As much as Bulgarian church grandmothers have in common with bishops' Rolexes and expensive limousines, so do Russian grandmothers benefit from the billions of the "cigarette-smoking metropolitan" Kirill, says Archimandrite Nikanor.
DV: Archimandrite Nikanor, since the election of Patriarch Daniil, you have been following his pro-Russian aspirations with concern. Let's discuss the current cases: Do you see any reason for the Bulgarian Orthodox Church, on the one hand, and the state authorities - on the other - to jointly support a march against civil rights, specifically of people with different sexual orientations?
The support by the state for the so-called March for the Family, which is actually a counter-pride, is an extremely dangerous precedent for two reasons. On the one hand, the state, which is supposed to be an arbitrator, takes sides in an ideological dispute between two groups of its citizens. This destroys statehood. On the other hand, the state, which is called upon to be a guarantor and guarantor of human rights, stands against them. This is extremely dangerous. Today, instead of providing an opportunity for people with non-traditional sexual orientation to obtain a legal framework for their cohabitation and for the settlement of their property relations, it de facto contributes to hatred towards them and their demonization.
Tomorrow, after the "resolved" this question, against whom will this hatred be directed? And let us not be hypocrites and not tear our clothes, because supposedly, you see, ensuring the civil rights of homosexuals meant "encouraging sin". Sins are many and varied - do we have a procession against every sin? Where is the procession in support of sobriety? Where is the procession in support of non-acquisitiveness? Where is the procession in support of love? After all, it is the greatest virtue, which, in the words of the Apostle Paul, "never fails"? Why should we be sad - the procession supposedly in support of the family is a pure homophobic manifestation, dictated by hatred. Because Christ, with Whose name the organizers speculate, said: "By their works you will know them!". What family will Patriarch Daniil, his vicar Yoan, Plamen Miryanov or Desislava Panayotova boast about? And the politician who supported them from the rostrum of the National Assembly, how many children does he have?
Do you know what the difference is between today's and the Pharisees of the past? After such a reminder, the Pharisees of the past were ashamed and dispersed, and the Savior said softly and with love to the young girl they had brought to Him: "Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more".
DV: Isn't protecting the family, without anyone attacking it, a play on the so-called traditional values that Russian propaganda has appropriated and declared the West to be their enemy?
Look, "pious" hatred seeks to find a plausible justification, unlike open and honest hatred. When you have managed to dress your political ideology in the clothes of religious piety, you have to find a suitable justification for the denial and malice that are an integral part of it. If people with non-traditional sexual orientation were not pointed out as an existential threat to the family and to the proper development of young people, on what grounds would we hate them? Just because they are different? This does not work in the context of Christian teaching. If it were not instilled that Jews are a "threat to society", how would enough people be convinced of the need for a "final solution"?
The ideology of "traditional" values is disgusting precisely because of the radical substitution it makes, presenting virtues as sin and sin as virtue. Christianity in all its manifestations and ramifications does not know the concept of "traditional values". On the contrary, it fundamentally destroys the values traditional for the ancient man - egoism, be it personal or tribal, the right to power, attachment to the material, atavistic fear and various taboos. By manipulating and mixing concepts, today's Russian propaganda tries to present Western civilization, which is based on the protection of human rights and freedoms, as an encourager of sin - an almost infernal community, as if it is possible for virtues to exist in conditions of lack of freedom?
DV: What is the relationship then between traditional and Christian values? What are the values of a political regime that is firmly for the traditional family, but has blackened hundreds of thousands of Christian families and destroyed dozens of Christian churches?
Wherever it spreads by the apostles and through the work of men and women who are equal to the apostles, Christianity uproots and destroys "traditional values", replacing them with its Gospel values. What are they? They are formulated by the Savior in the following way: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength; and love your neighbor as yourself".
Christianity prepares man to be worthy of eternal and blessed life and to become a heavenly inhabitant. It is not concerned with the organization of earthly human existence. In one of the ancient Christian writings it is said that Christians feel alien in their own country and their own in a foreign one, that is, nationalism and even patriotism are completely alien to the Christian ethos. And "traditional values" are entirely concerned with the way in which people should organize their lives on Earth for the sake of earthly well-being and the longevity of human habitation in the material world - both personal and social. As we see, Christian and traditional values are absolutely opposite.
The mentioned political regime has no other values and concerns, except how to survive itself and those at its top. No matter how much it disguises itself with beautiful political rhetoric or religious fables, for it people are only "building" material for its own reproduction or for the persecution of socio-political chimeras. The family in the context of the regime is needed only as an incubator for workers or soldiers - "women will give birth" (more boys who will replace those who fell in battle).
DV: What made the patriarch finally announce that next year the Procession will not be organized in parallel with Pride? Did he regret the previous stigmatization of some of the "people"?
I notice that recently the Patriarch has been acquiring a very good political instinct. Pay attention to how he turned around at the last moment, refused to personally lead the Procession and saved himself a great shame.
Can you imagine what an exotic couple they would have been with the princess at the front? Tongue, as the people say. I still have no reason to believe that Patriarch Daniil is capable of any positive change, but he has certainly finally found a reasonable and intelligent enough advisor around him.
His decision to part ways with this format and these organizers of the anti-pride is extremely apt and deserves acclamations. We should not forget that the Bulgarian church has a specially designated day for celebrating the Christian family and that its celebration precedes the first pride by almost a century. That is, there is no objective connection between these two manifestations.
DV: Regarding the second case - do you see any grounds for the secular authorities in a secular state like ours to delegate foreign policy decisions to the patriarch, as happened in the case of sanctions against the Russian Patriarch Kirill?
Here I see a media maneuver that is not particularly correct towards the head of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church.
I see the pain and concerns of many of our compatriots who are haunted by the nightmare of the new September 9th. But they seem to forget that the Red Army today is not on the Danube, but hundreds of kilometers from the Dnieper. There is no reason for fear and apprehension - the collapse of neo-communist and neo-imperialist Russia is inevitable.
However, the government must pay a tax on "Russophile public opinion". Of all the convenient PR opportunities, the case of sanctions against Patriarch Kirill is the most effective and at the same time the cheapest. What do you expect? Will Rumen Radev's government block some truly important European decision related to Russia's ability to maintain the war? The Bulgarian government would never allow such an adventure, given the inevitable consequences. On the other hand, a "symbolic war" against European sanctions seems politically safe for now. However, the government seems to want to play it safe and shift the responsibility for its decision onto the Bulgarian Orthodox Church and, more specifically, onto Patriarch Daniil.
If I were in Patriarch Daniil's place and I had been approached with such a request, I would have rejected it, citing the fact that it concerns issues of security and state policy, on which the Church is not competent to pronounce. In fact, the act of Bulgarian politicians is doubly vile, because even for purely human ethical reasons, Patriarch Daniil could not have spoken in favor of sanctions against his brother. After all, there are only nine Orthodox patriarchs living on our planet, and he is one of them. Kirill of Moscow - too.
DV: Is supporting the war in Ukraine a political or religious gesture? And in this sense, do the sanctions on the Russian patriarch also fall on believers in Russia, as Rumen Radev believes, or are they an attempt to open their eyes?
Support for the Russian aggression against Ukraine has both a political and a religious aspect, because in this case it rests on a choice between evangelical good and evil. This choice itself both predetermines and is the result of a person's spiritual and moral state. I don't know if it made an impression on you, but the spiritual leaders of the two most numerous Christian denominations - the popes in Rome and the patriarch in Constantinople, enlightened by the grace of the Holy Spirit, clearly and unequivocally defined the war as a sin and an act of blasphemy. And Patriarch Kirill betrayed Christ and renounced the Gospel. May God be his judge. However, to say that the personal sanctions that would be imposed on him also fall on his flock is frivolous and borders on mockery of common sense. As much as the Bulgarian church grandmothers have in common with the bishops' Rolexes and expensive limousines, the Russian grandmothers also have some benefit from the billions of the "cigarette-smoking metropolitan", as Valeri Simeonov accurately and aptly called Patriarch Kirill in 2018.
DV: How do you interpret Radev's statement: "I think the time of the crusades is over". And according to him, as according to Russian Patriarch Kirill, the "evil West" continues to wage war on Orthodoxy?
Look, Prime Minister Radev needs to somehow justify his decision. He cannot openly say that he is throwing dust in the eyes of the Russophiles who support him, while in practice he is working for the military defeat of Russia. In my opinion, he is not tempted by religion for good. So he refused to have a water blessing performed in order to "cleanse" his office from the presence of Andrey Gyurov before that. Radev is a sane military Orthodox atheist.
This is very useful for our country at this moment, believe me. At the same time, he could not understand the bankruptcy of the arguments that were thrown at him in defense of the decision to oppose the sanctions against Patriarch Kirill. So is Greece a less Orthodox country than Bulgaria? And Romania? And Cyprus? And now what comes out - our Prime Minister is more Orthodox than the Ecumenical Patriarch, eh? But go and ambush him tomorrow in front of the Council of Ministers and make him recite the Creed or at least the Our Father... he will not be able to. But is he very concerned about Orthodoxy otherwise? Sancta simplicitas!
DV: In the confrontation between Russia and the EU that arose after the attack on Ukraine, are the Bulgarian Patriarch and the Bulgarian Prime Minister on the same side and which one is it?
Apparently, judging by their words and deeds, they are on the same side. But they are not on the same side. Unlike Borisov, who is a very superstitious person and had knelt down to Patriarch Daniil, indulging him in the insane and paranoid persecution of the Old Style Church in our country, Prime Minister Radev will not allow himself to play second fiddle in the state-church symphony. Borisov gave state support to the Church. Radev, if budget savings are required, will take it away - just to have money for kindergartens, schools and hospitals. Radev sympathizes with Russia and probably sympathizes with Putin, but he is a political realist and will act according to the circumstances. In contrast, the patriarch was placed on the high pulpit by someone else and his attitude towards Russia and Putin is religious-mystical with no room for "small-faith" pragmatism. But he too has recently shown a faithful church-political instinct.
DV: Who puts "constantly in doubt the right of canonical Orthodox priests of Ukrainian origin to perform their ministry", as Metropolitan Arseny of Sliven writes? Is this an expression of a purposeful instillation of anti-Ukrainian sentiment and does it have any relation to the tension between the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which is under the command of the Russian Orthodox Church, and the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, which is independent of it?
In democratic countries, the role of public opinion is enormous. Broad public support for Ukraine is crucial to the ability of Western governments to provide the necessary resources for Ukraine's armed forces to successfully carry out their combat missions and thus provide an effective shield for the European continent. The Kremlin understands this very well and is making tremendous efforts to induce anti-Ukrainian sentiment, taking advantage of every convenient opportunity.
This is the case with the ordinary investor Nevzorov, who was deceived by the native mafia and slandered by the media in order to create a negative public image of Ukrainian citizens residing in our country. In the same way, the frivolous and spontaneous decision of the young Sliven Metropolitan to replace the Bulgarian priests in four Burgas churches with Ukrainian ones, probably taken on the advice of a young clergyman recently accepted into the diocese who maintains close contacts with the Russian Church in Ukraine, was cleverly used to instill hatred against Ukrainians. Metropolitan Arseny's public address was issued precisely in response to these suggestions, but it turned out that in fact none of the wronged Bulgarian parishioners had anything against Ukrainian believers, nor did any of them claim that the services were conducted in Ukrainian. A classic hybrid operation to instill suggestions and induce hatred was unfolding before our eyes.
Completely unexpectedly and beyond all logic, a Bulgarian metropolitan, after the shelling of the Kiev-Pechora Lavra, sent a letter of sympathy to Metropolitan Onufry Berezovsky and Bishop Sylvester Stoychev - persons who have long had nothing to do with the ancient monastery complex. The abbot of the Lavra for several years has been Bishop Avraamiy from the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, and this letter should have been addressed to him. But apparently its real addressee was not in Kiev at all, but in Moscow - at "Lubyanka". You see how perfidiously propaganda works.