The ROC and the KGB: The Story of a “Prodigal Cohabitation”

Dr. Serhii Shumylo*

 The ROC and the KGB: The Story of a “Prodigal Cohabitation”.

On the Involvement of the Moscow Patriarchate in Cooperation with the Communist Special Services and the Destruction of Church Opposition in the USSR[1]

Abstract. The article analyses the events and processes of the 1920s-1980s in subordinating the activities of the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (ROC MP) to the Soviet secret services. The author examines the events of the 1920s when, with the intervention of the OGPU, an intra-church coup was organised in the ROC and a ‘Provisional Synod’ of Metropolitan Sergei Stragorodsky was established, which in 1927 proclaimed full loyalty to the communist regime. According to the author’s conclusions, these events radically changed the further development of the RPC, causing intra-church polemics and schism. Not accepting the new course of loyalty to the Soviet regime and co-operation with its repressive organs, a significant part of the episcopate and clergy formed a church opposition known as the ‘non-commemorators’ movement. Due to the total repression of the opposition by the Soviet security services, it was forced to go into an illegal situation in the 1930s, which gave it the name ‘Catacomb Church’ (also in NKVD investigative files this movement was often referred to as ‘True Orthodox Church’). The author concludes that by destroying the church opposition with the help of the loyal clergy of the Moscow Patriarchate, the Soviet regime planned to destroy the remnants of Metropolitan Sergei Stragorodsky loyal church structure as well. The events of World War II changed these plans, forcing the Stalinist regime to begin using the Moscow Patriarchate for international activities. According to the author, Stalin’s ‘reset’ of the Moscow Patriarchate took place in 1943 for this purpose. At the same time, while restoring and strengthening the loyal church structure of the Moscow Patriarchate, the Stalinist regime completely destroyed any manifestations of church alternative after the end of World War II in the occupied territories. The structures of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (UGCC), the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (UAOC), the True Orthodox Church (TOC), the Belarusian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (BAOC), the Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church (EAOC), the Latvian Orthodox Autonomous Church (LOAC) and other alternative jurisdictions were subjected to repression and liquidation. With the help of the brutal repressive policy of the Soviet regime in the USSR from the late 1940s, the church monopoly of one structure – ROC MP – was secured. According to the author’s conclusion, from this period the Soviet secret services (MGB – KGB) began to actively use their agents in the ROC MP for espionage and intelligence activities abroad, participation in various international and ecumenical events, dissemination and promotion of decisions and narratives necessary for the Soviet regime. These representatives of the ‘new type’ of Soviet clergy, even with the weakening of the communist regime in the late 1980s and early 1990s, resisted democratic changes in society in every possible way, opposed the collapse of the USSR, the processes of national revival and the acquisition of state independence by the republics. Remaining in the leadership of ROC MPs after the collapse of the USSR, they not only did not free themselves from the captivity of the Soviet security services, but also became in the vanguard of their return to power and neo-Soviet restoration in the Russian Federation.

Keywords: Russian World, ROC MP, Moscow Patriarchate, USSR, Russian Federation, OGPU, NKVD, MGB, KGB, Stalin, Sergei Stragorodsky, Kirill Gundyaev, Russian aggression

Can a good tree bear evil fruit, and a bad tree bear good fruit? (Matthew 7:18). With reference to these words from the Gospel of Matthew, I would like to begin our discussion of the current state of the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (ROC MP).

There is an opinion that the current problems in the ROC MP are connected exclusively with the personality of its patriarch Kirill Gundyaev. However, is this really the case? Are the problems of the whole system really centered in one man?

It is obvious that ROC MP is experiencing a deep crisis. But what are its essence and causes? The success of treatment of any disease, first of all, depends on the correctness of diagnosis. And this requires delving into the medical history.

This task raises another question: can the present-day structure of the Moscow Patriarchate be considered the legitimate legal successor of the centuries-old Russian Church? Such a question inevitably refers us to the ecclesiastical events and debates of the late 1920s-1930s. That discussion was not finalized in a natural way. It was artificially suppressed by the Soviet punitive organs by means of brutal repression and physical destruction of the opposition. Since this word in our history was never spoken to the end, it remains relevant, also in the context of modernity.

Sergianism: from an illegal church coup to “common joys” with the totalitarian regime

Undoubtedly, the most important event in the life of the Orthodox Russian Church in the 20th century was the Local Council (Sobor) of 1917-1918. With the democratic transformations that began in the country in February 1917, the Orthodox Church, which had been deprived of canonical church governance and a conciliar system for 200 years, was for the first time granted the right to convene a church-wide Local Council (Sobor). After centuries of being under the pressure of the imperial system, where the Church was deprived of internal freedom and was assigned only the role of a state appendage or a “spiritual department,” there was hope for its reboot and free development. The Council (Sobor) laid the foundation for significant reforms of church life on the basis of democratization and internal spiritual freedom[2]. However, his decisions were never implemented due to the gross interference of the Bolsheviks, who soon seized power and unleashed persecution against any manifestations of dissent and religion.

The communist regime aimed to completely eradicate religion, belief in God, any churches and their ministers. However, this task was met with resistance from the believing population. Realizing that it was impossible to completely eradicate religion from the people, the Soviet repressive authorities (Cheka-OGPU-NKVD) made attempts to put the Church at the service of their interests. In parallel with the arrests and executions of “unreliable” bishops and priests, the punitive authorities inspired a number of schisms within the Church, and recruited individual hierarchs and clergy as secret agents. Thus, in the 1920s, the Renovationist (obnovlenchestvo) and other schisms emerged within the Russian Church[3].

In the midst of the tragic events of the 1920s and 1930s, one of the most serious challenges for the Russian Church was the loss of the principle of “sobornost” and the succession of legitimate church authority, followed by the loss of the internal spiritual freedom of the Church.

Two years after the death of Patriarch Tikhon (Belavin) of Moscow, in 1927, several events occurred that still have serious consequences for the Church in Russia. First of all, it was a church coup organized under the leadership of the head of the 6th department of the OGPU, Yevgeny Tuchkov. As a result of a successful special operation, the former Renovationist Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky), recruited by the OGPU, was put in charge of the Church[4]. In his claims to church power, he relied not on the conciliar will of the Church, but on the will of the Soviet punitive bodies (OGPU-NKVD).

Shortly before that, a new legitimate primate of the Russian Church had been elected by a written survey and collection of signatures from the bishops. By a majority of the bishops’ votes (72 votes in favor), the lot fell on Metropolitan Kirill (Smirnov, †1937) of Kazan[5]. The OGPU quickly tried to intervene and prevent the election of an unwanted hierarch. Most of the participants in the secret conciliar vote were arrested and thrown into prisons and camps[6].

One of those arrested in this case was Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky), who, unlike other bishops, was soon released[7]. After agreeing to cooperate with the OGPU, he accepted their offer to establish a new “Provisional Patriarchal Synod” under their control from among the bishops recruited by the Soviet secret services[8]. The members of this unauthorized body were not elected by anyone. It was selected and formed in the OGPU on the basis of loyalty to the Soviet regime and willingness to cooperate with the state security agencies. It is not surprising that immediately after its foundation, it received registration, although before that, the “Tikhonov” Church administration had been denied this for many years[9].

In fact, in 1927, with the intervention of the OGPU, a new church structure was created under the guise of the “old” one, which was under the full control of the Soviet regime. Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky), who headed it, exceeded the powers of the “Temporary Deputy Locum Tenens” entrusted to him earlier and, illegally appropriating the power of the First Hierarch, caused a new split in the Church[10]. In his name, this movement was called the “Sergian Church” or “Sergianism”[11].

One of the first acts of the Sergius “Provisional Synod” was the issuance of the so-called “Declaration of Loyalty to Soviet Power” on July 29, 1927[12]. In this document, on behalf of the entire Russian Church, the identity of the “joys and sorrows” of the communist regime and the Church was proclaimed for the first time. This was fundamentally different from the previous more restrained statements of Patriarch Tikhon and other bishops. The new church leadership declared a course of unconditional loyalty and cooperation with the Soviet government. In fact, it was a course of complete subordination of the Church to the Soviet state security agencies.

Internal church resistance and the struggle for church freedom

The illegitimate establishment of the “Provisional Synod” by Metropolitan Sergius and his issuance of the “Declaration of Loyalty” caused deep turmoil among the “Tikhonov’s” Church. Bishops and priests in many dioceses refused to recognize the canonicity of the newly formed “Synod” and its Declaration[13]. Metropolitan Sergiy was accused by many hierarchs of violating the principle of “Sobornost,” non-canonical usurpation of church authority and voluntary subordination of the Church to the interests of the God-fighting regime[14].

Similar to the Confessing Church (German: Bekennende Kirche) movement in Nazi Germany, an intra-church opposition movement spontaneously emerged in the USSR in the late 1920s and early 1930s, which in the literature was conventionally called “non-commemorators”[15]. In a number of regions, entire dioceses headed by bishops declare that they do not recognize Metropolitan Sergius’ authority. Among the leaders of the opposition are such prominent hierarchs as Metropolitan Kirill (Smirnov, †1937) of Kazan, Metropolitan Agafangel (Preobrazhensky, †1928) of Yaroslavl, Metropolitan Joseph (Petrovykh, †1937) of Petrograd, Archbishop Seraphim (Samoilovich, †1937) of Uglich, Archbishop Andrei (Ukhtomsky, †1937) of Ufa, and many others[16]. All of them, because of their principled position, would later tragically end their lives in the torture chambers of Stalin’s prisons and concentration camps.

Calls for the preservation of the internal spiritual freedom of the Church and the impossibility of its serving the interests of an atheistic state became the leitmotif of the polemics of many opposition hierarchs with Metropolitan Sergius in these years[17]. It was a debate not so much about the system of political organization as about what the Church is, what its nature, mission, and purpose are. It was of an ecclesiological nature. The question was not just about ordinary “loyalty” to a particular system of government (regardless of its forms). It was about the identity of interests (common “joys and sorrows”) of the church and the regime, which aimed to completely eradicate any religion. And about the inadmissibility of the Church’s service to these criminal interests. This was a fundamental difference from the Church’s loyalty to the former regimes that declared their external devotion or loyalty to Christianity.

But many “non-commemorators” went even further in their views of the Church’s mission than simply disagreeing with a particular ideology. In the spirit of the Local Council (Sobor) policy of 1917-1918, which welcomed democratic transformations and the liberation of the Church from the dictates of the state, they insisted on the principle of preserving the internal spiritual freedom of the Church before any state authority, whether monarchy, democracy, authoritarianism, or totalitarianism. The limit of possible compromises with the state was determined by this criterion – internal spiritual freedom and independence from any external influences[18].

This was a new word in Orthodox theological thought in the former empire, so uncharacteristic of it in previous times. The fact that these ideas were publicly expressed by the hierarchs of the Church not in conditions of external freedom, but under the threat of arrest and repression, and often from prison, makes them especially valuable and relevant, in particular for our time. Unfortunately, this heritage of the twentieth-century martyrs and confessors has remained virtually unknown and unclaimed in the post-Soviet Church.

By the early 1930s, the intra-church movement of “non-commemorators” to one degree or another covered almost all dioceses of the “Tikhonov” Church, including Ukraine[19]. In conditions of relative freedom, this intra-church movement would definitely have been widespread and would have influenced the development of the Orthodox Church, making it completely different from what it is today. But the Soviet repressive authorities, in close cooperation with Metropolitan Sergius’ “Provisional Synod,” did everything they could to destroy both the movement and its representatives.

Metropolitan Sergius subjected dissenting bishops to removal from their sees, “bans from the priesthood,” and “excommunication”[20] (in fact, the same thing that Patriarch Kirill Gundyaev is doing now with regard to “anti-war” priests of the Russian Orthodox Church). For the OGPU-NKVD, disobedience to Metropolitan Sergius’ “Provisional Synod” and non-recognition of his ‘Declaration’ was sufficient to be accused of involvement in the “anti-Soviet church underground,” which resulted in long prison terms and concentration camps (10 to 25 years) or executions[21].

Suppression of the opposition. The emergence of the Catacomb Church

In the late 1920s and early 1930s, the first wave of arrests of disobedient hierarchs took place. In 1929 alone, more than 15 bishops who had separated from Metropolitan Sergius were arrested, and the “Provisional Synod” immediately appointed loyal bishops to the vacant sees who had been “interviewed” by the OGPU[22]. The communist regime, with the help of Metropolitan Sergius, carried out a kind of “selection” (purges) among the episcopate and “rebooted” the Russian Orthodox Church. Only those who confirmed their loyalty and agreed to be a secret agent of the Soviet secret services were allowed to manage dioceses. Those who disagreed were sentenced to long prison terms or shot[23].

From March to October 1929, the Chekists carried out the first stage of an all-Union operation to destroy the church opposition: mass arrests took place in many regions of the country. According to incomplete statistics, more than 5,000 clergymen were arrested during that year[24].

Since then, the opposition of “non-commemorators” has had a new unofficial name – the “True Orthodox Church” (TOC) (this movement should not be confused with the old-calendar groups in Greece, which, although they also used the name “True Orthodox Church”, but they were completely different and unrelated movements, which arose for different reasons, in other conditions and countries). It was under this name that it was “registered” in the materials of the OGPU-NKVD investigative cases[25]. For some unknown reason, the Chekists threw this name at the church opposition, and thus it gradually stuck with it. The more the Soviet regime and the Synod of Sergius persecuted the opposition, the more the spontaneous movement acquired the features of organized resistance.

From July 1931 to April 1932, mass arrests of supporters of the anti-Sergius opposition again swept through all regions of the USSR. The number of arrested clergymen during this period exceeded 19,000[26].

In the face of total repression, arrests, and the defeat of the anti-Sergius opposition, the movement’s remaining representatives began to turn to illegal activities in the mid-1930s in order to preserve themselves. In fact, the remnants of the opposition were driven deep underground, after which it lost the ability to influence the masses.

Thus, on the basis of the spontaneous “non-commemorators” movement, a new movement emerged in the USSR – the ‘catacomb’ (i.e., underground) movement, which was unofficially called the “Catacomb Church”[27]. In the materials of the NKVD investigative cases, it continued to be called the “True Orthodox Church” (TOC). The forced retreat of the Church into the “catacombs” was justified by its followers as a necessity to preserve its internal freedom and independence from the God-fighting state.

The peak of repression against this movement occurred in 1937-1938, when more than 40 bishops and thousands of priests were shot throughout the country in NKVD torture chambers on massively fabricated cases of the “anti-Soviet TOC underground.” The exact numbers have not yet been established.

In addition to persecuting the followers of the Catacomb Church, the Soviet repressive authorities during this period completely defeated the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (UAOC) and a number of other Orthodox and Protestant movements. Catholics, Jews, Muslims, and Buddhists were also subjected to brutal repression and extermination.

Knowing about such reprisals, Metropolitan Sergius and his “Provisional Synod” not only did not stand up for the innocent victims, but also publicly stated to the whole world that there were no religious repressions in the USSR and that bishops and priests were serving just punishment exclusively for “political crimes”[28].

However, such statements did not prevent the regime from subsequently cracking down on the Sergius group. After the massacre of the anti-Sergius opposition, the same fate awaited the clergy loyal to the Soviet government. According to some estimates, by 1940 there were just over 100 active churches in the RSFSR under the jurisdiction of Metropolitan Sergius[29]. His Declaration not only did not save anyone from persecution, but, on the contrary, led to increased repression[30]. First, opposition religious organizations and religious worshipers were subject to extermination, and then all religious organizations and worshipers without exception, even those loyal to the communist regime, such as the “Sergians” and “Renovationists.” Only the Second World War saved them from total destruction.

Stalin’s “reset” of the Moscow Patriarchate

Since 1943, there has been a change in the Stalinist regime’s policy toward religion and the church. Having failed in the war with Nazi Germany, Stalin was forced to appeal to the leaders of Western countries (the United States and Great Britain) for military assistance and the opening of a “second front.” Negotiations within the framework of the Tehran Conference of the Allied Countries of the Anti-Hitler Coalition, which was being prepared for November 1943, were vital for the Stalinist regime. But for this to happen, it was necessary to demonstrate to the Western Allies its readiness for democratic transformation and the restoration of religious freedom[31]. Therefore, to ensure successful negotiations, it was decided to use the influence of religious organizations to create a positive “democratic” image of the USSR.

To this end, a delegation of the Church of England was invited to the USSR for the first time. Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky), who was hastily elevated to the rank of patriarch to add weight, was entrusted with the negotiations[32].

On the night of September 4-5, 1943, by order of Stalin, three remaining Sergian bishops were brought to him in the Kremlin – Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky) himself, as well as Metropolitan Alexy (Simansky) and Metropolitan Nikolai (Yarushevich)[33]. At this meeting, Stalin instructed the three metropolitans to reboot their church organization and convene a Bishops’ Council (which, however, did not represent even 70% of the Russian Church hierarchy).

The result of this event was the proclamation of Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky) as “Patriarch of Moscow” without alternative[34]. At the same time, at Stalin’s personal insistence, the title was amended and instead of being called “all Rossia”, as it had been under Patriarch Tikhon, it became “all Rus” (in order to substantiate Stalin’s claims to the heritage of Kyivan Rus). The assembly reestablished the Synod, which had been inactive since 1934. Also from that moment on, the name “Russian Orthodox Church” (ROC) was finally adopted for the Sergian structure, instead of the name “Orthodox Rossian Church” (ORC), which had been used under Patriarch Tikhon.

To control the ROC, on Stalin’s orders, a special state body was created under the USSR Council of People’s Commissars – the Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church (CA ROC), headed by Colonel G. Karpov, head of the 5th (Church) Department of the 2nd Directorate of the NKGB of the USSR[35]. The Patriarch and members of the Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church had to coordinate all their actions with this controlling body, which had a double subordination to the Soviet People’s Commissariat and the NKGB of the USSR[36].

A week after his enthronement, Patriarch Sergius received in Moscow a long-awaited delegation of the Church of England led by Archbishop Cyril Garbett of York, who later told the New York Times and other Western media that “there is complete freedom of religion in the Soviet Union”[37]. From this moment on, the Moscow Patriarchate was particularly actively involved and used in defending and promoting the interests of the Soviet totalitarian regime at the international level[38]. At the same time, recruitment among the clergy and bishops and the work of MGB-KGB agents in the structures of the ROC are being intensified[39].

Gradually, the participation of the Moscow Patriarchate in foreign events became one of the priority areas of activity, which was supervised directly by the Council for the Affairs of the ROC and the NKGB-MGB of the USSR[40]. On April 4, 1946, a special Department for External Church Relations (DECR) was established within the structure of the ROC MP[41], whose employees were specially recruited by the MGB-KGB for further agent activities abroad. This department was directly subordinated to the MGB-KGB supervisors, and even the Moscow patriarchs could not actually influence it.

A separate and little-studied topic is the use by the KGB of its agents in the Russian Orthodox Church for espionage and intelligence activities abroad, their participation in various international and ecumenical events, and the dissemination and promotion of decisions and narratives necessary for the Soviet regime. This topic still requires comprehensive research and disclosure. Unfortunately, this is hindered by the strict secrecy of the KGB archives in Moscow.

Establishment of the “spiritual monopoly” of the ROC MP and destruction of the opposition

It should be noted that since 1946, the Stalinist regime has been intensifying its campaign to deliberately destroy any alternative church jurisdictions and movements and to establish a complete monopoly in the USSR of one “pocket” church structure, the ROC MP. Through brutal repression, the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, the Ukrainian and Belarusian Autocephalous Orthodox Churches, the Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church (EAOC) and the Latvian Orthodox Autonomous Church (LOAC) under the jurisdiction of the Church of Constantinople, other parishes of the Ecumenical Patriarchate (including in Transcarpathia), as well as dioceses and parishes of the Romanian and Serbian Churches were forcibly liquidated. The Ukrainian Autonomous Church and the “Renovationist” Church were also liquidated. In addition, the campaign to identify and completely destroy underground communities of the Catacomb or True Orthodox Church (TOC) was intensified. The clergy and parishes were forced by the state security authorities to transfer to the ROC-MP, and those who disagreed were subjected to arrest and long prison terms. Thus, in the second half of the 1940s, a complete monopoly of the ROC MP, controlled and loyal to the communist regime, was imposed in the USSR.

But even under these conditions, the church opposition in the USSR continued to exist, although it was driven underground and deprived of the ability to influence the masses. Despite the official “liquidation,” secret Greek Catholic bishops and priests continued their illegal activities under threat of death[42]. Also, despite massive repressions against the followers of the Catacomb Church (another name for the True Orthodox Church), by the early 1960s there were still at least 100 secret priests of this movement and more than 1,000 “catacomb” (underground) TOC communities in the USSR[43]. This topic of the history and secret ministry of the Catacomb Church in the USSR is still poorly understood and unclaimed because of the longstanding “taboo” on it by the Moscow Patriarchate, which during Soviet times helped repressive authorities suppress church opposition.

In identifying and eliminating these and other underground church groups, the local departments for religious affairs and the KGB were often assisted by priests and bishops of the Moscow Patriarchate recruited as secret state security agents[44]. At the same time, with the emergence of the dissident movement in the USSR, the leadership of the Moscow Patriarchate tried to suppress any opposition within its structure. In particular, in 1965, Archbishop Germogen (Golubev), who refused to close churches in his diocese, was removed from the administration of the diocese at the request of the administrator of the Moscow Patriarchate, Archbishop Alexei Ridiger (KGB agent “Drozdov”), and placed under house arrest in the Zhyrovychi Monastery. Priests Gleb Yakunin and Nikolai Eshliman, who opposed the violation of the rights of believers in the USSR, were banned from priesthood. Many other, lesser-known priests of the ROC who dared to express disagreement with the official course of the church leadership were also subjected to church sanctions[45].

A sad page in the history of the Russian Orthodox Church during this period was the campaign to close existing parishes. Out of 14477 patriarchal churches operating in the USSR in 1949, 7523 remained open by 1966[46]. Accordingly, by 1966, more than 7,000 ROC clergymen had been deprived of their parishes, registration, and livelihoods. At the same time, the closure of churches was no longer carried out by the Soviet authorities, but by the ruling bishops of the Moscow Patriarchate, who, on orders from the Department for Religious Affairs, obediently closed these churches themselves. And priests who dared to protest such actions of the bishops were subjected to church sanctions and bans[47].

The “New Type” of Soviet Clergy

The leadership of the Council for Religious Affairs in its reports in 1979 proudly stated that as a result of many years of preventive measures, the Soviet authorities managed to selectively breed and form a “new type” of Soviet clergy in the ROC, who simultaneously believed “in God and in communism”[48] and “in words and deeds confirm not only loyalty but also patriotism to the socialist society”[49].  He was a type of unprincipled opportunist and careerist, often self-serving and morally corrupt. It was easy for KGB officers to control such people by blackmailing them with available dirt on them. Therefore, with the assistance of the Soviet secret services, they quickly made a church career, occupying leading positions in the hierarchy.

As Deputy Chairman of the Council for Religious Affairs V. Furov noted in his report, “we have developed a clear and broad system of educating the bishops, and through them the ordinary clergy, in political terms, forming patriotism, civic duty, respect for the laws and activities of the Soviet government”[50]. At the same time, as he specifies, “no ordination as bishops, no transfer takes place without a thorough check of candidates by the responsible employees of the Council in close connection with the authorized, local bodies and relevant interested organizations” (i.e. the KGB)[51].

Therefore, it is not surprising that in the late 1980s and early 1990s the Soviet hierarchs of the ROC MP resisted democratic transformations in society in every possible way, actively opposing the collapse of the USSR, the processes of national revival and the republics’ gaining state independence, as well as the restoration of the Ukrainian and Belarusian Autocephalous Orthodox Churches (UAOC and BAOC), the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (UGCC), the Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church (EAOC) and the Latvian Orthodox Autonomous Church (LOAC) under the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the Bessarabian Metropolis of the Romanian Orthodox Church in Moldova, the Russian True Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Free Church under the jurisdiction of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR), and other alternative jurisdictions.

According to confession of the former Exarch of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine, Metropolitan Filaret (Denysenko), no bishop of the Russian Orthodox Church in Soviet times could be appointed to a see without the consent of the KGB[52]. The KGB archives, partially declassified in 1991-1992, showed that most of the well-known hierarchs of the Moscow Patriarchate were secret agents or KGB officers[53]. Their active international activities in the ecumenical and peacekeeping field were supervised directly by the KGB[54].

Among the declassified secret KGB officers, in particular, there are agent “Sviatoslav” – Metropolitan Nikodim (Rotov) of Leningrad, agent “Drozdov” – Metropolitan Alexy (Ridiger) of Leningrad and Moscow Patriarch, agent “Mikhailov” – Metropolitan Kirill (Gundyaev) of Kaliningrad and current Moscow Patriarch, and dozens of other names of well-known ROC hierarchs[55].

None of them ever repented for their longstanding collaboration with the KGB. The ROC never underwent the lustration that many hoped for in the 1990s. Remaining in the leadership of the ROC, these “agents in cassocks” continued to defend the interests of the Russian special services with the help of the Church even after the collapse of the USSR. This was especially acute when former KGB lieutenant colonel Vladimir Putin came to power in the Russian Federation, and many leading positions in the state were occupied by former KGB officers. It is not surprising that the long-time KGB agent “Mikhailov” (aka Kirill Gundyaev), as head of the Russian Orthodox Church, became one of the main adherents and ideologues of the new Chekist regime of the Russian Federation, justifying and blessing all its crimes in the name of the Church[56].

A paradoxical situation arose when, with the fall of the communist regime, the ROC MP not only did not free itself from the captivity of the Soviet special services, but to some extent became at the forefront of their return to power and neo-Soviet restoration in Russia. While in 1927 Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky) and other hierarchs from his group cooperated with the OGPU out of fear for their lives, in the 2000s Moscow Patriarch Kirill Gundyaev voluntarily put the ROC at the service of the Chekist junta, turning the Church into an ideological and propaganda mouthpiece of the totalitarian regime of the Russian Federation. The ROC-MP, represented by its patriarch and other influential hierarchs, has become a conductor of anti-evangelical quasi-religious and fundamentalist ideas of the “Russian world”[57]. For many years, they have been developing and promoting these ideas among Russian society and the ruling elite in order to establish them as the official state ideology, thereby laying the groundwork for Russia’s claims to the former territories of the USSR and the Russian Empire and for its war of aggression against Ukraine and other independent states.

Reflecting on this, I would like to turn once again to the Gospel words of Christ: can a good tree bear evil fruit, and a bad tree bear good fruit? (Matthew 7:18).

After the collapse of communist tyranny, was it possible to revive a full-fledged healthy spiritual life on the basis of the old Soviet system of the Moscow Patriarchate without all the ugly and painful manifestations that we see in it now? Or does it need to be completely dismantled and rebooted, along with the repressive KGB-FSB system that spawned it?

We need an honest and diverse discussion on this issue, otherwise we will be doomed to continue to walk in a vicious circle of the same problems.

*Dr. Serhii Shumylo, Ph.D. in History, Doctor of Theology (Th.Dr.),

Director of the International Institute of the Athonite Legacy,

Honorary Research Fellow at the University of Exeter (UK),

Research Fellow of the Institute of History of Ukraine, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine,

Associate Professor of the T.H. Shevchenko National University “Chernihiv Colehium”,

Honored Worker of Ukraine Culture (Kyiv, Ukraine).

E-mail: institute@afon.org.ua

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7041-7766

References

Alekseeva, L. (2012). Istoriya inakomysliya v SSSR : novejshij period [History of Dissent in the USSR: The Modern Period]. Mosk. Hel’sink. Gruppa, P. 192 – 202. Moscow. Russian.

Berman, A., Skakun, R. (2018). «Obespechivat’ proverennoj agenturoj iz chisla duhovenstva»: Direktivy NKGB SSSR o Pomestnyh Soborah Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi 1943 i 1945 gg. iz arhiva Sluzhby bezopasnosti Ukrainy [‘Provide proven agents from among the clergy’: Directives of the NKGB of the USSR on the Local Councils of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1943 and 1945 from the archive of the Security Service of Ukraine]. Cerkovno-istoricheskij vestnik, 2017/2018, № 24–25, P. 247–258. Moscow. Russian.

Borutska, O. (2012). Pidpilna diialnist UHKTs v chasy radianskoho totalitaryzmu u 60-kh rr. XX st. [Underground activity of the UGCC during the Soviet totalitarianism in the 60s of the twentieth century]. Istoriia relihii v Ukraini, № 22, Kn. I, P. 728-729. Ukrainian.

Botsiurkiv, B. (1993). Ukrainska Hreko-Katolytska Tserkva v katakombakh (1946-1989) [Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church in the Catacombs: 1946-1989]. Zbirnyk statei z tserkovnoi istorii, Ch. 1, P. 130-132. Instytut istorychnykh doslidzhen Lvivskoho derzhavnoho universytetu im. I. Franka, Instytut istorii Tserkvy, Lviv. Ukrainian.

Colquhoun, I. (2014). STALIN’S CONCORDAT – TURNING-POINT OF HISTORY. Polish News. URL: https://polishnews.com/stalin-s-concordat-turning-point-of-history

Cypin, V. (1994). Istoriya Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi: 1917 – 1990 [History of the Russian Orthodox Church: 1917 – 1990]. Moscow, Russian.

Cypin, V. (2010). Istoriya Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi: Sinodal’nyj i novejshij periody (1700-2005) [History of the Russian Orthodox Church: Synodal and Modern Periods: 1700-2005]. Sretenskij monastyr’, Moscow, Russian.

Ellis, D. (1990). Russkaya Pravoslavnaya Cerkov’: Soglasie i inakomyslie [The Russian Orthodox Church: Consent and Dissent]. London, Great Britan. Russian.

Gosudarstvo i cerkov’ v XX veke: Evolyuciya vzaimootnoshenij, politicheskij i sociokul’turnyj aspekty: Opyt Rossii i Evropy [The State and the Church in the XX century: Evolution of Relationships, Political and Socio-Cultural Aspects: The Experience of Russia and Europe] (2011). Librokom, P. 106-176. Moscow. Russian.

Gubonin, M. (1994). Akty svyatejshego patriarha Tihona i pozdnejshie dokumenty o preemstve vysshej cerkovnoj vlasti. 1917-1943 gg. [Acts of His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon and later documents on the succession of supreme ecclesiastical authority. 1917-1943]. Izd-vo Pravosl. Svyato-Tihonovskogo Bogoslovskogo Instituta, Moscow. Russian.

Mazyrin, A. (2006). Vysshie ierarhi o preemstve vlasti v Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi v 1920-h — 1930-h godah [The Highest Hierarchs on the Succession of Power in the Russian Orthodox Church in the 1920s – 1930s]. Izd-vo PSTGU, P. 57—196.  Moscow. Russian.

Mazyrin, A. (2018). «Nepominayushchie» [The non-commemorators]. Pravoslavnaya enciklopediya, T. XLIX, P. 15-20. Moscow. Russian.

Odincov, M. (2004). Velikaya Otechestvennaya vojna (1941–1945) i religioznye organizacii v SSSR [The Great Patriotic War (1941-1945) and religious organisations in the USSR]. Pravoslavnaya enciklopediya, T. 7, P. 407. Moscow. Russian.

Osipova, I. (2008). O, Premiloserdyj, budi s nami neotstupno… Vospominaniya veruyushchih Istinno-Pravoslavnoj (katakombnoj) Cerkvi. Konec 1920-h – nachalo 1970-h godov [Merciful One, be with us unceasingly… Memories of the believers of the True Orthodox (Catacomb) Church. Late 1920s – early 1970s]. Bratonezh, Moscow. Russian.

Pivovarov, N. (2017). Kogo priglashali v SSSR i kogo otpravlyali za granicu po religioznoj linii (1943-1985 gg.) [Who was invited to the USSR and who was sent abroad on religious lines (1943-1985)]. Gosudarstvo, religiya, cerkov’ v Rossii i za rubezhom, №1, P. 185-215. Moscow. Russian.

Pospelovskij, D. (1995). Russkaya pravoslavnaya cerkov’ v XX veke [Russian Orthodox Church in the XX century]. Moscow. Russian.

Regel’son, L. (1977). Tragediya Russkoj Cerkvi, 1917-1945 [Tragedy of the Russian Church, 1917-1945]. Imka-press, Paris, France. Russian.

Shkarovskij, M. (1999). Russkaya Pravoslavnaya Cerkov’ pri Staline i Hrushchyove [Russian Orthodox Church under Stalin and Khrushchev]. Moscow, Russian.

Shkarovskij, M. (2006). Sud’by iosiflyanskih pastyrej. Iosiflyanskoe dvizhenie Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi v sud’bah ego uchastnikov [Fates of Iosiflian pastors. Iosiflian Movement of the Russian Orthodox Church in the Fates of its Participants]. Satis, St Petersburg. Russian.

Shumilo, V. V. (2021). Istynno-pravoslavna (Katakombna) tserkva na Chernihivshchyni u 20–30-kh rr. XX st. [True Orthodox (Catacomb) Church in Chernihiv region in the 20s and 30s of the 20th c.]. Chernihiv, Ukraine.

Shumylo, S. V. (2011). V katakombah. Pravoslavnoe podpol’e v SSSR. Konspekt po istorii Istinno-Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi v SSSR [In catacombs. Orthodox underground in the USSR. Conspectus on the History of the True Orthodox Church in the USSR]. Teren, Luck, Ukraine. Russian.

Shumylo, S. V. (2022). Falshyvi «prorotstva» chernihivskoho «arkhyiepyskopa» Kheruvyma Dehtiaria yak pidgruntia voiovnychykh mistyfikatsii moskovskoho patriarkha Kirila [False ‘prophecies’ of Chernihiv ‘Archbishop’ Cherub Degtyar as the basis for the bellicose mystifications of Moscow Patriarch Kirill]. Siverianskyi litopys: Vseukrainskyi naukovyi zhurnal, № 5-6 (167-168), P. 157 – 166. Ukrainian.

Shumylo, S. V. (2022). Ideia «russkoho mira» yak teolohiia viiny moskovskoho patriarkha Kirila: do postanovky problem [The idea of the ‘Russian world’ as a theology of war of Moscow Patriarch Kirill: to the problem statement]. Siverianskyi litopys: Vseukrainskyi naukovyi zhurnal, № 4 (166), P. 126 – 134. Ukrainian.

Shumylo, S. V. (2024). «Zvychainyi fashyzm», abo «Russkii mir» Moskovskoho patriarkha Kirila yak apolohiia antykhrystyianstva, ksenofobii ta nasylstva [‘Ordinary Fascism’ or ‘Russian World’ of Moscow Patriarch Kirill as an Apology for Anti-Christianity, Xenophobia and Violence]. Siverianskyi litopys: Vseukrainskyi naukovyi zhurnal, № 2 (176), P. 148-160. Ukrainian.

Shumylo, S. V. (2024). Nelegal’nye svyazi mezhdu RPCZ i katakombnymi obshchinami v SSSR v 1960-e–1980-e gg. [Illegal Ties between ROCOR and Catacomb Communities in the USSR in the 1960s-1980s]. Textus et Studia – is a scientific journal of the Institute of History of the John Paul II Pontifical University in Krakow, 1(37). Krakow, Poland. Russian.

Skakun, R. (2025). Ahentura NKVS–MDB–KDB u pravoslavnomu yepyskopati Ukrainy (1939–1964): formuvannia, funktsii, modeli povedinky [The NKVD-MGB-KGB agents in the Orthodox bishops of Ukraine (1939-1964): formation, functions, behavioural patterns]. Vydavnytstvo UKU, Lviv. Ukrainian.

Yakunin, G. (1995). Podlinnyj lik Moskovskoj patriarhii [The Genuine Face of the Moscow Patriarchate]. Moscow, Russian.

Zhuravskij, A. (2004). Vo imya pravdy i dostoinstva Cerkvi: ZHitie i trudy svyashchennomuchenika Kirilla Kazanskogo v kontekste istoricheskih sobytij i cerkovnyh razdelenij XX veka [In the Name of Truth and Dignity of the Church: The Life and Works of the Holy Martyr Cyril of Kazan in the Context of Historical Events and Church Divisions of the 20 Century]. Izd-vo Sretenskogo monastyrya, Moscow. Russian.

Сергей Шумило

РПЦ и КГБ: история «блудного сожительства». К вопросу о сотрудничестве Московской Патриархии с коммунистическими спецслужбами и разгроме церковной оппозиции в СССР

Абстракт. В статье анализируются события и процессы 1920-х – 1980-х годов по подчинению деятельности Русской Православной Церкви Московского Патриархата (РПЦ МП) советским спецслужбам. Автор рассматривает события 1920-х гг., когда при вмешательстве ОГПУ был организован внутрицерковный переворот в РПЦ и создан «Временный Синод» митрополита Сергея Страгородского, который в 1927 г. провозгласил полную лояльность к коммунистическому режиму. Согласно выводам автора, эти события кардинально изменили дальнейшее развитие РПЦ, вызвав внутрицерковную полемику и раскол. Не принимая новый курс лояльности к советскому режиму и сотрудничество с его репрессивными органами, значительная часть епископата и духовенства составили церковную оппозицию, известную как движение «непоминающих». Из-за тотальных репрессий советских спецслужб против оппозиции она в 1930-е гг. вынуждена была перейти на нелегальное положение, от чего у нее появилось название «Катакомбная Церковь» (также в следственных делах НКВД это движение нередко называли как «Истинно-Православная Церковь»). Автор приходит к выводу, что уничтожив с помощью лояльного духовенства Московской патриархии церковную оппозицию, советский режим планировал уничтожить и остатки лояльной к нему церковной структуры митрополита Сергея Страгородского. События Второй мировой войны изменили эти планы, заставив сталинский режим начать использование Московской патриархии в международной деятельности. По словам автора, с этой целью в 1943 г. произошла сталинская «перезагрузка» Московской патриархии. Одновременно, восстанавливая и усиливая лояльную церковную структуру Московской патриархии, сталинский режим после окончания Второй мировой войны на оккупированных территориях полностью уничтожает любые проявления церковной альтернативы. Репрессиям и ликвидации были подвергнуты структуры Украинской Греко-Католической Церкви (УГКЦ), Украинской Автокефальной Православной Церкви (УАПЦ), Истинно-Православной Церкви (ИПЦ), Белорусской Автокефальной Православной Церкви (БАПЦ), Эстонской Апостольской Православной Церкви (ЭАПЦ), Латвийской Православной Автономной Церкви (ЛПАЦ) и другие альтернативные юрисдикции. При помощи жестокой репрессивной политики советского режима в СССР с конца 1940-х годов была обеспечена церковная монополия одной структуры – РПЦ МП. Согласно заключению автора, с этого периода советские спецслужбы (МГБ – КГБ) начинают активно использовать свою агентуру в РПЦ МП для шпионско-разведывательной деятельности за рубежом, участия в различных международных и экуменических мероприятиях, распространении и продвижении необходимых советскому режиму решений и нарративов. Эти представители «нового типа» советского духовенства даже с ослаблением коммунистического режима в конце 1980-х – в нач. 1990-х гг. всячески сопротивлялись демократическим преобразованиям в обществе, выступали против распада СССР, против процессов национального возрождения и обретения республиками государственной независимости. Оставшись в руководстве РПЦ МП после распада СССР, они не только не освободились от плена советских спецслужб, но и стали в авангарде их возвращения к власти и неосоветской реставрации в РФ.

Ключевые слова: Русский мир, РПЦ МП, Московский патриархат, СССР, РФ, ОГПУ, НКВД, МГБ, КГБ, Сталин, Сергей Страгородский, Кирилл Гундяев, российская агрессия

Сергій Шумило

РПЦ та КДБ: історія «блудного співжиття». До питання про співпрацю Московської Патріархії з комуністичними спецслужбами та розгром церковної опозиції в СРСР

Анотація. У статті аналізуються події та процеси 1920-х – 1980-х років з підпорядкування діяльності Російської Православної Церкви Московського Патріархату (РПЦ МП) радянським спецслужбам. Автор розглядає події 1920-х рр., коли за втручання ОДПУ було організовано  внутрішньоцерковний переворот в РПЦ та утворено «Тимчасовий Синод» митрополита Сергія Страгородського, який в 1927 р. проголосив цілковиту лояльність до комуністичного режиму. За висновками автора, ці події кардинально змінили подальший поступ РПЦ, викликавши внутрішньоцерковну полеміку та розкол. Не приймаючи новий курс лояльності до радянського режиму та співпраці з його репресивними органами, значна частина єпископату та духовенства склали церковну опозицію, відому як рух «непоминаючих». Через тотальні репресії радянських спесцлужб проти опозиції вона в 1930-і рр. змушена була перейти на нелегальний стан, від чого у неї з’явилась назва «Катакомбна Церква» (також у слідчих справах НКВС цей рух нерідко називали як «Істинно-Православна Церква»). Автор приходить до висновку, що знищивши за допомоги лояльного духовенства Московської патріархії церковну опозицію, радянський режим за тим планував знищити і залишки лояльної до нього церковної структури митрополита Сергія Страгородського. Події Другої світової війни змінили ці плани, змусивши сталінський режим почати вокористовування Московської патріархії у міжнародній діяльності. За словами автора, з цією метою в 1943 р. відбулося сталінське «перезавантаження» Московської патріархії. Одночасно, відновлюючи та посилюючи лояльну до себе церковну структуру Московської патріархії, сталінський режим по закінченні Другої світової війни на окупованих територіях повністю знищує будь-які прояви церковної альтернативи. Репресіям та ліквідації були піддані структури Української Греко-Католицької Церкви (УГКЦ), Української Автокефальної Православної Церкви (УАПЦ), Істинно-Православної Церкви (ІПЦ), Білоруської Автокефальної Православної Церкви (БАПЦ), Естонської Апостольської Православної Церкви (ЕАПЦ), Латвійської Православної Автономної Церкви (ЛПАЦ) та інших альтернативних юрисдикцій. Завдяки жорсткій репресивній політиці радянського режиму в СРСР з кінця 1940-х років була забезпечена церковна монополія однієї структури – РПЦ МП. За висновком автора, з цього періоду радянські спецслужби (МДБ – КДБ) починають активно використовувати свою агентуру в РПЦ МП для шпигунсько-розвідувальної діяльності за кордоном, участі у різноманітних міжнародних та екуменічних заходах, поширенні та просуванні необхідних радянському режимові рішень і наративів. Ці представники «нового типу» радянського духовенства навіть з ослабленням комуністичного режиму наприкінці 1980-х – на поч. 1990-х рр. всіляко чинили опір демократичним перетворенням у суспільстві, виступали проти розпаду СРСР, проти процесів національного відродження та набуття республіками державної незалежності. Залишившись в керівництві РПЦ МП після розпаду СРСР, вони не тільки не звільнилася від полону радянських спецслужб, але й стали в авангарді їхнього повернення до влади та неорадянської реставрації в РФ.

Ключові слова: Русскій мір, РПЦ МП, Московський патріархат, СРСР, РФ, ОДПУ, НКВС, МДБ, КДБ, Сталін, Сергій Старогородський, Кіріл Гундяєв, російська агресія

[1] Presentation by Dr. Serhii Shumylo at the seminar “WHAT MEMORIAL POLICIES FOR THE DAY AFTER IN EUROPE?”, held as part of the 7th Normandy World Peace Forum, September 25, 2024 (Caen, France). The seminar was organized in partnership with the Collège des Bernardins (Paris, France) and the Normandy World Peace Forum.

[2] Регельсон Л. Л. Трагедия Русской Церкви, 1917-1945. Париж: Имка-пресс, 1977. С. 114-117.

[3] Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. Православное подполье в СССР. Конспект по истории Истинно-Православной Церкви в СССР. Луцк: Терен, 2011. С. 17; Регельсон Л. Л. Трагедия Русской Церкви, 1917-1945. Париж: Имка-пресс, 1977. С. 117; Поспеловский Д. В. Русская православная церковь в XX веке. М., 1995. С. 106; Мазырин А., иерей. Высшие иерархи о преемстве власти в Русской Православной Церкви в 1920-х — 1930-х годах. М.: Изд-во ПСТГУ, 2006. С. 57—196.

[4] Регельсон Л. Л. Op. cit. P. 117, 429; Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 37–40.

[5] Журавский А. В. Во имя правды и достоинства Церкви: Житие и труды священномученика Кирилла Казанского в контексте исторических событий и церковных разделений ХХ века. М.: Изд-во Сретенского монастыря, 2004. – С. 249; Мазырин А., иер. Высшие иерархи о преемстве власти… С. 57—196; Цыпин В. прот. История Русской Православной Церкви: Синодальный и новейший периоды (1700-2005). М.: Сретенский монастырь, 2010. С. 419-420; Регельсон Л.Л. Op. cit. С. 114.

[6] Журавский А.В. Op. cit. P. 277-278; Регельсон Л.Л. Op. cit. P. 114.

[7] Регельсон Л.Л. Ibid. P. 114; Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 37–40.

[8] Регельсон Л.Л. Ibid. P. 117, 429; Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 37–40.

[9] Цыпин В. прот. Op. cit. P. 422; Регельсон Л.Л. Ibid. P. 117.

[10] Регельсон Л.Л. Op. cit. P. 117; 429.

[11] Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 42.

[12] Акты святейшего патриарха Тихона и позднейшие документы о преемстве высшей церковной власти. 1917-1943 гг. / Сост. М.Е. Губонин. –  М.: Изд-во Правосл. Свято-Тихоновского Богословского Института, 1994. С. 509-513; Регельсон Л.Л. Op. cit. P. 117-118.

[13] Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 42.

[14] Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 42–45.

[15] Шкаровский М. В. Русская Православная Церковь при Сталине и Хрущёве. М., 1999. С. 217; Шкаровский М. В. Судьбы иосифлянских пастырей. Иосифлянское движение Русской Православной Церкви в судьбах его участников. СПб.: Сатисъ, 2006. С. 14; Мазырин А., свящ. «Непоминающие» // Православная энциклопедия. Т. XLIX. М., 2018. С. 15-20; Регельсон Л.Л. Op. cit. С. 179; Осипова И.И. О, Осипова И.И. О, Премилосердый, буди с нами неотступно… Воспоминания верующих Истинно-Православной (катакомбной) Церкви. Конец 1920-х – начало 1970-х годов. – М.: Братонеж, 2008. С. 18; Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 47-50.

[16] Регельсон Л.Л. Ob. cit. P. 179; Осипова И.И. О, Премилосердый… С. 18; Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 47-50.

[17] Шумило С. В. Ibid. P. 43-45.

[18] Шумило С. В. Ibid. P. 43-45.

[19] Шкаровский М. В. Иосифлянство… С. 3-6; История Русской Православной Церкви. От восстановления патриаршества до наших дней. Т. 1.: 1917-1970. – СПб., 1997. С. 529. Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 45.

[20] Акты патриарха Тихона…– С. 605-609; 643-644; Регельсон Л.Л. Ob. cit. P. 168-169; Польский М. прот. Положение Церкви в Советской России // Путеводитель по православной аскетике. Серия «О духовном рассуждении». Вып. 3. – СПб, 1999. С. 174-175; Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 42.

[21] Регельсон Л.Л. Ob. cit. P. 465; Андреев И.М., проф. Русская Зарубежная Церковь и Катакомбная Церковь в Советской России. Документальные данные о начале раскола Русской Церкви на «Советскую» и «Катакомбную» // Луч Света. Учение в защиту Православной веры, в обличение атеизма и в опровержение доктрин неверия. Джорданвилл, Н.Й., США, Свято-Троицкий монастырь РПЦЗ, 1970. Ч. 2. – С. 119-120; Андреев И., проф. Заметки о Катакомбной Церкви в СССР // Православная Русь, 1947; Андреев И.М. Истоки раскола Русской Православной Церкви на Советскую и катакомбную // Владимирский православный календарь на 1960 г. Джорданвилл, Н.Й., 1960. С. 36-35; Андреев И.М. Краткий обзор истории Русской Церкви от революции до наших дней // Православный путь. Джорданвилл, Н.И. Ч. 1, 1952; Ч. 2, 1953.

[22] Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 42, 50.

[23] Регельсон Л. Ob. cit. P. 117, 429; Шумило С. В. Ibid. P. 51, 57.

[24] Осипова И.И. Сквозь огнь мучений и воды слез… Гонения на Истинно-Православную Церковь. М., 1998. С. 25-26.

[25] Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 52-53.

[26] Осипова И.И. Ob. cit. P. 26-27.

[27] Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 53, 65.

[28] Интервью с главой Патриаршей Православной Церкви в СССР Заместителем Патриаршего Местоблюстителя митрополитом Сергием и его Синодом // Известия ЦИК. – 1930, 16 февраля. – № 46 (3893).

[29] Одинцов М. И. Великая Отечественная война (1941–1945) и религиозные организации в СССР // Православная энциклопедия. Т. 7. М., 2004. С. 407.

[30] Осипова И.И. О, Премилосердный… – С. 24; Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 49-51.

[31] Алексеев В. А. Иллюзии и догмы. М.: Политиздат, 1991. С. 337; Шкаровский М. В. Русская Православная Церковь при Сталине и Хрущёве. М., 1999. С. 284-287.

[32] Алексеев В. А. Ibid. P. 337; Шкаровский М. В. Ibid. P. 284-287.

[33] Записка Г.Г. Карпова о приеме Сталиным иерархов Русской Православной Церкви 4 сентября 1943 года // Сталин И.В. Cочинения. Т. 18. Тверь: ИИЦ «Союз», 2006. С. 621–629

[34] Шкаровский М. В. Русская Православная Церковь при Сталине и Хрущёве. С. 206, 284-287.

[35] Шкаровский М. В. Ibid. P. 205;

[36] Записи бесед председателей Совета по делам Русской православной церкви при СНК (СМ) СССР Г. Г. Карпова и В. А. Куроедова с патриархами Русской православной церкви (1943–1960) // Государство и церковь в XX веке: Эволюция взаимоотношений, политический и социокультурный аспекты: Опыт России и Европы. М.: Либроком, 2011. С. 106-176.

[37] Colquhoun, Iain. (2014). STALIN’S CONCORDAT – TURNING-POINT OF HISTORY // Polish News. URL: https://polishnews.com/stalin-s-concordat-turning-point-of-history

[38] Шкаровский М. В. Русская Православная Церковь при Сталине и Хрущёве. С. 284-287.

[39] Скакун, Р. Агентура НКВС–МДБ–КДБ у православному єпископаті України (1939–1964): формування, функції, моделі поведінки. Львів: Видавництво УКУ, 2025. 360 с.; Берман А., Скакун Р. «Обеспечивать проверенной агентурой из числа духовенства»: Директивы НКГБ СССР о Поместных Соборах Русской Православной Церкви 1943 и 1945 гг. из архива Службы безопасности Украины // Церковно-исторический вестник. 2017/2018. № 24–25. С. 247–258.

[40] Шкаровский М. В. Русская Православная Церковь при Сталине и Хрущёве. М., 1999. С. 284-287; Скакун, Р. Агентура НКВС–МДБ–КДБ у православному єпископаті…; Берман А., Скакун Р. Ob. cit. P. 247–258.

[41] Алфеев И., митр. Отдел внешних церковных связей // Православная энциклопедия. Т. 53. М., 2019. С. 489.

[42] Боцюрків Б. Українська Греко-Католицька Церква в катакомбах (1946-1989) // Збірник статей з церковної історії. Ч. 1. – Львів: Інститут історичних досліджень Львівського державного університету ім. І. Франка, Інститут історії Церкви, 1993. С. 130-132; Боруцька О. Підпільна діяльність УГКЦ в часи радянського тоталітаризму у 60-х рр. ХХ ст. // Історія релігій в Україні. № 22-1 (2012): Вип. 22, Кн. I. С. 728-729.

[43] Шумило, С. В. (2024). Нелегальные связи между РПЦЗ и катакомбными общинами в СССР в 1960-е–1980-е гг. // Textus et Studia – is a scientific journal of the Institute of History of the John Paul II Pontifical University in Krakow (Krakow, Poland). 2024, 1(37). P. 145.

[44] Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 93–94.

[45] Эллис Д. Русская Православная Церковь: Согласие и инакомыслие. Лондон, 1990. С. 16 – 17; Алексеева Л. М. История инакомыслия в СССР : новейший период. 3-е изд. М. : Моск. Хельсинк. группа, 2012. С. 192 – 202; Поспеловский Д. В. Ob. cit. P. 332-389; Шкаровский М. В. Русская Православная Церковь при Сталине и Хрущёве. С. 261-283.

[46] Цыпин В., прот. История Русской Православной Церкви: 1917 – 1990. М., 1994. С. 503; 516.

[47] Поспеловский Д. Ob. cit. P. 321; Цыпин В., прот. Ibid. P. 162; Шумило С. В. В катакомбах. С. 114–115.

[48] Поспеловский Д. Ibid. P. 393.

[49] Фуров В. Г. Отчёт Совета по делам религий членам ЦК КПСС (1974) // Вестник Русского христианского движения. 1979. № 130. С. 278.

[50] Фуров В. Г. Ibid. P. 281.

[51] Фуров В. Г. Ibid. P. 279-280.

[52] Аудіозапис бесіди С. Шумила з патр. Філаретом (Денисенко) від 23.02.2021 р. Приватний архів С. Шумила; Филарет признал связь с КГБ // Лівий берег, 20.01.2012. URL: https://lb.ua/news/2012/01/20/132771_filaret_priznal_svyaz_kgb_.html ; Архивы КГБ. Как Филарет работал на советские спецслужбы // RISU, 05.07.2019. URL:  https://risu.ua/ru/arhivy-kgb-kak-filaret-rabotal-na-sovetskie-specsluzhby_n98991 ;  Історія Філарета: заслуги та гріхи почесного патріарха ПЦУ // 24 Канал, 20.06.2019. URL: https://24tv.ua/istoriya_filareta_zaslugi_ta_grihi_pochesnogo_patriarha_ptsu_n1100564

[53] Эдельштейн Г. Чекисты… в рясах // Аргументы и факты, № 36, 12.09.1991; Якунин Г. “Аббат” выходит на связь // Аргументы и факты, 08.01.1992; Полосин, Вячеслав. Вечный раб ЧК // Известия, № 18, 23.01.1992; Якунин Г. Подлинный лик Московской патриархии. М., 1995. С. 7-14; Пивоваров, Н. Кого приглашали в СССР и кого отправляли за границу по религиозной линии (1943-1985 гг.) // Государство, религия, церковь в России и за рубежом. 2017. №1. С. 185-215; Выписки свящ. Глеба Якунина из отчетов КГБ о работе с агентами-сотрудниками Московской патриархии, 1992 г. // Krotov.info. URL: http://krotov.info/4/texts/03_v/Vypiski_1992.htm ; Использование ЦК КПСС и КГБ СССР религиозных организаций в антиконституционных целях. Выводы комиссии Президиума Верховного Совета Российской Федерации по расследованию причин и обстоятельств ГКЧП. 1992 год // Esxatos. URL: https://esxatos.com/articles/svyashchenniki-razvedchiki ; Агенты КГБ в рясах. Как священники РПЦ работали на тоталитарный режим СССР // Internet-Sobor. URL: http://internetsobor.org/index.php/novosti/mirovoe-pravoslavie/moskovskaya-patriarkhiya/agenty-kgb-v-ryasakh-kak-svyashchenniki-rpts-rabotali-na-totalitarnyj-rezhim-sssr

[54] Скакун, Р. Агентура НКВС–МДБ–КДБ у православному єпископаті України (1939–1964): формування, функції, моделі поведінки. Львів: Видавництво УКУ, 2025. 360 с.

[55] Солдатов А. Проклятие «Третьего имени». Реальные масштабы церковной агентуры ГБ видны после вскрытия архивов на постсоветском пространстве // Gorby.media. URL: https://gorby.media/articles/2024/08/05/prokliatie-tretego-imeni

[56] Shumylo, S. (2024). “Ordinary Fascism”, or The Russian World of Patriarch Kirill // The Wheel, Journal (USA), 10.04.2024. URL: https://wheeljournal.com/2024-4-10-serhii-shumylo-ordinary-fascism-or-the-russian-world-of-patriarch-kirill/ (in English).

[57] Shumylo, S. (2022). “Orthodox Shahidism” and Moscow Patriarch Kirill’s neo-pagan theology of war // Orthodox Times, 11.12.2022. URL: https://orthodoxtimes.com/orthodox-shahidism-and-moscow-patriarch-kirills-neo-pagan-theology-of-war/ (in English); Shumylo, S. (2022). False “prophecies” as justification for the war: Sectarian hoaxes by Moscow Patriarch Kirill // Orthodox Times, 26.11.2022. URL: https://orthodoxtimes.com/false-prophecies-as-justification-for-the-war-sectarian-hoaxes-by-moscow-patriarch-kirill/ (in English); Shumylo, S. (2024). “Ordinary Fascism”, or The Russian World of Patriarch Kirill // The Wheel, Journal (USA), 10.04.2024. URL: https://wheeljournal.com/2024-4-10-serhii-shumylo-ordinary-fascism-or-the-russian-world-of-patriarch-kirill/ (in English).