Theologian, expert in doctrinal theology of the Catholic Church, canon law, bible semiotics Grant holder of SSF(Iky.gr) in Orthodox Church Theology and Religious Studies in the National University of Athens, interfaith and interreligious dialogue, politician, member of the Futurium think tank of the European Commission, Brussels
Despite the temporal and apparent differences between these two dates at the ecclesiastical level, the crisis and the ecclesiastical warfare with the responsibility of Russia and not only of the Russian church is also placed much earlier. At least since 2016.
Given the sequence of events at the political and ecclesiastical level, one could easily call this war is also religious.
In the paradoxes of this war where politics and church in Russia complement each other is that the Russian church with the endless excuses that has given to the war, it has taken a character of a crusade and anyone with little knowledge of European history can discern all those features of the crusades against, for example, Constantinople or the Holy Land, their submission to the spiritual jurisdiction of the Western Catholic Church (now in Russian), either directly or indirectly, but also to the ill-intentioned attempt to de-Protestantize Britain during the reign of Elizabeth I by Philippe of Spain that in his eyes (Elizabeth) represented immorality, heresy and the fall . He called her as the seed of the devil when she reject the only true religion according to him who was the Catholicism.
In both cases we have at the same time the attempt to conquer lands at the level of a state entity and the attempt to conquer religious jurisdictions and change the central reference pole of spiritual power again with same excuses of either immorality or those who fall from the Doctrine of the Faith.
However, the reality that was very different from the excuses concerned mainly the wealth but mainly the submission of these jurisdictions (political or religious) with the justification that for some unhistorical reason their areas belong to crusaders of the Holy Land and the crusaders of Constantinople raising issues of ecclesiastical kinship of each of these jurisdictions that could not belong to People fall from the true faith. Philip on the other hand was connecting his royal blood as a successor which had rights to the throne of England.
In both cases we have two different results. In Constantinople and the Holy Land we have the victory of the crusaders-invaders and the establishment of their own leaders, Latin patriarch of Constantinople and Latin patriarch of Jerusalem and for a long time a ban on the existence of a corresponding orthodox church while in the other we have the victory of Elizabeth, the destruction of the Spanish armada and the prohibition of the existence of the invader's religion for a long time.
Of course all this, with the change of historical conditions and reaching today has changed. There is no longer a Latin patriarch of Constantinople and the Latin patriarch of Jerusalem is a titular person with specific jurisdictions and these only on his faithful Respectively in England, under the pressure of mainly the Scottish and Irish Catholics, we have the re-establishment of the Catholic Church in Britain on the condition that its leaders will be loyal to the monarch and will be indigenous.
Coming to today and in the case of Ukraine based on the above and mainly the two different results we have to ask ourselves what result is what we want for Ukraine. Undoubtedly we have an invader and an enemy. The Russian who together with his church is trying to conquer something that does not belong to him. Ukraine as a state entity or part of it and the Ukrainian people spiritually from a church foreign to the Ukranian people who find excuses for immorality and deprivation who make it booty. The excuses are the same. Like the real causes. An unhistorical position about property, wealth and power.
In my opinion, that result that Ukraine must claim is the second (case of Philip - Elizabeth) and for that we must all fight.
The changes brought by the Synod of the structure of the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine are nothing but a purchase of time to find new allies, and this Ally has a specific name. Patriarchate of Serbia.
The patriarchate of Serbia that after the occupation of the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium) by the Ottomans was the first to claim the Ecumenical throne as part of its megaloideasm and a self declare continuation of the Byzantine state and its close relations with the Patriarchate of Moscow , is also today show power in violation of any canonical performance of grand Autocephaly in the Archdiocese of Ohrid (republic of Northern Macedonia) is the one to which the Structure of the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine will turn to legitimize its existence within the country.
If this happens (and we should not let happen) it will bring results like those of the crusaders in the Holy Land (the unacceptability of parallel structures) while if we move forward together to achieve the goal of banning it and his structures like Elizabeth we will have achieved an historical spiritual expulsion of that structure ( moskow church and its institutions) from the territories of Ukraine.
To the end, I call on, as far as I can, all the patriotic forces of Ukraine and those who are fighting in one way or another on its side, with one voice, to immediately promote all those necessary actions to save the spiritual normality of the Ukrainian Orthodox and The only way is to ban the Structure of the Moscow Patriarchate (or as it will be called after the changes in its statute) in the territory of Ukraine.
Long live Ukraine!