On the sureties for Metropolitan Arseniy and "Che Guevara"

Phanar’s Exarch in court. Photo: Suspilne

On 18 November, Orthodox Ukraine was stunned by the appearance of Bishop Michael (Anishchenko), the exarch of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, at the High Anti-Corruption Court. He came to the hearing of former Deputy Prime Minister Oleksii Chernyshov – a key figure in the “Mindich case” – and announced his readiness to stand surety for him.

According to NABU, Chernyshov was involved in vast corruption schemes that caused the state hundreds of millions of dollars in damage. Investigators say that Chernyshov (known among the corrupt networks by the nickname “Che Guevara”) received more than 1.2 million dollars and almost 100,000 euros in cash.

It was for this man that a bishop of the Ecumenical Patriarchate came to vouch.

A desire to help someone in trouble is, of course, a noble impulse. But for a hierarch, such an act would appear honorable only under one condition: if he were convinced of Chernyshov’s innocence – if Chernyshov were his spiritual child, confessed regularly, received Communion, and lived a genuine church life.

But is that the case? No. Chernyshov has never once appeared at St. Andrew’s Church, where the exarch serves. Moreover, there is no indication that he has ever attended an Orthodox service at all.

Society is outraged by the scale of corruption uncovered in the “Mindich case” and is firmly set against its participants. Bishop Michael, being an intelligent man, cannot fail to understand that stepping forward for “Che Guevara” casts a very heavy shadow over him. So why did the exarch go to court?

He told Left Bank that he had previously “crossed paths” with Chernyshov and knows him “as a good man,” and that Chernyshov’s aides had “asked” him to come.

Many people “crossed paths” with Che Guevara during his time as deputy prime minister. But only Bishop Michael showed up in court. Perhaps the request came in such a way that refusing to help Zelensky’s "kum" (godfather of his children – Ed.) was simply impossible?

And one more thing. Not long ago there was another high-profile trial – that of Bishop Michael’s brother in the episcopate, Metropolitan Arseniy. We would hardly be mistaken in calling him a righteous man – a Man with a capital M. There are a few people who, at every hearing, ask the court to release the metropolitan on surety. Yes, there is still no result, but we are grateful to them for their steadfastness.

It is just deeply regrettable that among these people there is no exarch of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, Bishop Michael. But it seems he has made his choice.

Read also

Portrait of the “сonscience of the nation”

Shevchuk waxes eloquent about the uniqueness of the Ukrainian nation and the value of human life – while supporting the sweeping mobilization that is grinding that very nation down.

OCU in the Lavra: When a recording replaces the choir

Parishioners have been pushed out of the Lavra. The monks are barred from the churches. But there is room for a handful of OCU “monks.”

Sviatohirsk murder no one is allowed to talk about

Logic suggests that Zelensky was informed about the monk’s murder that very day.

Sviatohirsk Lavra tragedy: A confession of faith or not?

The killers came to the monastery and, after hearing the words “Glory to our Lord God” in response, began to kill. What matters is that the victims were given a choice: they could give the “right” answer and escape death.

Have the talking points on the Sviatohirsk murder already been rolled out?

Espreso gives viewers the unmistakable impression that nothing particularly terrible happened – and that no one should feel too sorry for the “Moscow Patriarchate monks.”

Why are a rabbi and an exarch pleading for corruption suspects?

The rabbi and the exarch are both highly intelligent men and cannot fail to understand that their actions are dealing a serious blow to their reputations. Yet they still went to court. Why?