Comments in the Greek news Agency “Romfea” the Chairman of the Department for external Church relations of the Moscow Patriarchate, Metropolitan Hilarion gave an assessment of the decision of the Synod of the schismatic “Kiev Patriarchate” on assignment Filaret Denisenko of the title “his Holiness and Beatitude, Archbishop and Metropolitan of Kiev — Mother of Russian lands, father superior of Kiev-Pechersk and Pochaev Laurel”, according to patriarhiei. Metropolitan Hilarion said:
“We Filaret as he was, and remains schismatic. This whole farce with the assignment of titles only demonstrates once again how right was the decision of the 1997 excommunication from the Church, recognized by all, without exception, local churches including the Patriarchate of Constantinople. The lions can claim many titles, but the essence remains the same: he was not a Patriarch and is not. And, therefore, is neither Holy nor blessed.
Surprising is not so much what Filaret, inspired by the support of Constantinople, assigns a new title as the this support. Well I thought the counselors Patriarch Bartholomew, who recommended him to defend such odious figures? Not framed or they your supervisor?
The absorption Filaret of the title of Archimandrite of Kiev-Pechersk and Pochaev Laurel is consistent with the claims to these sacred for millions of Orthodox Ukrainians of the monastery, which he has repeatedly voiced. In Constantinople, when taking the decision on its restoration in Sana’a (though it is unclear what the Patriarch? Metropolitan?), he urged “all concerned to avoid appropriation of churches, monasteries and other property, and any other acts of violence and retaliation.” The President of Ukraine Poroshenko assured that no redistribution of property will not.
But can we believe these appeals and assurances, when the main leader of the split, now justified Constantinople, reveals his plans to capture the main shrines of the canonical Ukrainian Church, while nationalist groups are preparing for his “blessing” this capture exercise? It seems that only the absence of the Tomos of autocephaly still stops from the power of the actions of those who wish as soon as possible to deal with the canonical Church.”