The illusory power of the Patriarchate of Constantinople

Иллюзорная мощь Константинопольского патриархата

Patriarch Bartholomew. Photo: SPMthe Patriarchate of Constantinople, intoxicated by the postmodern power to create a parallel history, destroys itself. Therefore, it is important to did not trust him.
The news that the Athens Archdiocese (Greek Orthodox Church) decided to accept, i.e. to take into the fellowship of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, is interesting and tragic, not only because it plays an important role in the current drama of the collapse of the Orthodox Church.

To some extent this decision was expected and did not surprise those who are familiar with the situation in Christianity, where the relationship between Constantinople and Moscow are displayed on the level of confrontation between Nations, Greeks and barbarians, as well as conflict of power.

What we really should be surprised is some semblance of tact and diplomacy, which is still preserved. However, it gradually becomes apparent, is not so much the gap of communication between Hellenic and Slavic local Churches and not so much a geopolitical division of the Orthodox world, how many consecutive division in language, concepts, meanings, and interpretations.

It is difficult to say whether this separation is overcome, because Athens did not recognize that because of their own ethnocentric phobia “of Russian misfortunes” they agreed to participate in the project the collapse of the narrative of Russian identity, in which Kiev is an integral part of polycentricity of the great, Minor and White Russia (regardless of whether we identify this narrative with the ideology of the “Russian world” or not).

They did not even mention his own vassalage before geostrategic power centers, vassalage, which would give them at least some excuse. In fact, they mentioned only one basic and fundamental fact, the hermeneutical key through which we can understand the real course of events — they referred to “the right of the Ecumenical Patriarchate to grant autocephaly” on the basis of which Athens agreed to recognize “the autocephaly Orthodox Church of the Independent Republic of Ukraine.”

Postmodern nature of the claims of the Patriarchate of Constantinople to primacy

Of course, as in Greece and throughout the Orthodox world will soon hear the voices that will raise a myriad of issues, one of which is likely to be the question of Apostolic succession in the PCU.

But what distinguishes today’s Church crisis from the preceding ones, is not geostrategic depth of separation or weakness of the internal unity of the Orthodox Church, which in no way defines a way of survival in this unity (if we are obsessing Church, where the regular councils of all the local Churches?). Today it is clear that Constantinople and the Local Churches that have agreed or will agree with his vision of the existence of the Orthodox Church, adopted its special point of view on reality, in fact, represents a postmodern vision of the Church, namely the implementation of the idea of primacy in the key and the context of the postmodern.

However, the impatient reader, unwilling to believe the reasoning with the use slang cliche humanistic disciplines (which has long included “postmodernism” and “postmodern”), you will not see here any frills or just another theological text. I do not write this text for the sake of it was “postmodern”, but I want to specify that without providing at least basic conceptual and post-modern claims, it is impossible to understand the behavior of the Patriarchate of Constantinople.

What is postmodernism the Church drama that started after the decision of panara first ptsu granted “autocephaly,” and then to take actions, in which other Local Churches are wittingly or unwittingly (common or endangered) would agree with this decision.

When the validity of the substitute interpretation of reality

One of the distinguishing characteristics of postmodernism is the belief in the futility of conceptuality as such. Picture of the destroyed world in which there is no stability implies that the force dictates not only how to interpret the facts, but also how to interpret the concept. Good and evil, truth and lies – these are all aspects of reality, relative as any other reality. Thus, the concept, devoid of meaning, can be completely stripped of significance. Demonstrirovalsya they can be reconstructed as its own antithesis: the truth of one may be false for another.

What does this have to do with theology of the Patriarchate of Constantinople? The most direct. Let’s look at the Tomos of autocephaly issued ptsu:

“Accordingly we declare that their head of the Autocephalous Church in Ukraine recognizes the Holy Apostolic and Patriarchal throne, as well as other patriarchs and primates, and performs, among other canonical duties and obligations, our most important mission is to preserve the purity of our Orthodox faith and the canonical unity and communion with the Ecumenical Patriarchate and other local Orthodox Churches… In case of serious matters ecclesiastical, dogmatic or canonical character, His Beatitude, Metropolitan of Kiev, on behalf of the Holy Synod of his Church must look to our Holy Patriarchal and Ecumenical throne, in an effort to get his authoritative opinion and reliable interpretation, while the rights of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in respect of the Exarchate and of the Holy stavropigio shall not be violated”.

Despite the fact that Patriarch Bartholomew is clear that the throne on which he sits, the other “patriarchs and primates” does not recognize its “head”, he believes that it can establish a lie as the truth, reversing the value system.Here we come to the problem of construction of reality: despite the fact that Patriarch Bartholomew is quite clear that the throne on which he sits, the other “patriarchs and primates” does not recognize as its “head”, he believes that the choice between actual reality that is, and constructing a new reality, which, in essence, is false, it can establish a lie as the truth, reversing the value system. This ability to ignore another is not a postmodernist. It lies at the basis of the idea of Roman primacy, when the “heir of Peter” performs the “service” even on local Churches and people who do not recognize and do not want.

However, while the First Rome it was necessary to legitimize their own aspirations, at least, even with the help of a number of historical falsifications (the most famous of which is the sacristy of Constantine), the Second Rome bases its claims in the spirit of postmodernists, drawing not only on documents, but on interpretation (according to the Nietzschean principle, which States that there are no facts, but interpretations). Thus, if the “actual reality” is set on the basis of its interpretation, it is obvious that the actual reality as such means nothing.

Tomos ptsu, from the point of view of formal logic is nonsense, but nonsense is not random

Any sane person with the basic knowledge of Orthodox theology, it is obvious that the document on the one hand talks about granting “autocephaly” (the Church’s full independence from external influence) and on the other, ptsu, in fact, the “gain” something, not even representing autonomy. All Tomos, from the point of view of formal logic, can be regarded as nonsense (suggestion: “in conclusion we declare that their head of the Autocephalous Church in Ukraine recognizes the Holy Apostolic and Patriarchal throne” [Προσεπιδηλοῦμεν ἀνωτέρω ὅτι τοῖς ἡ Ἐκκλησία ἐν Οὐκρανίᾳ Αὐτοκέφαλος γινώσκει κεφαλὴν ὡς καὶ τὸν Ἁγιώτατον Ἀποστολικὸν Πατριαρχικὸν Οἰκουμενικὸν Θρόνον] represents the culmination of this absurdity and inconsistency).

But nonsense is not accidental – it postmodernity: autocephaly is not autocephaly in its essence, and that Constantinople offers as autocephaly. The value of this term is not defined either within itself or in the preceding reception, it is determined that Constantinople (and its geopolitical customers) want to use as the this value. It may be meaningless, but the meaning does not exist by itself: if necessary each time it is determined again depending on the situation. This just occurs “is not accidental: not only historical facts, but whole institutions can and should be subjected to the dictatorship imposed by the new values, values that exist and have meaning (only) in the moment determined by the Almighty force.

Nonsense Thomas ptsu is not accidental – it postmodernity: autocephaly is not autocephaly in its essence, and that Constantinople offers as autocephaly.And therefore, what is primarily taken care of Constantinople, is the real power. Not just the right to control the distribution of money in Kyiv the Episcopal Vicariate, and the government, giving the right to dispose of the interpretation of the facts and institutions: thus, the PCU will remain forever hermeneutic customer “Mother Church”.

The power that craves Constantinople, in fact, from a postmodern point of view, is demonic in nature. This power should be continuous existence, inside which everything can be, but is not required to be, and only this power is the only “Manager” of interpretations. And despite the fact that Moscow has a military and demographic, religious and political, and the powerful financial potential, which often has the character of a sensitive and brute force, Moscow, in fact, it appears corny weak before the demands put forward by Fanar.

She needs to get her power was perceived as self-evident greatness, but she has no aspirations to create a permanent “fluctuations” facts and institutions, in which there is only the ability of One to establish and destroy the dignity of others to the extent which suits only One.

Narcotic dope “new” reality

Ideas that have already been granted autocephaly of the Serbian, Bulgarian, Romanian Orthodox Church and other may change or be in some extent interpreted, can only be heard in the postmodern speeches Fanara.

Although we know that historical facts cannot be changed retroactively depending on the current benefits, it does not apply to our situation.

Just like today, no one in Kiev will not remember a time when on Khreschatyk on may 9 was held a parade with participation of veterans of the red Army (whose anti-fascist heritage to Euromaidan wanted to inherit and Ukraine), and not veterans of the OUN-UPA, in Constantinople, nobody remembers themselves to autumn 2018.Feature of Constantinople postmodern ideology is that it is able to offer us the idea that the Power of the Interpreter (i.e., Mother Church) has the right to shape our collective memories about past events. Today Fanar assures us that Ukraine has always been its canonical territory, that the same man, the Patriarch Bartholomew himself has not confirmed the anathema of Filaret Denisenko, etc. Again, here we see a common idea with new projects of identity.

Just like today, no one in Kiev will not remember a time when on Khreschatyk on may 9 was held a parade with participation of veterans of the red Army (whose anti-fascist legacy, at least prior to the Euromaidan wanted to inherit and Ukraine), and not veterans of the OUN-UPA, in Constantinople, nobody remembers themselves to autumn 2018. Is a narcotic the perception of the current reality, in which there is no unity, even with themselves, involves a mad, continuous and indiscriminate choice between (quasi -) realism and fiction.

And here we are faced with a postmodern use of “real” and “imaginary”. With another paradox. In other words, when, for example, Fanar indicates the political situation in the Ukraine as a reason for granting “autocephaly”, it establishes the legitimacy of the question about the political situation as a criterion of Church organization.

Contrast the political reality and Church solutions

If political reality is the only or even the decisive criterion, then the project of Ukrainian autocephaly is justified only to the extent in which he justifies the judgment that Constantinople is Istanbul, a city in Turkey. That is “imaginary” taking Constantinople “Church-missionary” steps, guided by the “real” independence of Ukraine.

As the Patriarchate of Constantinople can make us forget about reality 1453?”New Rome” should exist, even when he’s gone: Ukraine, like everything else, plays only a cameo role. Force systematically, from the point of view of hermeneutics, dishonest, but she didn’t care, because it feels like the force: it tells us that we can agree on what happened in 1219, 1767 or 1879. We can even agree to a mass hallucination, a parallel reality, in which it had not changed its position 2018 in comparison with the position in previous years, but how can she make us forget about reality 1453?

There is in postmodern action some sort of demonic nature. She knows very well how tragically “broken” man is a fallen world in which it exists, how all relations and institutions are changing. But postmodernism from the fall made the religion of slices of a fallen world – a silent measure and norm, laughing all the rules of the whole. Deconstructing “narratives of power”, he secretly worshiped the forces of power, violence against the person. And that’s why his nature is demonic in nature. And that’s why its nature leads to self-destruction.

Constantinople destroys himself

The Patriarchate of Constantinople, intoxicated by the postmodern power to create a parallel history and concepts of destroying himself. Therefore, it is important to did not trust him. It is important to protect Constantinople from himself, from the postmodern quasimolecule of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Constantinople is not the Fanar, Fanar is not Constantinople.

On the basis of what Constantinople might consolidate his power in order not only to manage the relations between the Orthodox churches as “first among equals” (it all belongs to him according to Legend), but to be “first without equal” in the absurd fantasies of Metropolitan Elpidophoros, to grant autocephaly without consultation with any other Local Church and to establish the facts and their interpretation?

The present privileges and prerogatives of Constantinople stem from its provisions New Rome, despite the fact that a long time no Empire, nor the city in which he would be “great Church of Christ.”On the basis of their own perception of himself, based on Hellenistic racial solidarity and geo-strategic benefits within a certain date (for current day) of the project. An even greater paradox lies in the fact that his own post-modern ideology of the Church of Constantinople destroys itself.

We continue to observe how the present privileges and prerogatives of Constantinople stem from its provisions New Rome, despite the fact that a long time no Empire, nor the city in which he would be “great Church of Christ.” Constantinople there is only one collective, but equally important “imagination” of the Orthodox Church as a place of fundamental importance for its Cathedral of the ethnic group. This “imagology” (the discipline of interpretation foreign to the perceiving of objects – Ed.) is both historical and eschatological historical in nature, and the eschatological because we expect – as opposed to the “realism of the current situation” – that Christ will appear again and gather us in His Temple, in His Temple as the wisdom of God.

If all expose of “contextualization” and to take into account “real world picture”, the first victim of this banal realism will own Constantinople, which is not. However, it’s Constantinople, there is however considerably different from the one that now directs the Patriarch Bartholomew.

Constantinople who’s not obsessed with Hellenism, Constantinople sent Constantine the Philosopher and Methodius, Constantinople, which ethnic group settled in Nicea and was able to love other brothers. So Constantinople can still be found everywhere, but only, apparently, not vanara.

To some extent it is this ability of Constantinople to be the “navel of the earth” made him a “chronotope” of such great contemporary novels as “Baudolino” Umberto Eco, “dictionary of the Khazars” by Milorad Pavic, “the navel of the earth” wonderful wreath Andonovska. Constantinople integrates and ignores time and place. But only when it is a place of permanence, full of meaning and content. Devoid of them, Constantinople ceases to exist. He did not cease to exist neither in 1204, nor in 1453. If he stopped its existence in 2019?

________________________

FR Darko Jogo – theologian and publicist, Professor of the Orthodox Theological faculty of the Serbian Orthodox Church in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Share Button