorities.
According to him, the Kiev Patriarchate is ready to create a commission and does not refuse dialogue.
“But from what kind of dialogue? From a dialogue about the autocephaly of the UOC, if there is such a dialogue, then we will go to it. If the dialogue is about returning to the Moscow Patriarchate, then we will not go to a dialogue, we don’t need it,” said the head of the UOC-KP.
If Moscow does not want to negotiate on autocephaly, then the Kiev Patriarchate will continue the dialogue with the Patriarch of Constantinople, added the head of the UOC-KP.
The initiative for reconciliation came from the Moscow Patriarchate, he claims.
“And not directly from Moscow to Kyiv, but through New York, through Metropolitan Hilarion of the Foreign Russian Church,” Filaret said.
Earlier, the chairman of the department for external church relations of the Moscow Patriarchate, Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk, said that Filaret’s appeal to the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church was the initiative of “the authors of the letter themselves.”
"We extended our hand"
Filaret also said that he would insist on the adoption of a law on the special status of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, and called the decision of the Council of Bishops that the center of the UOC-MP is located in Kyiv a “deception.”
In May, the Verkhovna Rada planned to consider a bill that suggested that religious organizations with a center in the “aggressor country” (this status was officially assigned to Russia by the Kyiv authorities) would be able to appoint metropolitans and bishops only in agreement with the authorities. Parliament did not discuss the document due to lack of votes for its adoption.
"The center of this church is in Moscow<…>. Let them not deceive the people and the Verkhovna Rada, which is currently discussing the law on freedom of conscience, which contains an article about the church, the center of which is located in the aggressor country. They are afraid that a stain will fall on this church,” said the head of the UOC-KP.
These statements were commented on by the representative of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, Archpriest Nikolai Danilevich.
“I’m watching Filaret’s press conference. I’m already drawing the conclusion: “No matter how much you feed the wolf, he’s still looking into the forest.” I’m sorry. Lies, excuses, attempts to stay in trend, etc. Glimpses of church consciousness are clouded by worldly philosophies. But we were ready , extended a hand, even if they spat on that hand, but we did it as Christians. You can’t drag us into heaven by force,” he wrote on his page in
Patriarch of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate since 1995, former deputy of the previous Patriarchs of the UOC-KP Vladimir (Romanyuk) (1993-1995) and Mstislav (Skrypnyk) (1992-1993). Previously - His Beatitude Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine (1990-1992), Archbishop of Kiev and Galicia, Exarch of Ukraine (1966-1990). In 1997, he was excommunicated from the Church by the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church for schismatic activities.
Mikhail Antonovich Denisenko (later Filaret) was born on January 28, 1929 in the village of Blagodatnoye, Amvrosievsky district, Donetsk region, into a miner’s family.
In 1946, Denisenko graduated from high school, after which he entered the third grade of the Odessa Theological Seminary, from which he graduated in 1948. In the same year, Denisenko entered the Moscow Theological Academy. While studying in his second year, on January 1, 1950, he was tonsured a monk under the name Philaret and appointed acting caretaker of the Patriarchal chambers in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra. In the same month he was ordained to the rank of hierodeacon, and in 1952 to the rank of hieromonk.
In 1952, Filaret graduated from the academy with a candidate of theology degree and was appointed teacher of the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament at the Moscow Theological Seminary. At the same time, Filaret served as dean of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra. In March 1954 he was awarded the title of associate professor.
In August 1956, Filaret was elevated to the rank of abbot and took the post of inspector of the Saratov Theological Seminary. The following year he took a similar position at the Kyiv Theological Seminary. In July 1958, Filaret was elevated to the rank of archimandrite. In 1960, Archimandrite Philaret took the post of administrator of the Ukrainian Exarchate.
In May 1961, Filaret became rector of the metochion of the Russian Orthodox Church at the Patriarchate of Alexandria in Alexandria (United Arab Republic), and held this post until January 1962.
In 1962, Filaret was elevated to the rank of Bishop of Luga, vicar of the Leningrad diocese (the sacrament of consecration, or ordination, took place on February 4, 1962). At the same time he was appointed manager of the Riga diocese. In the summer of the same year, he was relieved of his duties as vicar of the Leningrad diocese and appointed vicar of the Central European Exarchate with temporary control of the Central European Exarchate. In November of the same year he became Bishop of Vienna and Austria.
In December 1964, Firaret - already as Bishop of Dmitrovsky - became vicar of the Moscow diocese and rector of the Moscow Theological Academy and Seminary.
Best of the day
On May 14, 1966, Filaret was elevated to the rank of Archbishop of Kyiv and Galicia, Exarch of Ukraine, and appointed a member of the Holy Synod. In this capacity, he began to take an active part in the international activities of the Russian Orthodox Church and in December of the same year headed the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate in Kyiv. In this post, he continued to work actively, repeatedly traveling abroad as part of delegations of the Ukrainian Exarchate, the Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian Orthodox Church, taking part in various events - conferences, assemblies and congresses. In 1979, by decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the Ukrainian SSR, Filaret was awarded the Order of Friendship of Peoples, and in 1988 - the Order of the Red Banner of Labor (the award was given to the clergyman by decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the USSR for active peacekeeping activities and in connection with the 1000th anniversary of the Baptism of Rus').
In May 1990, after the death of Patriarch Pimen of Moscow and All Rus', Filaret became locum tenens of the Patriarchal Throne and one of the candidates for patriarch. To elect a new patriarch, an extraordinary local council was convened, which on June 7, 1990 elected Metropolitan Alexy (Alexy II) as the new head of the Russian Orthodox Church. Meanwhile, according to tradition, it was the Metropolitan of Kiev who was considered the second most important bishop of the Russian Church after the patriarch and the most influential of the permanent members of the Holy Synod. However, despite the fact that Filaret was the most likely candidate for the post of primate of the Russian Orthodox Church, many were not satisfied with his candidacy. In particular, his faulty moral character - his manner of behavior, rudeness, lust for power and "non-monastic" lifestyle - caused censure.
The election of a new patriarch took place against the backdrop of an intensification of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church’s struggle for independence. In January 1990, at the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church, a new “Regulation on Exarchates” was adopted, according to which the Ukrainian Exarchate was given more rights in self-government and building church life in accordance with its church-national traditions. In October of the same year, having considered the “Appeal of the UOC episcopate to His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Rus' and the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church” approved by the synod of the Ukrainian Exarchate, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church decided to grant the UOC independence and autonomy in governance. After this, the name “Ukrainian Exarchate” was abolished, and Philaret, as the head of the UOC, was given the title “His Beatitude Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine.” In November 1990, the local council of the UOC adopted a resolution: “To appeal to His Holiness Patriarch Alexy of Moscow and All Rus' and the episcopate of the Russian Orthodox Church with a request to grant autocephaly to the UOC,” that is, complete canonical independence. Subsequently, the issue of granting autocephaly to the Ukrainian Church was considered at meetings of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church on December 25-26, 1991 and February 18-19, 1992, but no decision was made.
However, Filaret continued his activities aimed at separating the Ukrainian Church, relying on the support of the Chairman of the Supreme Council of the Ukrainian SSR Leonid Kravchuk (talking about the connections of the church hierarch with Kravchuk, the media called the Ukrainian leader “an old acquaintance of Filaret” from his work in the ideological sector of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine "). After Ukraine became an independent state in 1991, Kravchuk actively supported the work to create an independent church on the basis of the canonical UOC (the Uniate Church, as well as the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (UAOC), were not suitable for this purpose, since they did not enjoy widespread popular support). It was noted that granting the UOC the status of canonical autocephaly could serve to unite the Orthodox churches of Ukraine into one denomination, which should have helped reduce religious confrontation in the country, and consequently increase the socio-political stability of Ukrainian society.
In January 1992, after Kravchuk took the post of President of Ukraine in December 1991, Filaret convened the Ukrainian Bishops' Conference, at which an appeal was adopted to the Patriarch, the Holy Synod and all bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church. It contained accusations of deliberately delaying a positive resolution of the issue of autocephaly of the UOC. “We humbly declare that our desire to gain full canonical independence, forced by new historical conditions, is dictated solely by the good of Orthodoxy in Ukraine, and not by pressure from the state,” this address said, in particular.
The topic of granting autocephaly to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church was discussed by the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church in the spring of 1992 (Filaret was not present at it). It was announced to the participants of the council that Filaret, using the autonomy granted to the UOC as “a tool for strengthening his personal power in the Ukrainian Church,” was putting pressure on Ukrainian bishops and priests in order to force them to support autocephaly. Gradually, the discussion of the problem of autocephaly “grew into a discussion about the immoral behavior of the Kyiv Metropolitan and his gross miscalculations in the management” of the UOC. As a result, the council invited Filaret to voluntarily resign as head of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
Filaret promised to do this and gave his word as a bishop that he would not create any obstacles to the free expression of the UOC when electing its new first hierarch. However, later he refused to resign from his duties as the head of the UOC and renounced the bishop’s oath given to him, which marked the beginning of a new schism, which went down in the history of Orthodoxy under the name “Filaret’s.” Filaret explained his actions by saying that the promise he made to vacate the post of head of the UOC was forced and therefore insincere. According to him, he could not leave under the circumstances, “because he is responsible for the Ukrainian Orthodox Church before God.” Filaret never convened a council at which he would have resigned and at which a new Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine would have been elected.
However, in May of the same 1992, the Bishops' Council of the UOC was assembled. He removed Filaret from the Kyiv See and from the post of first hierarch of the UOC, while enrolling him on the staff, but with a ban on the priesthood. The episcopate, by a majority vote, elected the bishop of the Russian Orthodox Church, Metropolitan of Rostov and Novocherkassk Vladimir (Viktor Sabodan), as the primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
On June 11, 1992, the Judicial Act of the Council of Bishops “for a cruel and arrogant attitude... towards the subordinate clergy, dictatorship and blackmail... introducing temptation among believers with one’s behavior and personal life”, for perjury (failure to fulfill the promise to convene a Council of Bishops in Kiev and submit to it resignation given under the cross and the Gospel), as well as "public slander and blasphemy of the Council of Bishops... performing sacred rites, including ordinations, in a state of prohibition... causing a schism in the Church" Filaret was deposed from the dignity, with his deprivation of "all degrees of the priesthood and all rights associated with being in the clergy."
In response to this, supporters of Filaret’s policy convened a Unification Council in Kyiv on June 25-26, 1992. On it, as a result of the unification of part of the representatives of the UOC (Moscow Patriarchate) and the UAOC, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate (UOC-KP) was created. In the same year, Filaret became the deputy of the Patriarch of the UOC-KP Mstislav (Skrypnyk), after whose death in 1993 he became the deputy of the new Patriarch Vladimir (Romanyuk). On July 14, 1995, Vladimir died under mysterious circumstances, and on October 25, 1995, Filaret was elected Patriarch of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate.
On February 19, 1997, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church excommunicated Filaret because he “did not heed the call to repentance addressed to him on behalf of the Mother Church and continued schismatic activities during the inter-council period.”
But in subsequent years, Filaret, referred to in the Russian press as a “false patriarch,” heading the Kiev Patriarchate, actively contributed to attempts to unite the UOC-KP and the UAOC into the Local Ukrainian Orthodox Church. It was noted that his activities were carried out with the assistance of the Ukrainian authorities and were highly appreciated by them - Filaret was awarded the Order of Prince Yaroslav the Wise II, III, IV and V degrees "for a special significant contribution to the construction of the Local Orthodox Church in Ukraine, many years of church activity in establishing ideals spirituality, mercy and interfaith harmony in society." At the end of 2005, Filaret's supporters asked Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko to appeal to Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople with a request to recognize the Kyiv Patriarchate as an independent local autocephalous church. In 2007, the bishops of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UOC-MP) “expressed bewilderment” at the proposal he made about possible negotiations with “false shepherds.”
At the end of July 2008, celebrations took place in Kyiv on the occasion of the 1020th anniversary of the Baptism of Rus. The head of the Russian Orthodox Church Alexy II and Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople were invited to them, but Filaret was not present at the official events. Meanwhile, Yushchenko, speaking after the solemn service performed by Patriarch Bartholomew, again spoke about a national local autocephalous church and asked the primate of the Church of Constantinople to bless its creation. In his response, Bartholomew reserved for himself “not only the right, but also the obligation to support, within the established Orthodox tradition, any constructive proposal that would eliminate dangerous divisions in the church body as quickly as possible.” Nezavisimaya Gazeta noted in this regard that Bartholomew’s speech “was very vague” and as a result, it remained unclear what exactly was hidden “behind such streamlined formulations.” Indeed, a number of media reported that Bartholomew did not give his blessing to the creation of a local Ukrainian church, and Yushchenko’s speech clearly did not add to his popularity among “believers who consider themselves to be part of the flock of the Moscow Patriarchate.” However, the very next day the ITAR-TASS agency announced that the Patriarch of Constantinople “supports the creation of a single Orthodox Church in Ukraine, but within the framework of canonicity.” “We are interested in a united Ukrainian church,” the agency quoted Bartholomew as saying. In turn, the head of the State Committee of Ukraine for Religious Affairs, Alexander Sagan, called not to dramatize the fact that the Patriarch of Constantinople did not express open support for the idea of creating a local church independent of Moscow. “Whatever opposition exists, this process is objective and cannot be stopped,” he said.
I do not believe!
Jutius 26.07.2018 12:55:38
I don’t believe a single word. How did Moscow propagandists learn to bullshit sweetly? It all comes down to the fact that Filaret (openly calling Moscow enemy No. 1 AND AS THE FATHER OF HIS PEOPLE revealing all Russian vileness and rot in the image of Kiril (Gundyaev) and his friend Putin! !!But the real thief shouts the loudest - stop the thief or there are still people in Ukraine who trust the Kegebist Gundyaev, and it is he who represents Orthodoxy on the planet today. I don’t need such Gods!!!
Patriarch of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate
Patriarch of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate since 1995, former deputy of the previous Patriarchs of the UOC-KP Vladimir (Romanyuk) (1993-1995) and Mstislav (Skrypnyk) (1992-1993). Previously - His Beatitude Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine (1990-1992), Archbishop of Kiev and Galicia, Exarch of Ukraine (1966-1990). In 1997, he was excommunicated from the Church by the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church for schismatic activities.
Mikhail Antonovich Denisenko (later Filaret) was born on January 28, 1929 in the village of Blagodatnoye, Amvrosievsky district, Donetsk region, into a miner’s family.
In 1946, Denisenko graduated from high school, after which he entered the third grade of the Odessa Theological Seminary, from which he graduated in 1948. In the same year, Denisenko entered the Moscow Theological Academy. While studying in his second year, on January 1, 1950, he was tonsured a monk under the name Philaret and appointed acting caretaker of the Patriarchal chambers in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra. In the same month he was ordained to the rank of hierodeacon, and in 1952 to the rank of hieromonk.
In 1952, Filaret graduated from the academy with a candidate of theology degree and was appointed teacher of the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament at the Moscow Theological Seminary. At the same time, Filaret served as dean of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra. In March 1954 he was awarded the title of associate professor.
In August 1956, Filaret was elevated to the rank of abbot and took the post of inspector of the Saratov Theological Seminary. The following year he took a similar position at the Kyiv Theological Seminary. In July 1958, Filaret was elevated to the rank of archimandrite. In 1960, Archimandrite Philaret took the post of administrator of the Ukrainian Exarchate.
In May 1961, Filaret became rector of the metochion of the Russian Orthodox Church at the Patriarchate of Alexandria in Alexandria (United Arab Republic), and held this post until January 1962.
In 1962, Filaret was elevated to the rank of Bishop of Luga, vicar of the Leningrad diocese (the sacrament of consecration, or ordination, took place on February 4, 1962). At the same time he was appointed manager of the Riga diocese. In the summer of the same year, he was relieved of his duties as vicar of the Leningrad diocese and appointed vicar of the Central European Exarchate with temporary control of the Central European Exarchate. In November of the same year he became Bishop of Vienna and Austria.
In December 1964, Firaret - already as Bishop of Dmitrovsky - became vicar of the Moscow diocese and rector of the Moscow Theological Academy and Seminary.
On May 14, 1966, Filaret was elevated to the rank of Archbishop of Kyiv and Galicia, Exarch of Ukraine, and appointed a member of the Holy Synod. In this capacity, he began to take an active part in the international activities of the Russian Orthodox Church and in December of the same year headed the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate in Kyiv. In this post, he continued to work actively, repeatedly traveling abroad as part of delegations of the Ukrainian Exarchate, the Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian Orthodox Church, taking part in various events - conferences, assemblies and congresses. In 1979, by decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the Ukrainian SSR, Filaret was awarded the Order of Friendship of Peoples, and in 1988 - the Order of the Red Banner of Labor (the award was given to the clergyman by decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the USSR for active peacekeeping activities and in connection with the 1000th anniversary of the Baptism of Rus').
In May 1990, after the death of Patriarch Pimen of Moscow and All Rus', Filaret became locum tenens of the Patriarchal Throne and one of the candidates for patriarch. To elect a new patriarch, an extraordinary local council was convened, which on June 7, 1990 elected Metropolitan Alexy (Alexy II) as the new head of the Russian Orthodox Church. Meanwhile, according to tradition, it was the Metropolitan of Kiev who was considered the second most important bishop of the Russian Church after the patriarch and the most influential of the permanent members of the Holy Synod. However, despite the fact that Filaret was the most likely candidate for the post of primate of the Russian Orthodox Church, many were not satisfied with his candidacy. In particular, his faulty moral character - his manner of behavior, rudeness, lust for power and "non-monastic" lifestyle - caused censure.
The election of a new patriarch took place against the backdrop of an intensification of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church’s struggle for independence. In January 1990, at the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church, a new “Regulation on Exarchates” was adopted, according to which the Ukrainian Exarchate was given more rights in self-government and building church life in accordance with its church-national traditions. In October of the same year, having considered the “Appeal of the UOC episcopate to His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Rus' and the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church” approved by the synod of the Ukrainian Exarchate, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church decided to grant the UOC independence and autonomy in governance. After this, the name “Ukrainian Exarchate” was abolished, and Philaret, as the head of the UOC, was given the title “His Beatitude Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine.” In November 1990, the local council of the UOC adopted a resolution: “To appeal to His Holiness Patriarch Alexy of Moscow and All Rus' and the episcopate of the Russian Orthodox Church with a request to grant autocephaly to the UOC,” that is, complete canonical independence. Subsequently, the issue of granting autocephaly to the Ukrainian Church was considered at meetings of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church on December 25-26, 1991 and February 18-19, 1992, but no decision was made.
However, Filaret continued his activities aimed at separating the Ukrainian Church, relying on the support of the Chairman of the Supreme Council of the Ukrainian SSR Leonid Kravchuk (talking about the connections of the church hierarch with Kravchuk, the media called the Ukrainian leader “an old acquaintance of Filaret” from his work in the ideological sector of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine "). After Ukraine became an independent state in 1991, Kravchuk actively supported the work to create an independent church on the basis of the canonical UOC (the Uniate Church, as well as the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (UAOC), were not suitable for this purpose, since they did not enjoy widespread popular support). It was noted that granting the UOC the status of canonical autocephaly could serve to unite the Orthodox churches of Ukraine into one denomination, which should have helped reduce religious confrontation in the country, and consequently increase the socio-political stability of Ukrainian society.
In January 1992, after Kravchuk took the post of President of Ukraine in December 1991, Filaret convened the Ukrainian Bishops' Conference, at which an appeal was adopted to the Patriarch, the Holy Synod and all bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church. It contained accusations of deliberately delaying a positive resolution of the issue of autocephaly of the UOC. “We humbly declare that our desire to gain full canonical independence, forced by new historical conditions, is dictated solely by the good of Orthodoxy in Ukraine, and not by pressure from the state,” this address said, in particular.
The topic of granting autocephaly to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church was discussed by the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church in the spring of 1992 (Filaret was not present at it). It was announced to the participants of the council that Filaret, using the autonomy granted to the UOC as “a tool for strengthening his personal power in the Ukrainian Church,” was putting pressure on Ukrainian bishops and priests in order to force them to support autocephaly. Gradually, the discussion of the problem of autocephaly “grew into a discussion about the immoral behavior of the Kyiv Metropolitan and his gross miscalculations in the management” of the UOC. As a result, the council invited Filaret to voluntarily resign as head of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
Filaret promised to do this and gave his word as a bishop that he would not create any obstacles to the free expression of the UOC when electing its new first hierarch. However, later he refused to resign from his duties as the head of the UOC and renounced the bishop’s oath given to him, which marked the beginning of a new schism, which went down in the history of Orthodoxy under the name “Filaret’s.” Filaret explained his actions by saying that the promise he made to vacate the post of head of the UOC was forced and therefore insincere. According to him, he could not leave under the circumstances, “because he is responsible for the Ukrainian Orthodox Church before God.” Filaret never convened a council at which he would have resigned and at which a new Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine would have been elected.
However, in May of the same 1992, the Bishops' Council of the UOC was assembled. He removed Filaret from the Kyiv See and from the post of first hierarch of the UOC, while enrolling him on the staff, but with a ban on the priesthood. The episcopate, by a majority vote, elected the bishop of the Russian Orthodox Church, Metropolitan of Rostov and Novocherkassk Vladimir (Viktor Sabodan), as the primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
On June 11, 1992, the Judicial Act of the Council of Bishops “for a cruel and arrogant attitude... towards the subordinate clergy, dictatorship and blackmail... introducing temptation among believers with one’s behavior and personal life”, for perjury (failure to fulfill the promise to convene a Council of Bishops in Kiev and submit to it resignation given under the cross and the Gospel), as well as "public slander and blasphemy of the Council of Bishops... performing sacred rites, including ordinations, in a state of prohibition... causing a schism in the Church" Filaret was deposed from the dignity, with his deprivation of "all degrees of the priesthood and all rights associated with being in the clergy."
In response to this, supporters of Filaret’s policy convened a Unification Council in Kyiv on June 25-26, 1992. On it, as a result of the unification of part of the representatives of the UOC (Moscow Patriarchate) and the UAOC, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate (UOC-KP) was created. In the same year, Filaret became the deputy of the Patriarch of the UOC-KP Mstislav (Skrypnyk), after whose death in 1993 he became the deputy of the new Patriarch Vladimir (Romanyuk). On July 14, 1995, Vladimir died under mysterious circumstances, and on October 25, 1995, Filaret was elected Patriarch of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate.
On February 19, 1997, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church excommunicated Filaret because he “did not heed the call to repentance addressed to him on behalf of the Mother Church and continued schismatic activities during the inter-council period.”
But in subsequent years, Filaret, referred to in the Russian press as a “false patriarch,” heading the Kiev Patriarchate, actively contributed to attempts to unite the UOC-KP and the UAOC into the Local Ukrainian Orthodox Church. It was noted that his activities were carried out with the assistance of the Ukrainian authorities and were highly appreciated by them - Filaret was awarded the Order of Prince Yaroslav the Wise II, III, IV and V degrees "for a special significant contribution to the construction of the Local Orthodox Church in Ukraine, many years of church activity in establishing ideals spirituality, mercy and interfaith harmony in society." At the end of 2005, Filaret's supporters asked Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko to appeal to Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople with a request to recognize the Kyiv Patriarchate as an independent local autocephalous church. In 2007, the bishops of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UOC-MP) “expressed bewilderment” at the proposal he made about possible negotiations with “false shepherds.”
At the end of July 2008, celebrations took place in Kyiv on the occasion of the 1020th anniversary of the Baptism of Rus. The head of the Russian Orthodox Church Alexy II and Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople were invited to them, but Filaret was not present at the official events. Meanwhile, Yushchenko, speaking after the solemn service performed by Patriarch Bartholomew, again spoke about a national local autocephalous church and asked the primate of the Church of Constantinople to bless its creation. In his response, Bartholomew reserved for himself “not only the right, but also the obligation to support, within the established Orthodox tradition, any constructive proposal that would eliminate dangerous divisions in the church body as quickly as possible.” Nezavisimaya Gazeta noted in this regard that Bartholomew’s speech “was very vague” and as a result, it remained unclear what exactly was hidden “behind such streamlined formulations.” Indeed, a number of media reported that Bartholomew did not give his blessing to the creation of a local Ukrainian church, and Yushchenko’s speech clearly did not add to his popularity among “believers who consider themselves to be part of the flock of the Moscow Patriarchate.” However, the very next day the ITAR-TASS agency announced that the Patriarch of Constantinople “supports the creation of a single Orthodox Church in Ukraine, but within the framework of canonicity.” “We are interested in a united Ukrainian church,” the agency quoted Bartholomew as saying. In turn, the head of the State Committee of Ukraine for Religious Affairs, Alexander Sagan, called not to dramatize the fact that the Patriarch of Constantinople did not express open support for the idea of creating a local church independent of Moscow. “Whatever opposition exists, this process is objective and cannot be stopped,” he said.
Filaret is a Doctor of Theology honoris causa (1982), the author of numerous works on theology.
The media wrote about Filaret’s family: despite the canons, he practically publicly lived with his family. His wife was Evgenia Petrovna Rodionova (died in January 1998). His three children were also mentioned - son Andrei and daughters Vera and Lyubov.
In 1991-1992, during the period of confrontation between Filaret and the leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church, information appeared in the media that the hierarch was closely connected with the KGB, in whose reports he appeared as an agent under the pseudonym "Antonov", but no documentary evidence of this was published.
