Less than two days after the appointment, Archbishop Savva (Tutunov) of Zelenograd — one of the most influential figures in the administrative apparatus of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) — had already established for his audience how the new commander of the Ukrainian army was to be regarded, what threat he posed to Russia, and the ideological framework through which his future actions were to be interpreted.
The Center for Civic Monitoring (CCM) reported this on Telegram, citing a post by Bishop Savva himself, who serves as a vicar of the Moscow Patriarch, deputy chancellor of the Moscow Patriarchate, head of its Control and Analysis Service, and chairman of the Synodal Missionary Department.
Savva (Tutunov) shared a post from another Russian outlet, "Starshie Eddy" (a nod to the "Elder Edda"), in which Drapaty was labeled with an ethnic slur, making it unequivocally clear how Drapaty should be treated — "you don't debate the enemy, you destroy him."
As the CCM notes, "the archbishop was not the author of the original statement, but he deliberately reposted it to his own channel, did not condemn the dehumanizing language, and used it as a starting point for a broader justification of the war." The CCM also states that what matters is not only the content of the reaction, but also how quickly it came.
"The Moscow Patriarchate did not wait for the newly appointed Commander-in-Chief to implement his own strategy, make high-profile decisions, or become the target of a prolonged campaign by Russian state media. Savva reacted to the very fact that a new Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine had been appointed and immediately offered his followers a ready-made lens through which to view him: Drapaty is not simply the Commander-in-Chief of Ukraine's Armed Forces, but the personification of an allegedly longstanding Russophobic program aimed at depriving Russia and the Russian people of their right to exist. This amounts to a form of ideological targeting. Mykhailo Drapaty is not yet being judged by the results of his tenure — he has already been cast as an enemy of 'Orthodoxy and Russia,'" the CCM emphasizes.
According to the CCM, when such a view of the enemy is promoted by such a high-ranking figure in the Moscow Patriarchate of the ROC, it is no longer simply a repost of aggressive rhetoric from another channel — "among segments of Orthodox, military, and nationalist audiences, it acquires additional normative weight."
Archbishop Savva does not directly threaten Major General Mykhailo Drapaty, nor does he publish any specific plan of action to counter him. "However, he is helping create an information environment in which violence against a designated enemy is presented in advance as morally justified. His episcopal rank lends this narrative religious legitimacy, while Savva's administrative position links it to the ROC's institutional center. The speed of this response shows that Savva is acting not as an outside church commentator, but as one of the channels through which the Moscow Patriarchate delivers its early ideological response to strategic developments in Ukraine," the Center for Civic Monitoring states, adding:
"In this sense, the ROC is increasingly and unmistakably functioning as what might be called a 'fifth branch of government' of the Kremlin — alongside the presidential administration, the government, the security apparatus, and the state propaganda system. Its particular role is not to formally make state decisions, but to define the moral and religious status of Russia's political and military adversaries. State propaganda names the enemy, the security services identify and pursue him, the army wages war against him, and the Moscow Patriarchate explains to its audience why the fight against him is allegedly not only politically necessary but also spiritually justified."
Researchers suggest that the speed of Archbishop Savva's response may also signal the launch of a targeted information campaign against the new Commander-in-Chief of Ukraine's Armed Forces.
"Further indicators of this could include attempts to portray Mykhailo Drapaty as a 'persecutor of canonical Orthodoxy,' a serviceman dependent on Western intelligence services, an ideological Russophobe, or an agent carrying out an external plan to destroy 'historical Rus.' Under this model, future decisions by the Ukrainian command will not shape the image of the enemy, but will instead be used to confirm an image that has already been constructed in advance."
The article titled "The Orthodox-Chekist Mobilization of Archbishop Savva (Tutunov)" opens its analysis of the archbishop's recent activities with this episode: "His post is not only about Major General M. V. Drapaty. It demonstrates the mechanism by which the ROC promptly responds to personnel and strategic changes in Ukraine, shapes attitudes toward them among its own followers, and recasts military and political developments as a metaphysical confrontation."