NATO served its purpose. The Soviet Union no longer exists.
NATO hasnt done anything to protect western countries from being invaded by Africa and the Middle East.
NATO needs to stay around because if the US and the EU countries will hit their 2% GDP spending marks then the West will be far an above any potential enemies in the future.
Countries like China, the Islamic world, or whoever comes in the future will never be able to spend enough to catch up to the West.
This spending of 2% GDP is also not a huge burden on modern Western budgets and drives military and tech innovation.
NATO not defending Europe from a migrant invasion is a different issue....they don't do that because Western elites have wanted mass migration
As a citizen of a NATO country who paid more in taxes last year than I have in my entire life, spending 2% of GDP on defense while your country is being actively invaded and nothing is being done about it is infuriating.
The more of these globalist institutions that fall, the better off we plebs will be.
Americans had more freedom before the NATO, the UN, the WHO, World Economic Forum, etc
NATO served its purpose. The Soviet Union no longer exists.
NATO hasnt done anything to protect western countries from being invaded by Africa and the Middle East.
NATO needs to stay around because if the US and the EU countries will hit their 2% GDP spending marks then the West will be far an above any potential enemies in the future.
Countries like China, the Islamic world, or whoever comes in the future will never be able to spend enough to catch up to the West.
This spending of 2% GDP is also not a huge burden on modern Western budgets and drives military and tech innovation.
NATO not defending Europe from a migrant invasion is a different issue....they don't do that because Western elites have wanted mass migration
As a citizen of a NATO country who paid more in taxes last year than I have in my entire life, spending 2% of GDP on defense while your country is being actively invaded and nothing is being done about it is infuriating.
The more of these globalist institutions that fall, the better off we plebs will be.
Americans had more freedom before the NATO, the UN, the WHO, World Economic Forum, etc
I absolutely agree
The EU countries have been taking advantage of us and the US elite have to get over their love affair with 3rd world mass immigration.
I still believe that NATO is a good idea and worth reforming vs getting rid of it.
Check the context note on that post which states Trump never advocated for leaving.
The US has been spending billions of dollars annually defending Western Europe since the 1940's.
It is past time for Europe to be responsible for their own defense. It's absurd for the US to continue to pay for Europe's defense.
If Europe is unable or unwilling to defend themselves after decades of US protection……that is 100% on them.
So, let's say you are right.
It is on them. Russia/China invades. You think we are sitting out and saying we told you so? How much harder will it be to get them out of Europe than to prevent them from coming? Happened twice already. You think even Trump would say no? The reason behind having troops there was to prevent another Overlord.
Check the context note on that post which states Trump never advocated for leaving.
The US has been spending billions of dollars annually defending Western Europe since the 1940's.
It is past time for Europe to be responsible for their own defense. It's absurd for the US to continue to pay for Europe's defense.
If Europe is unable or unwilling to defend themselves after decades of US protection……that is 100% on them.
So, let's say you are right.
It is on them. Russia/China invades. You think we are sitting out and saying we told you so?
The real unspoken danger is not a Russian or Chinese invasion of Europe
Russia is a vastly overrated power (as we have seen in Ukraine...it cant even hold onto its old satellite states)...and China would be focused on dominating Asia.
The danger is that a massive uncontrolled arms race develops again in Europe leading us back to the disaster of the early 20th century (WWI and WWII).....with the UK, France, Germany, Poland, Italy all competing for power and engaging in great power rivalry...but this time with Nukes.
With the US and European States in one military alliance (NATO) everyone is on the same team.
If NATO disappeared tomorrow....Welfare gets cut in Europe and the great regional powers there start rearming at a scary pace.
[Lord Ismay, the first Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), reportedly observed that the purpose of the Alliance was to "keep the Americans in Europe, the Russians out, and the Germans down".]
I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.
I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.
Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).
Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.
BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC
Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.
It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.
Several points here that I would address.
1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.
2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.
3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.
4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.
The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.
I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.
I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.
Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).
Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.
BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC
Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.
It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.
Several points here that I would address.
1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.
2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.
3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.
4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.
The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.
The point being no one has held up Russia as some bastion of freedom and human rights.
But we have been sold this false propaganda about Ukraine being a bastion of Freedom....while Kyiv bans political parties, doesn't hold elections, allows only one party owned media outlet to report on the government, and shuts down Churches they don't like (UOC-MP)
I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.
I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.
Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).
Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.
BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC
Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.
It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.
Several points here that I would address.
1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.
2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.
3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.
4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.
The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.
The point being no one has held up Russia as some bastion of freedom and human rights.
But we have been sold this false propaganda about Ukraine being a bastion of Freedom....while Kyiv bans political parties, doesn't hold elections, allows only one party owned media outlet to report on the government, and shuts down Churches they don't like (UOC-MP)
Ukraine tried to not be like Russia, so they invaded to stop that, and lo here we are with Ukraine having to be like Russia to survive. Ironic don't you think?
I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.
I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.
Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).
Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.
BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC
Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.
It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.
Several points here that I would address.
1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.
2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.
3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.
4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.
The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.
The point being no one has held up Russia as some bastion of freedom and human rights.
But we have been sold this false propaganda about Ukraine being a bastion of Freedom....while Kyiv bans political parties, doesn't hold elections, allows only one party owned media outlet to report on the government, and shuts down Churches they don't like (UOC-MP)
Ukraine tried to not be like Russia,
Well at least one-third of Ukraine was never Ukranian....it was ethnic Russian.
I do think this whole conflict was ironic and sad...a massive tragedy
And tearing the rest of Ukraine out of the orbit of Moscow was always going to be a bloody and possibly futile effort.....actually impossible without direct US-NATO troops
If Biden, the DC liberals & neo-cons, and the Western Europeans never planned to actually send in troops to accomplish this grand re-orientation of Ukraine away from Moscow and toward the West.........then what the hell point was the last 10 years of conflict?
I am actually in shock Biden and his buddies were so callous as to root on a war they did not intent to win with US-NATO troops
I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.
I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.
Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).
Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.
BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC
Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.
It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.
Several points here that I would address.
1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.
2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.
3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.
4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.
The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.
The point being no one has held up Russia as some bastion of freedom and human rights.
But we have been sold this false propaganda about Ukraine being a bastion of Freedom....while Kyiv bans political parties, doesn't hold elections, allows only one party owned media outlet to report on the government, and shuts down Churches they don't like (UOC-MP)
There are literally people in this thread arguing that Russia is "the true bastion of Christianity" as one of their main factors in this deal. It's almost comical.
I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.
I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.
Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).
Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.
BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC
Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.
It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.
Several points here that I would address.
1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.
2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.
3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.
4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.
The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.
The point being no one has held up Russia as some bastion of freedom and human rights.
But we have been sold this false propaganda about Ukraine being a bastion of Freedom....while Kyiv bans political parties, doesn't hold elections, allows only one party owned media outlet to report on the government, and shuts down Churches they don't like (UOC-MP)
Pro-Russian political party openly advocating for Russia and the invasion and some of whom were providing intel, including troop movements. And virtually all that were not doing those things have joined other parties and continue in parliament and other gov positions.
Again, as I explained in great detail, Ukraine banned the church that is formally beholden to the ROC, which is run by an openly pro-Putin former KGB agent, and which formally supports Russia and the invasion and is actively helping Putin. And as with the politicians, members and priests of that church were more than welcome to continue worshipping in the Orthodox faith in Ukraine, and most joined the non-Russian Orthodox church.
As to martial law, it was proposed and still is supported by even Zelensky's political opposition, and there has not been a single organized effort to undo martial law and hold an election. Who would pay? Provide security? And I have yet to see one example of a country invaded and at war on their lands hold a national election. Israel, England, and France all postponed elections in various wars for the same obvious reasons Ukraine is.
Finally, again, as I have explained in great detail, Ukraine's world press freedom ranking has INCREASED since the invasion and further widened the already massive gap with Russia. National tv was always run by the gov, and it simply consolidate to one. And nobody watched that anyway. Ukrainians watch local and regional tv and online. Most importantly, all other media remains free and unrestricted.
These Russian talking points were BS from the start.
I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.
I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.
Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).
Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.
BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC
Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.
It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.
Several points here that I would address.
1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.
2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.
3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.
4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.
The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.
The point being no one has held up Russia as some bastion of freedom and human rights.
But we have been sold this false propaganda about Ukraine being a bastion of Freedom....while Kyiv bans political parties, doesn't hold elections, allows only one party owned media outlet to report on the government, and shuts down Churches they don't like (UOC-MP)
Pro-Russian political party openly advocating for Russia and the invasion and some of whom were providing intel, including troop movements.
These Russian talking points were BS from the start.
You do this every time someone brings up this issue
Make excuses for why they shut down the rival political parties, why the shut down Media they did not like, why they shut down the Church in question.
You think its justified (shocker)
Maybe it is and make it is not....the point it its not democratic and not free
The goverment in Kyiv acts in an authoritarian manner and disregards liberties at will
I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.
I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.
Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).
Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.
BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC
Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.
It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.
Several points here that I would address.
1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.
2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.
3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.
4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.
The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.
The point being no one has held up Russia as some bastion of freedom and human rights.
But we have been sold this false propaganda about Ukraine being a bastion of Freedom....while Kyiv bans political parties, doesn't hold elections, allows only one party owned media outlet to report on the government, and shuts down Churches they don't like (UOC-MP)
There are literally people in this thread arguing that Russia is "the true bastion of Christianity" as one of their main factors in this deal. It's almost comical.
Yea yea that one bothers you.
I have no idea what idiot said that and its obvious not true.
Nor does anyone believe it
Between the corrupt bishops, the massive abortion rates, and the shutting down of rival protestant groups...its obvious Russia is not a defender of Christian values
I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.
I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.
Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).
Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.
BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC
Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.
It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.
Several points here that I would address.
1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.
2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.
3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.
4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.
The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.
The point being no one has held up Russia as some bastion of freedom and human rights.
But we have been sold this false propaganda about Ukraine being a bastion of Freedom....while Kyiv bans political parties, doesn't hold elections, allows only one party owned media outlet to report on the government, and shuts down Churches they don't like (UOC-MP)
Pro-Russian political party openly advocating for Russia and the invasion and some of whom were providing intel, including troop movements.
These Russian talking points were BS from the start.
You do this every time someone brings up this issue
Make excuses for why they shut down the rival political parties, why the shut down Media they did not like, why they shut down the Church in question.
You think its justified (shocker)
Maybe it is and make it is not....the point it its not democratic and not free
The goverment in Kyiv acts in an authoritarian manner and disregards liberties at will
I raise it every time you go back to your (and Putin's) original talking points. There really is no substance behind them.
There are legitimate explanations for every talking point you raise.
I just find it amazing that you provide no empathy or leeway to a country that was invaded by a vastly larger neighbor that had allies imbedded in their country for decades. I mean, Putin and Russia bragged about the Russian assets in Ukrainian intel, gov business, and yes, the church. Literally boasted about it for years.
Yet you think it should be business as usual in Ukraine. Forget about other disagreements we had, this by far is the most difficult for me to understand. Let Russian assets assist the invader? Allow priests to take orders from Kirill?
And, yes, I think it is all justified. But far more importantly, Ukraine's parliament overwhelmingly agreed. Ukraine's people, in poll after poll, agreed with everything you complain about. And Ukraine has acted consistently with what other invaded countries (including our allies) have done.
War is hell. Countries have to fight and protect themselves. The U.S. and all of its allies took drastic measures against Japanese, Germans, etc. in their own countries. Some of it should not have been done. But what Ukraine has done pales in comparison.
I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.
I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.
Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).
Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.
BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC
Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.
It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.
Several points here that I would address.
1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.
2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.
3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.
4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.
The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.
The point being no one has held up Russia as some bastion of freedom and human rights.
But we have been sold this false propaganda about Ukraine being a bastion of Freedom....while Kyiv bans political parties, doesn't hold elections, allows only one party owned media outlet to report on the government, and shuts down Churches they don't like (UOC-MP)
There are literally people in this thread arguing that Russia is "the true bastion of Christianity" as one of their main factors in this deal. It's almost comical.
Yea yea that one bothers you.
I have no idea what idiot said that and its obvious not true.
Nor does anyone believe it
Between the corrupt bishops, the massive abortion rates, and the shutting down of rival protestant groups...its obvious Russia is not a defender of Christian values
Who was it anyway....Barbarian?
Actually Kirill, the head of the church that you defend, has repeatedly stated this is a war for the soul of Christianity.
Check the context note on that post which states Trump never advocated for leaving.
The US has been spending billions of dollars annually defending Western Europe since the 1940's.
It is past time for Europe to be responsible for their own defense. It's absurd for the US to continue to pay for Europe's defense.
If Europe is unable or unwilling to defend themselves after decades of US protection……that is 100% on them.
So, let's say you are right.
It is on them. Russia/China invades. You think we are sitting out and saying we told you so? How much harder will it be to get them out of Europe than to prevent them from coming? Happened twice already. You think even Trump would say no? The reason behind having troops there was to prevent another Overlord.
The fact that we don't have domestic manufacturing and rely on China is more of a threat to war in Europe than us defending Ukraine. All China has to do is continue to make us increasingly reliant on them and then they pull the plug to destroy us financially and deny us resources.
I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.
I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.
Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).
Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.
BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC
Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.
It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.
Several points here that I would address.
1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.
2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.
3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.
4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.
The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.
The point being no one has held up Russia as some bastion of freedom and human rights.
But we have been sold this false propaganda about Ukraine being a bastion of Freedom....while Kyiv bans political parties, doesn't hold elections, allows only one party owned media outlet to report on the government, and shuts down Churches they don't like (UOC-MP)
Pro-Russian political party openly advocating for Russia and the invasion and some of whom were providing intel, including troop movements.
These Russian talking points were BS from the start.
You do this every time someone brings up this issue
Make excuses for why they shut down the rival political parties, why the shut down Media they did not like, why they shut down the Church in question.
You think its justified (shocker)
Maybe it is and make it is not....the point it its not democratic and not free
The goverment in Kyiv acts in an authoritarian manner and disregards liberties at will
I raise it every time you go back to your (and Putin's) original talking points. There really is no substance behind them.
There are legitimate explanations for every talking point you raise.
I just find it amazing that you provide no empathy or leeway to a country that was invaded by a vastly larger neighbor that had allies imbedded in their country for decades. I mean, Putin and Russia bragged about the Russian assets in Ukrainian intel, gov business, and yes, the church. Literally boasted about it for years.
Yet you think it should be business as usual in Ukraine. Forget about other disagreements we had, this by far is the most difficult for me to understand. Let Russian assets assist the invader? Allow priests to take orders from Kirill?
And, yes, I think it is all justified. But far more importantly, Ukraine's parliament overwhelmingly agreed. Ukraine's people, in poll after poll, agreed with everything you complain about. And Ukraine has acted consistently with what other invaded countries (including our allies) have done.
War is hell. Countries have to fight and protect themselves. The U.S. and all of its allies took drastic measures against Japanese, Germans, etc. in their own countries. Some of it should not have been done. But what Ukraine has done pales in comparison.
Europe is importing hostile Africans and Arabs that will eventually destabilize Europe to the point of no return. Europeans speaking against it are facing jail time and censorship. It's game over for Europe already and the people they're importing aren't going to fight Russia.
The US is so reliant on China that if they ever decide they want war in Europe, our leaders won't say a damn thing. If they did, China could halt trade and bully us into submission.
Point is, we have domestic problems in the west and our leaders are the biggest threat. But nah, we want to point the finger solely at Russia while we tie the noose around our necks. If you think Russia is going to attempt to destroy the west, your biggest concern needs to be western leaders.
Check the context note on that post which states Trump never advocated for leaving.
The US has been spending billions of dollars annually defending Western Europe since the 1940's.
It is past time for Europe to be responsible for their own defense. It's absurd for the US to continue to pay for Europe's defense.
If Europe is unable or unwilling to defend themselves after decades of US protection……that is 100% on them.
So, let's say you are right.
It is on them. Russia/China invades. You think we are sitting out and saying we told you so? How much harder will it be to get them out of Europe than to prevent them from coming? Happened twice already. You think even Trump would say no? The reason behind having troops there was to prevent another Overlord.
The fact that we don't have domestic manufacturing and rely on China is more of a threat to war in Europe than us defending Ukraine. All China has to do is continue to make us increasingly reliant on them and then they pull the plug to destroy us financially and deny us resources.
the thing people don't understand is that we have China over the barrel in equally as precarious a predicament. They literally can't feed their communist work rats without our business. They stop manufacturing, we stop send them food….immediately. We don't get 737's full of rubber dogshlt, they don't get tankers of grains,, veggies, pork, beef etc. .
I have a lot of issues with the Chinese invasion scenario, but we seem to agree that it would constitute banning a church. The fact that people could go to another church doesn't change the nature of the thing. I've posted articles about the violence and other indignities inflicted on UOC churches, including the planting of evidence to incriminate them for "actively helping Putin." The UOC's relationship to Russia and the war is more complex than we're led to believe. Even if the dubious accusations against some clerics are true, total suppression of a thousand-year-old institution is a grossly excessive response.
The fact that there's been no organized effort to end martial law or hold elections means very little considering that Zelensky has also banned every viable or semi-viable opposition party and is now in the process of arresting every political rival in sight, including our friend Poroshenko. Ukraine's WPF ranking is actually lower than it was in 2021, and even that understates the problem. The more unpopular the regime becomes, the more journalists seem to sound the alarm about restrictions on the press. And those are the ones who haven't died in prison.
Check the context note on that post which states Trump never advocated for leaving.
The US has been spending billions of dollars annually defending Western Europe since the 1940's.
It is past time for Europe to be responsible for their own defense. It's absurd for the US to continue to pay for Europe's defense.
If Europe is unable or unwilling to defend themselves after decades of US protection……that is 100% on them.
So, let's say you are right.
It is on them. Russia/China invades. You think we are sitting out and saying we told you so? How much harder will it be to get them out of Europe than to prevent them from coming? Happened twice already. You think even Trump would say no? The reason behind having troops there was to prevent another Overlord.
The fact that we don't have domestic manufacturing and rely on China is more of a threat to war in Europe than us defending Ukraine. All China has to do is continue to make us increasingly reliant on them and then they pull the plug to destroy us financially and deny us resources.
the thing people don't understand is that we have China over the barrel in equally as precarious a predicament. They literally can't feed their communist work rats without our business. They stop manufacturing, we stop send them food….immediately. We don't get 737's full of rubber dogshlt, they don't get tankers of grains,, veggies, pork, beef etc. .
China is a mostly homogenous society with shared values, traditions, and history.
America is an economic zone where half the population hates the other half and vice versa and they have absolutely no shared values.
In a war of economic attrition, my money is on the Chinese... this country would completely fold after a bad week or two on Wall Street.
NATO served its purpose. The Soviet Union no longer exists.
NATO hasnt done anything to protect western countries from being invaded by Africa and the Middle East.
NATO needs to stay around because if the US and the EU countries will hit their 2% GDP spending marks then the West will be far an above any potential enemies in the future.
Countries like China, the Islamic world, or whoever comes in the future will never be able to spend enough to catch up to the West.
This spending of 2% GDP is also not a huge burden on modern Western budgets and drives military and tech innovation.
NATO not defending Europe from a migrant invasion is a different issue....they don't do that because Western elites have wanted mass migration
As a citizen of a NATO country who paid more in taxes last year than I have in my entire life, spending 2% of GDP on defense while your country is being actively invaded and nothing is being done about it is infuriating.
The more of these globalist institutions that fall, the better off we plebs will be.
Americans had more freedom before the NATO, the UN, the WHO, World Economic Forum, etc
I absolutely agree
The EU countries have been taking advantage of us and the US elite have to get over their love affair with 3rd world mass immigration.
I still believe that NATO is a good idea and worth reforming vs getting rid of it.
I agree with you most of the time... but on NATO I have to respectfully disagree.
It needs to go.
It served it's purpose decades ago and ever since has been used as a force to suppress national populationism in Europe.
If after those little girls were stabbed to death in the UK, the English people said we've had enough and actually took back control over their country, the globalists who control their government would work with NATO allied countries to bomb and shoot them into submission.
Exactly what they did to the Serbs and what they are doing now in Eastern Ukraine.
I have a lot of issues with the Chinese invasion scenario, but we seem to agree that it would constitute banning a church. The fact that people could go to another church doesn't change the nature of the thing. I've posted articles about the violence and other indignities inflicted on UOC churches, including the planting of evidence to incriminate them for "actively helping Putin." The UOC's relationship to Russia and the war is more complex than we're led to believe. Even if the dubious accusations against some clerics are true, total suppression of a thousand-year-old institution is a grossly excessive response.
The fact that there's been no organized effort to end martial law or hold elections means very little considering that Zelensky has also banned every viable or semi-viable opposition party and is now in the process of arresting every political rival in sight, including our friend Poroshenko. Ukraine's WPF ranking is actually lower than it was in 2021, and even that understates the problem. The more unpopular the regime becomes, the more journalists seem to sound the alarm about restrictions on the press. And those are the ones who haven't died in prison.
We'll never agree on the UOC or elections, which is fine. But your wrong about the free press rankings. It's improved every year since 2021. And of course, where Ukraine is ranked in the 50s, Russia is in the 180s.
And Ukraine has not banned more opposition parties, just the initial ban, and those politicians are still politically active. I posted multiple articles last week about significant opposition, but they happen to agree with Zelensky major war-related decisions.
I'm not trying to take the easy way out on the mistreatment of UOC priest/members. I just don't have any intel on that and don't trust the media on either side. For example, I've seen UOC priests interviewed who said they disagreed with the ban but have been treated just fine and unaware of mistreatment elsewhere. Yet, I also read your posts. I'll stick to what I said earlier. I have no doubt some of that is happening. I think if it were prevalent, there would be more attention given to it.
I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.
I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.
Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).
Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.
BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC
Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.
It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.
Several points here that I would address.
1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.
2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.
3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.
4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.
The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.
The point being no one has held up Russia as some bastion of freedom and human rights.
But we have been sold this false propaganda about Ukraine being a bastion of Freedom....while Kyiv bans political parties, doesn't hold elections, allows only one party owned media outlet to report on the government, and shuts down Churches they don't like (UOC-MP)
There are literally people in this thread arguing that Russia is "the true bastion of Christianity" as one of their main factors in this deal. It's almost comical.
Yea yea that one bothers you.
I have no idea what idiot said that and its obvious not true.
Nor does anyone believe it
Between the corrupt bishops, the massive abortion rates, and the shutting down of rival protestant groups...its obvious Russia is not a defender of Christian values
Who was it anyway....Barbarian?
Actually Kirill, the head of the church that you defend, has repeatedly stated this is a war for the soul of Christianity.
So goofy
When have I ever defended Krill and the ROC?
I literally said in the post above that Russia is no great role model for Christian civilization
now on this we agree. Vance's speech last week in Munich was spectacular. Historic. Will change the trajectory of history, one way or the other.
We are witnessing a singular moment - the populist right rising to defend classical liberalism from progressive establishments who think they no longer need to engage in serious debate, because only a fascist could find reason to disagree them.
If you have not listened to the speech, make time to do so.
Vice President J.D. Vance gave a speech in Munich Friday, to the Munich Security Conference. I've posted the video and the entire text separately. I encourage everyone who hasn't done so to listen to or read the entire thing, then come back to this space, where I've compiled some of the efforts to "add context" and "fact-check" the address.
I've lost the ability to be shocked. Never have propaganda imperatives been more obvious:
The New York Times sold this as "support for far-right, anti-immigration parties," in a speech that "seemed to target efforts to sideline the hard-right party the Alternative for Germany."
Not until today, Sunday, did the Times publish the more obvious headline: "Trump Team Leaves Behind an Alliance in Crisis." Instead on Friday, a trio of all-star Times reporters in Steven Erlanger, David Sanger, and Jim Tankersley wrote an extraordinary lede for the paper's top news story. I thought I heard an American Vice President say continued support was contingent upon recognition of elections and the end of censorship. Filing from Munich, they wrote something else:
Quote:
Vice President JD Vance urged European leaders on Friday to end the isolation of far-right parties across the continent, an extraordinary embrace of a once-fringe political movement with which the Trump administration shares a common approach on migration, identity and internet speech. The address stunned and silenced hundreds of attendees at the Munich Security Conference, a forum where top-level politicians, diplomats and analysts had gathered expecting to hear President Trump's plans for ending the war in Ukraine and Europe's defense against a rising Russian threat.
The Times team went on to castigate Vance for focusing on "what he called [Europe's] suppression of abortion protests and other forms of free speech" when he should be worrying about Russia. They said this signaled that the administration's priorities were "expanding the MAGA movement abroad rather than countering President Vladimir V. Putin's aggression." They went on to describe Vance's sentiments about speech and respecting election results not only as "MAGA," but in sync with Russian propaganda designed to "destabilize" the West:
Quote:
Mr. Vance's remarks echoed those of hard-right leaders across Europe and the anti-establishment messages that Russia has pumped onto social media in an effort to destabilize democratic politics in America and Europe.
Vance invoked of a long list of issues, from German police raids of people suspected of "misogynistic hate speech," to a Swedish court conviction of a man who burned a Koran, to U.K. "buffer zones" banning even silent prayer near abortion clinics, to most notably, EU Commissioner Thierry Breton's recent remarks about canceling elections. "We did it in Romania," Breton said, "and if necessary, we'll do it in Germany as well."
The New York Times characterized these and other measures as necessary to suppress "right-wing" and perhaps foreign-inspired opinions. The paper noted that "European intelligence agencies have raised alarms" about these movements, and described voters as an opposition force, saying "firewalls have fallen around Europe" including in "the Netherlands, Hungary and Italy."
Fellow Times writer Michael Bender's analysis focused on how Vance revealed ignominious motives of populists. Hard-line immigration policy, he wrote, has "emerged as the thread tightly knitting together a global patchwork of populist movements." (The United States is a pretty large "patch," if we're evaluating metaphors.) Tankersley's separate "Nazis and Speech" piece returned to the idea that demanding acceptance of voter results or ending censorship would empower the rightist AfD party. He offhandedly described how post-WWII Europe's "Never Again" premise requires giving "intelligence" a veto over voters.
"[Germany] has an Office for the Protection of the Constitution, with intelligence tools to monitor extremists, and a constitutional court that in rare cases can ban parties entirely," he wrote.
American outlets nearly all followed the Times lead in describing the speech as support for extremists. Often, it was done in conjunction with a quote from a European politician:
Other media reactions focused on the idea that Vance's speech was "extreme," from "fringes." A "very weird 20 minutes," wrote the BBC. It was a "blistering attack on Europe's leaders," wrote the Guardian, accurately enough, before describing Vance's address as "attempting to underplay Moscow's role in the rise of the populist right." After Vance suggested Europe could handle listening to Elon Musk online if the U.S. could put up with Greta Thunberg, The Independent called it an "attempted joke" that "failed to raise a laugh." (As a writer of many speeches, that was not a laugh line. The mute, horrified faces were themselves supposed to be the punchline.)
Others, like Bertelsmann foundation analyst Cathryn Clver Ashbrook, suggested Vance's speech was not correct. "The first third of the speech was littered with conspiracy theories, misinformation, and the demand that these misrepresentations be taken seriously," she said. You're going to hear a lot about what the BBC called "dangerous" misinformation, specifically Vance's suggestion that prayer in one's own home could violate U.K. "buffer zone" laws about abortion clinics. The Beeb claims it would only impact things that that "could be seen or heard from the zone, such as displaying posters or banners, or protesting in their garden."
I have many thoughts about Vance's speech, which I think will be remembered as a moment of grave importance, but the most crucial immediate observation is how it was received by other formerly influential American figures. It's never been a secret that postwar Europe has a different attitude toward speech and even democracy. But we've never seen institutional America so open in its backing of overruled elections, censorship, and the use of intelligence mechanisms to cut off voter decisions. It's all out in the open now.
Check the context note on that post which states Trump never advocated for leaving.
The US has been spending billions of dollars annually defending Western Europe since the 1940's.
It is past time for Europe to be responsible for their own defense. It's absurd for the US to continue to pay for Europe's defense.
If Europe is unable or unwilling to defend themselves after decades of US protection……that is 100% on them.
So, let's say you are right.
It is on them. Russia/China invades. You think we are sitting out and saying we told you so?
The real unspoken danger is not a Russian or Chinese invasion of Europe
Russia is a vastly overrated power (as we have seen in Ukraine...it cant even hold onto its old satellite states)...and China would be focused on dominating Asia.
The danger is that a massive uncontrolled arms race develops again in Europe leading us back to the disaster of the early 20th century (WWI and WWII).....with the UK, France, Germany, Poland, Italy all competing for power and engaging in great power rivalry...but this time with Nukes.
With the US and European States in one military alliance (NATO) everyone is on the same team.
If NATO disappeared tomorrow....Welfare gets cut in Europe and the great regional powers there start rearming at a scary pace.
[Lord Ismay, the first Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), reportedly observed that the purpose of the Alliance was to "keep the Americans in Europe, the Russians out, and the Germans down".]
Yup. Believe it or not the US has been the adult in the room since 1949. NATO has kept Europe from becoming 1910 or 1937 all over again.
I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.
I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.
Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).
Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.
BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC
Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.
It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.
Several points here that I would address.
1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.
2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.
3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.
4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.
The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.
The point being no one has held up Russia as some bastion of freedom and human rights.
But we have been sold this false propaganda about Ukraine being a bastion of Freedom....while Kyiv bans political parties, doesn't hold elections, allows only one party owned media outlet to report on the government, and shuts down Churches they don't like (UOC-MP)
There are literally people in this thread arguing that Russia is "the true bastion of Christianity" as one of their main factors in this deal. It's almost comical.
Yea yea that one bothers you.
I have no idea what idiot said that and its obvious not true.
Nor does anyone believe it
Between the corrupt bishops, the massive abortion rates, and the shutting down of rival protestant groups...its obvious Russia is not a defender of Christian values
Who was it anyway....Barbarian?
Actually Kirill, the head of the church that you defend, has repeatedly stated this is a war for the soul of Christianity.
So goofy
When have I ever defended Krill and the ROC?
I literally said in the post above that Russia is no great role model for Christian civilization
(Neither is Western Europe for that matter)
Both Moscow, DC, and Brussels are far from moral
But if you understood Kirill and what his leadership means in the ROC and its affiliates, I really don't see how you'd second guess for one second the banning of his church in Ukraine. That's why I assumed you supported him and the ROC.
Check the context note on that post which states Trump never advocated for leaving.
The US has been spending billions of dollars annually defending Western Europe since the 1940's.
It is past time for Europe to be responsible for their own defense. It's absurd for the US to continue to pay for Europe's defense.
If Europe is unable or unwilling to defend themselves after decades of US protection……that is 100% on them.
So, let's say you are right.
It is on them. Russia/China invades. You think we are sitting out and saying we told you so?
The real unspoken danger is not a Russian or Chinese invasion of Europe
Russia is a vastly overrated power (as we have seen in Ukraine...it cant even hold onto its old satellite states)...and China would be focused on dominating Asia.
The danger is that a massive uncontrolled arms race develops again in Europe leading us back to the disaster of the early 20th century (WWI and WWII).....with the UK, France, Germany, Poland, Italy all competing for power and engaging in great power rivalry...but this time with Nukes.
With the US and European States in one military alliance (NATO) everyone is on the same team.
If NATO disappeared tomorrow....Welfare gets cut in Europe and the great regional powers there start rearming at a scary pace.
[Lord Ismay, the first Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), reportedly observed that the purpose of the Alliance was to "keep the Americans in Europe, the Russians out, and the Germans down".]
Yup. Believe it or not the US has been the adult in the room since 1949. NATO has kept Europe from becoming 1910 or 1937 all over again.
Instead its a dystopian cesspool of "multiculturalism" and swiftly becoming a 3rd world continent.
Check the context note on that post which states Trump never advocated for leaving.
The US has been spending billions of dollars annually defending Western Europe since the 1940's.
It is past time for Europe to be responsible for their own defense. It's absurd for the US to continue to pay for Europe's defense.
If Europe is unable or unwilling to defend themselves after decades of US protection……that is 100% on them.
So, let's say you are right.
It is on them. Russia/China invades. You think we are sitting out and saying we told you so?
The real unspoken danger is not a Russian or Chinese invasion of Europe
Russia is a vastly overrated power (as we have seen in Ukraine...it cant even hold onto its old satellite states)...and China would be focused on dominating Asia.
The danger is that a massive uncontrolled arms race develops again in Europe leading us back to the disaster of the early 20th century (WWI and WWII).....with the UK, France, Germany, Poland, Italy all competing for power and engaging in great power rivalry...but this time with Nukes.
With the US and European States in one military alliance (NATO) everyone is on the same team.
If NATO disappeared tomorrow....Welfare gets cut in Europe and the great regional powers there start rearming at a scary pace.
[Lord Ismay, the first Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), reportedly observed that the purpose of the Alliance was to "keep the Americans in Europe, the Russians out, and the Germans down".]
Yup. Believe it or not the US has been the adult in the room since 1949. NATO has kept Europe from becoming 1910 or 1937 all over again.
Instead its a dystopian cesspool of "multiculturalism" and swiftly becoming a 3rd world continent.
NATO honeslty has nothing to do with that
Political elites in DC, London, Paris, Berlin have made the decision to throw open the borders of Europe.
NATO is just a military alliance.
Its existence is not causing and does not bring in those 3rd word migrants…and presumably the immigration waves would still be allowed into Europe if NATO disappeared tomorrow
I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.
I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.
Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).
Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.
BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC
Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.
It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.
Several points here that I would address.
1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.
2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.
3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.
4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.
The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.
The point being no one has held up Russia as some bastion of freedom and human rights.
But we have been sold this false propaganda about Ukraine being a bastion of Freedom....while Kyiv bans political parties, doesn't hold elections, allows only one party owned media outlet to report on the government, and shuts down Churches they don't like (UOC-MP)
There are literally people in this thread arguing that Russia is "the true bastion of Christianity" as one of their main factors in this deal. It's almost comical.
Yea yea that one bothers you.
I have no idea what idiot said that and its obvious not true.
Nor does anyone believe it
Between the corrupt bishops, the massive abortion rates, and the shutting down of rival protestant groups...its obvious Russia is not a defender of Christian values
Who was it anyway....Barbarian?
Actually Kirill, the head of the church that you defend, has repeatedly stated this is a war for the soul of Christianity.
So goofy
When have I ever defended Krill and the ROC?
I literally said in the post above that Russia is no great role model for Christian civilization
(Neither is Western Europe for that matter)
Both Moscow, DC, and Brussels are far from moral
But if you understood Kirill and what his leadership means in the ROC and its affiliates, I really don't see how you'd second guess for one second the banning of his church in Ukraine. That's why I assumed you supported him and the ROC.
The ROC is corrupt but that does not then imply it's ok to suppress a church because Zelensky does not like it….a church with only tentative links to Moscow
The UOC-MP has been self governing for decades and officially condemned the invasion of Ukraine by Russia.
Suppressing it is a violation of free speech and freedom of religion.
And has no real purpose anyway….it only has the loyalty of about 6-8% of church goers in Ukriane….its a minority Church.
[In 2019, the Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU) was founded in accordance with then President Petro Poroshenko's "one nation, one church" vision. Poroshenko believed that an independent, national church was essential for national security, as opposed to the traditional UOC church, which was independent in governance but retained its legacy ecclesiastic connection with the Russian Orthodox Church based in Moscow. One way that the OCU displayed its nationalism was by replacing Slavonic with Ukrainian as its liturgical language.]
Check the context note on that post which states Trump never advocated for leaving.
The US has been spending billions of dollars annually defending Western Europe since the 1940's.
It is past time for Europe to be responsible for their own defense. It's absurd for the US to continue to pay for Europe's defense.
If Europe is unable or unwilling to defend themselves after decades of US protection……that is 100% on them.
So, let's say you are right.
It is on them. Russia/China invades. You think we are sitting out and saying we told you so?
The real unspoken danger is not a Russian or Chinese invasion of Europe
Russia is a vastly overrated power (as we have seen in Ukraine...it cant even hold onto its old satellite states)...and China would be focused on dominating Asia.
The danger is that a massive uncontrolled arms race develops again in Europe leading us back to the disaster of the early 20th century (WWI and WWII).....with the UK, France, Germany, Poland, Italy all competing for power and engaging in great power rivalry...but this time with Nukes.
With the US and European States in one military alliance (NATO) everyone is on the same team.
If NATO disappeared tomorrow....Welfare gets cut in Europe and the great regional powers there start rearming at a scary pace.
[Lord Ismay, the first Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), reportedly observed that the purpose of the Alliance was to "keep the Americans in Europe, the Russians out, and the Germans down".]
Yup. Believe it or not the US has been the adult in the room since 1949. NATO has kept Europe from becoming 1910 or 1937 all over again.
Instead its a dystopian cesspool of "multiculturalism" and swiftly becoming a 3rd world continent.
NATO honeslty has nothing to do with that
Political elites in DC, London, Paris, Berlin have made the decision to throw open the borders of Europe.
NATO is just a military alliance.
Its existence is not causing and does not bring in those 3rd word migrants…and presumably the immigration waves would still be allowed into Europe if NATO disappeared tomorrow
So the obvious question becomes why would we want to involve ourselves in a military alliance with corrupt political elites who are the enemies of their own people... and our enemies as well.
Check the context note on that post which states Trump never advocated for leaving.
The US has been spending billions of dollars annually defending Western Europe since the 1940's.
It is past time for Europe to be responsible for their own defense. It's absurd for the US to continue to pay for Europe's defense.
If Europe is unable or unwilling to defend themselves after decades of US protection……that is 100% on them.
So, let's say you are right.
It is on them. Russia/China invades. You think we are sitting out and saying we told you so?
The real unspoken danger is not a Russian or Chinese invasion of Europe
Russia is a vastly overrated power (as we have seen in Ukraine...it cant even hold onto its old satellite states)...and China would be focused on dominating Asia.
The danger is that a massive uncontrolled arms race develops again in Europe leading us back to the disaster of the early 20th century (WWI and WWII).....with the UK, France, Germany, Poland, Italy all competing for power and engaging in great power rivalry...but this time with Nukes.
With the US and European States in one military alliance (NATO) everyone is on the same team.
If NATO disappeared tomorrow....Welfare gets cut in Europe and the great regional powers there start rearming at a scary pace.
[Lord Ismay, the first Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), reportedly observed that the purpose of the Alliance was to "keep the Americans in Europe, the Russians out, and the Germans down".]
Yup. Believe it or not the US has been the adult in the room since 1949. NATO has kept Europe from becoming 1910 or 1937 all over again.
Instead its a dystopian cesspool of "multiculturalism" and swiftly becoming a 3rd world continent.
NATO honeslty has nothing to do with that
Political elites in DC, London, Paris, Berlin have made the decision to throw open the borders of Europe.
NATO is just a military alliance.
Its existence is not causing and does not bring in those 3rd word migrants…and presumably the immigration waves would still be allowed into Europe if NATO disappeared tomorrow
So the obvious question becomes why would we want to involve ourselves in a military alliance with corrupt political elites who are the enemies of their own people... and our enemies as well.
The goal has to be to change the politicians and to correct the political problems (that will keep popping up no matter if NATO is around or not)
But getting rid of a large and powerful military alliance of Western States is not a good idea in the face of a growing China.
Not to mention what other foes might come along over the next 100 years
Check the context note on that post which states Trump never advocated for leaving.
The US has been spending billions of dollars annually defending Western Europe since the 1940's.
It is past time for Europe to be responsible for their own defense. It's absurd for the US to continue to pay for Europe's defense.
If Europe is unable or unwilling to defend themselves after decades of US protection……that is 100% on them.
So, let's say you are right.
It is on them. Russia/China invades. You think we are sitting out and saying we told you so?
The real unspoken danger is not a Russian or Chinese invasion of Europe
Russia is a vastly overrated power (as we have seen in Ukraine...it cant even hold onto its old satellite states)...and China would be focused on dominating Asia.
The danger is that a massive uncontrolled arms race develops again in Europe leading us back to the disaster of the early 20th century (WWI and WWII).....with the UK, France, Germany, Poland, Italy all competing for power and engaging in great power rivalry...but this time with Nukes.
With the US and European States in one military alliance (NATO) everyone is on the same team.
If NATO disappeared tomorrow....Welfare gets cut in Europe and the great regional powers there start rearming at a scary pace.
[Lord Ismay, the first Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), reportedly observed that the purpose of the Alliance was to "keep the Americans in Europe, the Russians out, and the Germans down".]
Yup. Believe it or not the US has been the adult in the room since 1949. NATO has kept Europe from becoming 1910 or 1937 all over again.
Instead its a dystopian cesspool of "multiculturalism" and swiftly becoming a 3rd world continent.
NATO honeslty has nothing to do with that
Political elites in DC, London, Paris, Berlin have made the decision to throw open the borders of Europe.
NATO is just a military alliance.
Its existence is not causing and does not bring in those 3rd word migrants…and presumably the immigration waves would still be allowed into Europe if NATO disappeared tomorrow
So the obvious question becomes why would we want to involve ourselves in a military alliance with corrupt political elites who are the enemies of their own people... and our enemies as well.
The goal has to be to change the politicians and to correct the political problems (that will keep popping up no matter if NATO is around or not)
But getting rid of a large and powerful military alliance of Western States is not a good idea in the face of a growing China.
Not to mention what other foes might come along over the next 100 years
CBS joined German police to conduct a raid on a citizen for posting a meme online pic.twitter.com/qkjNdjIHxM
But if you understood Kirill and what his leadership means in the ROC and its affiliates, I really don't see how you'd second guess for one second the banning of his church in Ukraine. That's why I assumed you supported him and the ROC.
As a member of the Church of Antioch, one of the two oldest Christian Churches (the other being Jerusalem), I suppose you could say that we are affiliated with the Russian Church. Their members can freely commune with ours, and ours with theirs. We are on friendly terms with that organization, as well as with the Churches everywhere from Toyko through Serbia. This includes the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. It does not include the Pompeo-Zelensky created Orthodox Church of Ukraine. Neither do any of these other churches we are in fellowship with recognize the OCU, a strictly political creation. Saying the OCU represents Ukrainian Christianiy is like saying the Episcopalians represent American Protestantism. Patriarch Kirill has led the Russian Church through a tremendous revival of Christianity in post communist Russia, to the point that they are building chapels in Rest Areas on Russian interstates. Think twice before slandering the man or his fruit.
As for corruption, remove the beam of USAID funds in the eyes of multiple American churches from the RCC to the SBC before looking for specks in others.
But getting rid of a large and powerful military alliance of Western States is not a good idea in the face of a growing China.
Not to mention what other foes might come along over the next 100 years
NATO may have been an alliance of large, powerful western states 50 years ago. Today it ties our fate to a socialist dictatorial political construct and Orwell Island.
In 100 years, it may tie our fate to a caliphate.
We should have no article 5 commitments to such entities, and now is the perfect time to end them.
As for China, before contemplating a war with China, we need to walk in to a Walmart and see shelves that are 9%, not 90% occupied by Chinese products. The same thing goes for our pharmacies. Tens of millions of American civilians would die in the weeks and months following the start of such a conflict from the interruption of the pharmaceutical supply chain.
I am not Orthodox, but I've been surrounded by it most of my life. 90% of my relatives on one side are Serbian Orthodox. My wife's family are Russian immigrants and have a long history with the Russian Orthodox Church. Another part of our family is Greek Orthodox. BTW, the Russian orthodox church in the U.S. is different than the ROC.
I have the utmost respect for the church, so I don't say any of this to be critical, but rather just stating facts that many who do not follow the Orthodox churches probably don't know.
Orthodox churches have long been closely connected with their governments. More recently, for example, the Serbian church supported Milosevic and spoke out in favor of those wars. Unfortunately, Kirill - former KGB - in Russia is a Putin shill and has spoken out aggressively in favor of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
The Orthodox church also is exceedingly hierarchical. So, for example, the various Russian orthodox churches are governed by Kirill, and he dictates everything from church positions, how the church is run, and Divine Liturgies (weekly services, sermons worship.).
Two reasons for this background. One, when people hear complaints (usually from folks with no understanding) of Ukraine "banning Russian churches," they likely compare it to banning Christian churches here in the U.S. But it's nothing like that. When Ukraine "banned" the ROC, it was not in any way banning the Ortho church or communities, but rather, only those officially governed by and beholden to Kirill. Fortunately, many of those Ukrainian ROC priests disavowed Kirill, stopped referencing him during services, and spoke out against the invasion. Many changed to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine - not Russia-affiliated.
BTW, many also do not know that Putin and Russian agents tried mightily to prevent the formation of the OCU in the first place and used threats, coercion, and worse to keep priests and layfolk in the ROC
Two, there is nothing unusual about Eastern Orthodox Churches working with governments. Many such churches were anti-communists, including the Russian church. But since the fall of communism, various churches have taken different positions relative to democratic values, and even freedom of religion. The Russian church, for example, supported laws restricting other religions and again, has supported Putin. Other eastern churches have supported freedom and democracy.
It should surprise nobody that governments of all kinds - from Russia, to Greece, to Romania, to the U.S. and elsewhere - lend support and work with Ortho churches that share their values. That has been done for thousands of years.
But it is ludicrous to suggest that non-Russian orthodox churches are controlled by or beholden to the U.S. Frankly, that is deeply offensive to the Orthodox church.
Several points here that I would address.
1. It's true that Orthodoxy has always been closely tied with politics. I would argue that was the reason for the Eastern Schism in the first place. So, to say the Russian patriarch speaks in favor of his government's wars means very little. Even many Protestant churches in America do the same, and more to the point, so does the newly created Ukrainian church. They are all within their rights to do so. What the Russians don't do is ban other churches, brutally attack their congregants and clergy, and confiscate or destroy their property. Ukraine does all of these things to the Russian Orthodox.
2. Banning Orthodox churches with a connection to Russia is indeed banning Russian churches. It would be as if the US government banned Catholic churches governed by Rome, established a so-called American Catholic Church, and insisted that nothing had changed because all of those Catholic communities could continue existing as long as they renounced the pope and spoke out in favor of American policy.
3. I know you may not agree, but I must keep making the point that opposing Putin is not the equivalent of supporting democracy. Ukraine hasn't been a democracy in any meaningful sense for quite some time, and at this point it's no better than a tin-pot dictatorship ruled by an assortment of thugs, opportunists, and fanatics who are trying to sweep up as much ill-gotten gain as they can while they race for the exit.
4. The OCU would not exist, and would have no reason to exist, if not for the Western policy of sowing ethnic, religious, and political discord in Ukraine. Its origin has nothing to do with theology and everything to do with politics, as evidenced by the rhetoric of Poroshenko, the loyal Ukrainian hierarchy, and American supporters like Biden, McCain, et al.
The bold above is false. I know first hand what has happened to several evangelical churches and individuals including imprisonment. This was happening before the war in Ukraine and has only picked up in Russia.
The point being no one has held up Russia as some bastion of freedom and human rights.
But we have been sold this false propaganda about Ukraine being a bastion of Freedom....while Kyiv bans political parties, doesn't hold elections, allows only one party owned media outlet to report on the government, and shuts down Churches they don't like (UOC-MP)
There are literally people in this thread arguing that Russia is "the true bastion of Christianity" as one of their main factors in this deal. It's almost comical.
Yea yea that one bothers you.
I have no idea what idiot said that and its obvious not true.
Nor does anyone believe it
Between the corrupt bishops, the massive abortion rates, and the shutting down of rival protestant groups...its obvious Russia is not a defender of Christian values
Who was it anyway....Barbarian?
Actually Kirill, the head of the church that you defend, has repeatedly stated this is a war for the soul of Christianity.
So goofy
When have I ever defended Krill and the ROC?
I literally said in the post above that Russia is no great role model for Christian civilization
(Neither is Western Europe for that matter)
Both Moscow, DC, and Brussels are far from moral
But if you understood Kirill and what his leadership means in the ROC and its affiliates, I really don't see how you'd second guess for one second the banning of his church in Ukraine. That's why I assumed you supported him and the ROC.
The ROC is corrupt but that does not the imply it's ok to suppress a church because Zelensky does not like it….a church with only tentative links to Moscow
The UOC-MP has been self governing for decades and officially condemned the invasion of Ukraine by Russia.
Suppressing it is a violation of free speech and freedom of religion.
And has no real purpose anyway….it only has the loyalty of about 6-8% of church goers in Ukriane….its a minority Church.
[In 2019, the Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU) was founded in accordance with then President Petro Poroshenko's "one nation, one church" vision. Poroshenko believed that an independent, national church was essential for national security, as opposed to the traditional UOC church, which was independent in governance but retained its legacy ecclesiastic connection with the Russian Orthodox Church based in Moscow. One way that the OCU displayed its nationalism was by replacing Slavonic with Ukrainian as its liturgical language.]
"Only tentative: links? Seriously, have you studied it at all?
Brush up on Orthodox terminology. "Self governing" is not "autonomous." Self governing was a made-up term, with virtually no meaning. "Autonomous" is the traditional Orthodox word for truly independent yet sometimes still affiliated. They literally were the Moscow Patriarchate.
The ROC fought hard to prevent the OCU from even forming and, through, threats, coercion, violence, and ROC processes did everything possible to prevent priest and members from leaving the UOC.
And, even setting aside terminology, you're (and the article you posted) ignore 10 years of history. The UOC openly supported the 2014 invasion and endorsed everything Kirill said and did. They went to the frontline "blessing" Russian troops AND WEAPONS and their effort and called for the annexing of the East. They kept their HQ in Crimea post-annexation.
The list is far too long to post, but these actions continued. And they continued after the 2022 invasion. Prominent UOC priests and officials very publicly supported the Russian invasion and recognized the initial Russian territorial claims. Then, no surprise, when Ukraine re-took some of those areas, UOC priests left for Russia. This happened all over the place. Yet UOC leadership did nothing. In fact, while the UOC was publicly releasing statements condemning the invasion (while also blaming Ukraine for causing it) many in the highest of leadership were helping Russia and also doing nothing (not even condemning) about what priests were doing.
Now, as I've posted many times, you and I will never know exactly which arrests, accusation, etc. were and were not legitimate, but there were numerous arrests that were upheld by the same courts that had traditionally ruled for UOC on various matters, such as name changes, jurisdiction, etc. The press and the secret service released recordings and written materials showing widespread assistance to the Russians. Heck, UOC priests were included in Russian prisoner exchanges, and many had Russian passports. Church members by the thousands reported pro-Russian activities and support by their own church leaders.
As you acknowledged, thousands of churches changed to the OCU long before the UOC activities ban. And of course that continued after.
The bottom line for me, as a lifelong Christian and 1st Amendment advocate, my default position is 100% freedom of religion. I reflexively oppose any ban or restrictions. And I admit my position here has been significantly influenced by my lifelong exposure to the Orthodox church and understanding of how structured, hierarchial, and political it is.
But mostly, as with the other issues we've debated - press, martial law, etc. - I just give a hell of a lot of deference to a country that is invaded and fighting for its life, particularly by a country that is the truth antithesis to all of these freedoms.
And, again, if you compare what Ukraine has done to what other invaded countries (including the U.S.) has done throughout history, Ukraine has instituted far less extreme restrictions.
If my country were invaded, yes, it would be a balancing, but I would want my government to err on the side of protecting its people from an invader.
