Talk:Patriarch Kirill of Moscow

Wrong Image

That's clearly a picture of Osama bin Laden! 82.24.104.76 (talk) 12:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Misc. Edits

Edited grammar and links, as well as layout and spacing throughout the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.41.55.88 (talk) 07:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Church Positions

It seems there is very little on this mans writings or positions on the page. I would like to see references added on homosexuality, women's rights, race relations, etc. It seems to me, this is relevant to the future of Russia moving away from mysticism to a rational modern nation. There is also little on church finance, which is clearly in the case of the Russian Orthodox Church very questionable. The history of church run charities is questionable. And, there is nothing related to sex abuse, which is just as rampant in the Russian Orthodox Church as in others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.187.0 (talk) 00:43, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

"the church expert Nikolai Mitrokhin"

First off, this is not in English. Secondly I have no idea what an expert on "ROC ecinimic activities", but it is POV to label him an expert even if he is a "scholar" and to not label every other scholar who is cited as an "expert" too. Who says he is an expert? He is an author... that does not make him an expert in anything, aside from perhaps a keen ability to get publishers to print things he writes. Oprah has published more books and articles than he has. Is she an expert too? Frjohnwhiteford (talk) 19:12, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Biophys' latest edit may well be accurate, but I would like to see the source information that supports the claim that Nikolai Mitokhin is a "black market researcher from Russian State University for the Humanities". Is he a researcher who does research for the Russian State University, of is he a researcher who happens to have attended the Russian State University. If he is the latter, references to the university should be removed. Frjohnwhiteford (talk) 22:12, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

It tells: "научный сотрудник Центра исследований теневой экономики при РГГУ Николай Митрохин" ("a researcher of the Center for Research of Underground Economy affiliated with the Russian State University for the Humanities"). It means that "Center" is a part of University, something like a Medical Center of a US University. Here the ref (Russian) . It tells the following:

Занимающий внушительное четырехэтажное здание в Даниловом монастыре Отдел внешних церковных связей (ОВЦС), которым руководит митрополит Кирилл, называют церковным МИДом. Это ключевая структура РПЦ. Кирилл возглавил ОВЦС в 1989 году, еще при позапрошлом патриархе Пимене. Кураторы из Совета по делам религий при Совете министров СССР вполне доверяли тогда еще молодому иерарху — в оперативных кругах его знали под псевдонимом «Михайлов» (так его называли в своих отчетах сотрудники Пятого управления КГБ). Эта неприятная для иерарха подробность всплыла в начале 1990-х годов, когда на свет стали появляться итоги работы парламентской комиссии по расследованию деятельности КГБ. Работала комиссия и с архивами Пятого управления, а первым публичным итогом этой работы для церкви стала публикация в журнале «Христианский вестник» за октябрь 1992 года. Тогда-то вся заинтересованная публика и узнала о том, что церковные иерархи сплошь и рядом в советские годы были так или иначе связаны (или зависимы?) от политической полиции — КГБ. Назывались и псевдонимы, которые давали в своих отчетах сотрудники идеологической контрразведки — «Дроздов,» «Адамант», «Островский»... Свои псевдонимы были и у представителей остальных конфессий — мусульман, иудеев, католиков и так далее.

Митрополит Кирилл сделал в советские годы стремительную карьеру. Уже в 22-летнем возрасте, учась в Ленинградской духовной академии и служа секретарем могущественного митрополита Никодима, Кирилл начал регулярно выезжать за границу. Он занял крупные посты в руководстве Всемирного совета церквей, Конференции европейских церквей, миротворческих организациях. Уже в 28 лет он ректор Ленинградской академии, а в 30 — архиепископ Выборгский.

Комиссия президиума Верховного совета России в начале 1992 года официально обратила внимание руководства РПЦ на «глубокую инфильтрацию агентуры спецслужб» в Церковь, что «представляет собой серьезную опасность для общества и государства». В том же году, встречаясь со студентами МГУ, Кирилл утверждал: «Факт встречи духовенства с представителями КГБ нравственно безразличен». И действительно, этот факт скоро стал «безразличен», потому что странице под названием «Михайлов» в биографии Кирилла пришла на смену страница под названием «Табачный».

В 1996 году ОВЦС через свой Фонд «Ника» под видом гуманитарной помощи (без таможенных пошлин) ввез в Россию более 8 млрд сигарет, вытеснив с рынка импортеров, плативших пошлины. Первой эту историю откопала вскоре закрытая и забытая маленькая бизнес-газета, а затем был целый вал публикаций в «Московском комсомольце» и «Московских новостях».

Собственно, табачные короли и начали первую кампанию разоблачения, как они считали, недобросовестного конкурента. На никотине, утверждали тогда СМИ и злые языки в самой Церкви, Кирилл составил стартовый капитал — несколько сотен миллионов долларов, после чего финансовые скандалы полились на него, как из рога изобилия. Он был причастен к беспошлинному экспорту нефти, отлову камчатского краба, добыче уральских самоцветов, учреждению банков, скупке акций и недвижимости. Специфические (с оттенком «пастырства») связи в политическом руководстве и бизнес-сообществе быстро вывели Кирилла на первое место по объему личных активов среди иерархов РПЦ МП. В 2004 году научный сотрудник Центра исследований теневой экономики при РГГУ Николай Митрохин выпустил монографию о теневой экономической деятельности РПЦ. Состояние митрополита Кирилла оценивалось в этой работе в $1,5 млрд. Спустя 2 года журналисты «Московских новостей» попытались пересчитать активы главы церковного МИДа и пришли к выводу, что они насчитывают уже $4 млрд. Ни сам митрополит, ни руководство РПЦ эти данные не комментировали.

Принадлежность к элите требует определенного набора атрибутов. В 2002 году митрополит Кирилл купил пентхаус в Доме на набережной с видом на храм Христа Спасителя. Это, кстати, единственная квартира в Москве, зарегистрированная именно на митрополита по его мирской фамилии Гундяев, о чем есть соответствующая запись в кадастровой ведомости. В СМИ появилась и информация о покупке митрополитом виллы в Швейцарии. Одновременно митрополит занялся активной и во многом беспрецедентной для церковного иерарха просветительской деятельностью посредством телевидения: ведет программы на разных телеканалах, ежедневно появляется в выпусках новостей, его обслуживают несколько информагентств и журналов.

Biophys (talk) 22:23, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

P.S. This Mitrokhin seems to be a notable expert of the Russian Orthodox Church business, author of a book and other numerous publications like this: [1].Biophys (talk) 22:35, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

From the same source an edit was added: В статье допущена ошибка. Николай Митрохин не являлся сотрудником Центра по изучению нелегальной экономической деятельности РГГУ: в 2000 году он издал в этом центре свою работу "Экономическая деятельность РПЦ и ее теневая составляющая", в которой не содержалась оценка личного состояния митрополита Кирилла. It says that he did NOT work for the Center for Black Market Research"; only that he published his work for that center. That throws out any credibility with regards to the cited Center. In any event, it is highly POV and questionable - not a reliable established source. Rusmeister (talk) 18:58, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

New title

Why "Patriarch-Elect" instead of simply "Patriarch"?Biophys (talk) 01:41, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Because he is a "Patriarch-Elect". Only from 01.02.2009 he becam a Patriarch wit NEW name. Miller111 (talk) 09:18, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Now he's sorted himself out. --➨♀♂Candlewicke _S^T  _:) 10:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Putin's pick?

More on the succession process is needed. Who were the other candidates? Was Kirill Putin's first choice? &c... 192.121.84.241 (talk) 13:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Where did you get the idea that Putin picks the chief of the orthodox church? --Bernardoni (talk) 03:21, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Vyazma

Why was the title Archbishop of Smolensk and Vyazma changed to Archbishop of Smolensk and Kaliningrad in 1989? --Hapsala (talk) 14:20, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Cyril

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was No move Parsecboy (talk) 00:45, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Why is the article called Kirill and not Cyril? His predecessors (e.g. Alexy, Sergius) are here with their English names, as is customary with patriarchs and popes. Also, it's Kyrill in German, Cirilo in Spanish, Cirillo in Italian, Cyryl in Polish etc. I can't see why Kirill/Cyril should be singled out for special treatment. The press seems to be divided, but TIME, for example, has Cyril: [2] --89.245.251.212 (talk) 21:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

• Agree, I think it should be Cyril, not Kirill. --210.6.141.44 (talk) 10:07, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support English Cyril, or possibly Latin Cyrillus, not Kirill. --Hapsala (talk) 12:21, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

• Disagree - no need to translate personal names - you wouldn't have the Spanish King at King John Charles, would you? - fchd (talk) 19:52, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

But we call the pope Benedict XVI or John Paul II.--210.6.141.44 (talk) 02:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

• Disagree It is very uncommon to see him referred to as Cyril, and I think we should reflect normal usage, rather than wag a finger at people in favor of something that is not commonly used. Frjohnwhiteford (talk) 12:08, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support To my knowledge, we don't have a "never translate names" or "always translate names" rule. Instead, we have a "translate names if it is English convention to translate names" rule (WP:RM). That explains how we can end up with John Paul II and Juan Carlos I If English usage backs Cyril, then I back Cyril. Would appreciate more evidence on this point, however. Erudy (talk) 15:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

The problem in this case is that Wikipedia was instrumental in the spreading of Kirill as opposed to Cyril. Believe it or not, many news outlets look to Wikipedia for guidance if no other reliable source is available. There is, of course, no way to prove this. What I'm trying to say is that Wikipedia does not only reflect reality, it also creates it. And in this case it means that although we Wikipedians want to use whatever the press uses we Wikipedians have in fact determined or at least heavily influenced what they use. If in February 2007, this page would have been created as Metropolitan Cyril we wouldn't be having this discuission. --85.181.238.139 (talk) 09:29, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Juan Carlos was born Juan Carlos. It's not a name he has assumed upon his ascent to the throne. --Akkolon (talk) 09:46, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

The claim of the IP editor is not based upon any facts. Metropolitan Cyril up to 2000 has 3 google news hits. Metropolitan Kirill has 47 hits. So it appears that even before the advent of WP, his English name was already established as Kirill. --Russavia ^Dialogue 10:25, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I would contend that while Google News usage obviously favors Kirill (not sure whether Google News has representative data for the pre-Google News years, though), 50 hits for a period of nine years does not make anything established. --85.181.238.139 (talk) 12:03, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

That is for the search term "Metropolitan Kirill" (and Cyril) enclosed with " and ". Regardless, see my comment below. We have established guidelines for Russian names, and as results for the last 30 days show, less than 1% of sources use Cyril. That is already an established name, as per our guidelines, Popes names are irrelevant to Russian Orthodox articles; we have a guideline and demonstrated usage, and your assertion that news sources have taken their lead from WP has absolutely zero evidence.--Russavia ^Dialogue 12:14, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I do not dispute any of that. And I was talking of 1991-2000. I just assume (with, as you say, zero evidence in this particular case) that now that he got widespread coverage for the first time, Wikipedia was used by many as a source of confirmation. I have no personal stake in what he's called here. (I can't even read Kirillic :-)). I didn't say anything about popes. --85.181.238.139 (talk) 13:12, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support Popes' and patriarchs' names are translated for a reason. They choose their papal/patriarchal names in order to express whose example they wish to follow. In Cyril's case his name is most probably referring to Saint Cyril. Therefore, it is established usage to call the pope or patriarch by the same name as the saint. And as it is Saint Cyril in English and not Saint Kirill, I would go for Cyril. [3] --Akkolon (talk) 09:43, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Unlike the Roman Popes, Orthodox Patriarch do not change their names when elected. They change their names when they become monks, which in Patriarch Kyrill's case, would have been a long time ago. Where he to take on the Great Schema, he would change his name again, but that is not likely to happen. Frjohnwhiteford (talk) 13:33, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

• Absolute oppose WP:RUS comes into play here, not to mention that he is referred to as Patriarch Cyril in the last 30 days 14 times, as opposed to Patriarch Kirill 1,582 times. It is clear cut, Cyril is not what he is widely known as, nor is Cyril what he wants to be known as in English where he is clearly referred to as Patriarch Kirill. --Russavia ^Dialogue 10:10, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Second this; besides, the Patriarchate itself calls him Kirill in English [4], same for the US branch of ROC [5]. NVO (talk) 18:22, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Likewise, I unquestionably disagree with using the "alternative" name Cyril in this article - you do not incidentally suggest to refer to Patriarch Pavle of Serbia as "Patriarch Paul"? (ouital77 (talk) 01:04, 13 February 2009 (UTC))moved to correct topic by Ignatus (talk) 14:09, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

All Rus vs. All Russia

The official title of the Patriarch of Moscow is "Патриарх Московский и всея Руси"

The name of Russia in Russian is "Россия". As anyone can see "Россия" is not "Руси". There are four parts of Rus': Russia, Ukraine (or Little Russia), Belarus (White Russia), and Carpatho-Russia (i.e. the Rusyns). So please stop correcting this article on this point. Frjohnwhiteford (talk) 03:40, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, and the Russian federation is "smaller" than Russia..... No, the distinction Rus and Russia is unfortunately not logically implemented in English; so you may start a petition here before changing the offial titles, which is actually Moscow and all Russia. --Hapsala (talk) 11:24, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

You are wrong here: the name of Russia in Russian is both "Русь" and "Россия". "Русь" is the original form, "Россия" is its Hellenised form (from Ρωσία). (The difference between the two is no more than between "Britain" and its Latinised form "Britannia"). The English word "Russia" is obviously derived from the word "Русь" plus the suffix "-ia", routinely used for the names of countries; it existed in the English language well before the Russians started naming their country "Россия". Though since Peter the Great "Россия" started gradually replacing "Русь" in public use, it has never replaced it altogether. The Russian Church is much older than Peter the Great and it sticks to the old good word of "Русь". And don't confuse Russia with the Russian Federation, as historic Russia (that is "all Russia" of the patriarchal title) includes as well the independent countries of Ukraine (Little Russia) and Belarus (White Russia). Yurism (talk) 15:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

BTW, name "Русская православная церковь" was adopted only in 1945, before that it had been named "Российская...". First comment about Русь is not so true but the second is also. "Патриарх московский и всея Руси" is medieval therm from times when nobody cold separate Russia and Ukraina (then, there was politically Moscow Rus' and Lithuanian Rus', and they controversed for several historical regions like White Russia). This is not true to limit Kirill's titular eparchy to Russian Federation (by constitution, name equivalent to Russia) even now. It's a question for person knowing good historical and political English terms to say if we here can translate Русь as Russia or it is not correct and Rus’ should be instead. Ignatus (talk) 14:05, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Use of Numerals?

I think it is strange and out of the ordinary to refer to Kirill as "Kirill I". Check out, e.g., the website of the Moscow Patriarchate or the Russian Wikipedia. His predecessor was known as "Alexy II" because there was a patriarch with that name before him (who incidentally was never called "Alexy I" in his lifetime). If some years later ROC will elect another patriarch named Kirill, our current patriarch will be known as "Kirill I" - until then it seems strained and artificial to refer to him in this way (he is not a monarch). I suggest changing the title of the article to "Patriarch Kirill of Moscow."

Agree.Ignatus (talk) 14:07, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

This anon agrees. Dynastic number I is assigned retroactively. There is no "I" until there's at least a "II". So Miss Manners says as well. He's neither addressed as, nor styled as, "Kyrill I" within Russia itself, and as far as I can tell the Russian-language version of this page agrees as well. 68.170.190.61 (talk) 21:04, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

I agree as well. See a similar discussion (in French) about Pope Francis. (70.210.68.61 (talk) 22:08, 2 February 2014 (UTC))

Mordvin?

The reference says that the Patriarch's father and grandfather hail from the Mordovia region. Which is 2/3 ethnically Russian. Nowhere does it state that he has ethnic Mordvin roots. If that's not the case, can someone provide a reference? Sotnik (talk) 07:02, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Interesting?

Is it interesting enough for this article that Kirill gives controversial people like Dmytro Firtash church honors? — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 18:04, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

What about this?. What is controversial about that?--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫_Hey^{it's me} 19:00, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Does this mean that if Al Capone would have done lots of "social activities" he also would have had a change in getting a medal from the Russian Church? — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 19:32, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes he would. Also Wikipedia is not a forum.--♫GoP♫_T^CN 14:48, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

True... but it's an interesting point she makes, GOP (and suggestive, shock horror, of corruption or something like it). Try to be more friendly :) Malick78 (talk) 18:39, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Removal of most of the material on controversies

I am not entirely happy with the removal of most of the material on controversies on on 16-16 August.[6] The editor who did this has tried to suppress notable controversies regarding the Patriarch before.[7] This mass removal was done without discussion. It has left only the most recent example.

• If the intention was to airbrush out of history all the many controversies, then the materials should be restored.
• If the intention was to deal with "undue weight" by putting the detail on the controversies in a separate article, surely the editor should have summarised each of the controversies in the Kirill I of Moscow article, and use the "Main article: Controversies of Kirill I of Moscow".

What should we do?--Toddy1 (talk) 07:09, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

• I agree this seems to be a case of vandalism. The reason for the removal: "This is an article about a religious leader, not politician" is absurd as this article is about a person as whole including all notable and socially impacting aspects of him. It seems an attempt to cover Kirill by one of his supporters. Asterno (talk) 07:29, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Let us keep also such material on controversies, if well supported by widespread sources. We can keep a separate article for controversies (Controversies of Kirill I of Moscow) only if the original article is very long, which is not the case here. So I suggest to delete Controversies of Kirill I of Moscow. A ntv (talk) 08:04, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Many of the paragraphs on the various controversies are very short here. Earlier version explained some of them better. An advantage of having a separate article on the controversies, would be that each controversy could be greatly expanded using reliable sources, and the version on the main article kept as a summary.--Toddy1 (talk) 10:45, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree that two sections are notable, but the rest isn't really. "Gold" dust of the Patriarch, Silver Shoe Award, Importation of cigarettes and "Nomination" for Nobel Prize is very trivial and should be removed, per WP:TRIVIA. Also his role in the Pussy Riot dilemma is not really notable. He did not make the decision of two years imprisonment, but he merely did the rightous decision what every clergy would do, namely criticizing their performance. It is funny that someone called my edit "vandalism" XD; perhaps you need to watch their performance and all the feminist hateful outrages. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 11:38, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

The "Gold" dust of the Patriarch was in the Financial Times. It is not trivial.--Toddy1 (talk) 12:13, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Agree, all the criticism is relevant. As for Kurbis's actions - they may not be vandalism, but reverting so many other people was unhelpful. Please don't do it. The guy gets off on being involved in politics, so let him take the criticism that that brings. Malick78 (talk) 23:41, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, I think it would be reasonable to remain all the current subitems of the Controversies Section except for "Nomination for Nobel Prize" and "Golden Shoe" as of relatively minor importance and transfer them into the separate "Controversies" article where all subjects would be described in details. Asterno (talk) 10:44, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

The bit about the shoe award seemed trivial because it was put in a separate section to what the award for. Even GreatOrangePumpkin/Kürbis accepted that the airbrushed out watch was notable. I have moved all the watch bits to the same section.--Toddy1 (talk) 14:38, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

In fact it is what I spoke about with the exclusion that "Nobel nomination" is also a subject of minor importance deserving transferring to the Controversies of Kirill I of Moscow Article Asterno (talk) 17:48, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

• I suggest merging all the content from "controversies" back here and making "controversies" redirect. Having a separate article about "controversies" is a bad style. In addition, the sections about awards should be wikified/reformatted or removed. My very best wishes (talk) 03:10, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

• Most of the so-called controversies are not really notable. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 08:39, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
  • • Well, since they are the only sourced part of the article (his early life, ministry, and awards have.... just one ref as far as I can see) perhaps the whole article should be deleted? Only kidding. My point is that the controversies section is the only encyclopaedic bit of the entire article. Funny that. (Btw, how about we cull the awards section? No refs - as I've stated - and most aren't notable - they lack links to articles on the award.) Malick78 (talk) 11:21, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
      • The reality is that the so-called "controversies" are the most notable aspects of the patriarch's life. This is why people have both the interest and the opportunity to cite them. The various jobs he had before he took on management responsibility for the well-known shopping mall, are of little interest to an English-speaking audience.--Toddy1 (talk) 19:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

• • Perhaps you know this better. According to this publication, he was not a KGB agent (as the previous Patriarch), but a KGB officer. This makes a lot of difference. Do you know what exactly was his military rank? My very best wishes (talk) 19:06, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Possible copyright problem

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Mkativerata (talk) 10:51, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Anathema

I've just added: In March 2014 by Mount Athos monks cursed Patriarch Kirill, as well as other Russian Ecclesiastic servants and Vladimir Putin. The monks called them a "bunch of criminals" and accused of "betraying their religion" and for "making their brothers burn in the internal fire here, in this transient world". --Trzecimaja (talk) 05:39, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

This article is a hoax, there is no source for the allegations from this pretty obviously biased source. Removed --216.195.30.107 (talk) 01:28, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

This was the only action of this IP... very strange. Syrdon (talk) 10:30, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

References

Against violation of the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons

Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons

The Patriarch Kirill was not an agent of the KGB. And we can not check original source (very important issue). + :

All references on this issue :

33 here is no of specific article

34 this website gives The Washington Times without specific article & InoPressa.ru (404 - nothing)

35 Not Found

36 Website with .. 614 Likes

37 This website is banned in Russia for violations of Law (any user with Russian provider can check this fact)

38 Almost empty space (instead article) ////////// 78.106.175.235 (talk) 21:15, 15 October 2015 (UTC) 95.29.140.157 (talk) 21:53, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

---

5.1 Church Awards numbers in square brackets

What do the numbers like "[8]" and "[11]" refer to in the section cited? They look like footnotes, but are not links. --Haruo (talk) 07:28, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Need for clarification: Ecumenism

The section on "ecumenism" reads, in part: ". . . their hope for re–establishment of full unity, the persecution of Christians in the Middle East, . . ." "Hope for . . . the persecution of Christians" or "hope for re-establishment of . . . the persecution of Christians" is surely not what the author of the article intended to convey. I edited it, with "CLARIFICATION NEEDED . . ." and my edit was removed automatically because it somehow met the bot's criteria for possible vandalism. I DID NOT INTEND ANY HARM. I felt, and still feel, that the section could be improved by some clarification, because no decent person can possibly hope for the persecution of Christians or any other religious or ethnic group. I was merely trying, obviously the wrong way, for which I apologize, to call attention to the possibly confusing wording (it confused me, therefore it is at least possible that it could confuse others).

I just hope the author of the article will improve the wording to eliminate the potential for confusion.

Sincerely, Bret Hooper — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:483:3:2DB0:D545:B669:93AB:BA7B (talk) 04:48, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Patriarch Kirill of Moscow. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090205031556/http://www.georgefox.edu:80/academics/undergrad/departments/soc-swk/ree/Davis_Tribulations.pdf to http://www.georgefox.edu/academics/undergrad/departments/soc-swk/ree/Davis_Tribulations.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:13, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Patriarch Kirill of Moscow. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090301054312/http://www.izvestia.ru/obshestvo/article3124663/ to http://www.izvestia.ru/obshestvo/article3124663/
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090205120416/http://kremlin.ru:80/appears/2009/02/02/1255_type63376type122346_212362.shtml to http://kremlin.ru/appears/2009/02/02/1255_type63376type122346_212362.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090130115704/http://newtimes.ru/magazine/2008/issue096/doc-60246.html to http://newtimes.ru/magazine/2008/issue096/doc-60246.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080303222646/http://newtimes.ru/magazine/issue_46/article_18.htm to http://newtimes.ru/magazine/issue_46/article_18.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:44, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Kirill seems to believe that Russian and Ukrainians are one people

Kirill seems to believe that Russian and Ukrainians are one people as you can see here. Should that be mentioned in this Wikipedia article? — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 21:23, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Patriarch Kirill of Moscow. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.economist.com/blogs/erasmus/2016/02/catholicism-and-russian-orthodoxy
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120904004323/www.izvestia.ru/online/article28129/ to http://www.izvestia.ru/online/article28129/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:54, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

KGB recruitment

The KGB recruited Kirill as an agent in the late 1960s or early 1970s, assigning him the codename "Mikhailov".

This was removed before access to the page was blocked. If anyone who knows Russian also and knows the history of religious communities in the Soviet Union and has reviewed KGB materials could take a look and find a way to restore this information I would be grateful. The Dunlop reference is available here: https://books.google.co.uk/books?redir_esc=y&id=WDrihdh-TiIC&q=mikhailov#v=snippet&q=mikhailov&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.12.34.134 (talk) 16:54, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

References

Dispute between Russia and Ukraine may be impacting articles related to Russian Orthodoxy

As an admin who is concerned about recent edits, I have left a message at User talk:MaximusMarprelate. From a quick scan of the history of this article, it appears to me that WP:BLP violations may have been left in place for a long time. I hope that regular editors might take a look at this article and try to correct any remaining BLP problems that they see. Other Russian Orthodox Church-related articles may also be accumulating some odd points of view and unsourced material, though I have made only a brief review. Maybe there are not enough editors watching these pages, so problems remain for a long time. If anybody here speaks Russian, I wonder if the Church-related articles on the Russian Wikipedia are any better? Leaving a ping for User:Ymblanter since he speaks Russian. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:44, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for doing this! I undid one problematic item, but I'm not an expert and I'm sure there are many other problems. I agree that having a Russian-speaking editor would be good. Another source of problems is this: Most Wikipedia editors (including myself) do not know how to tell reliable sources from unreliable ones with regard to the Russian Orthodox Church. "Official" Russian newspapers are often themselves suspect, but "unofficial" sources could be just about anything. — Lawrence King ^(talk) 22:55, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 September 2019

In the award section in this page, The Order of St Gregory of Parumala was awarded by Indian (Malankara) Orthodox Church in 2006, not Syriac Orthodox church.

Kindly edit that. Orientaloc (talk) 06:02, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

 Partly done: The linking and footnoting is incorrect and has been corrected, but the church refers to itself as Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church, see also Church website.--Goldsztajn (talk) 12:56, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and all Rus' and Catholicos of the East and Malankara Metropolitan Paulose II (1).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:45, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Orthodox clergy around the world condemn Kirill

Following Kirill's use of propaganda for the war in Ukraine in the liturgy, he has been widely condemned by the Orthodox world. Even within the Russian Orthodox Church, archbishops condemn his "abuses of the gospel". This is pretty remarkable, and should probably be covered both in the article (properly sourced) and in the lead. This strong criticism of Patriarch from numerous high ranking clergy is exceptional. Jeppiz (talk) 15:49, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

@Jeppiz: feel free to Wikipedia:Do it yourself, or at least to give sources concerning this. Veverve (talk) 21:51, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2022

at the end of the first line of the paragraph "support for the russian invasion of Ukraine", replace "soliders" with "soldiers" Ethyle64 (talk) 11:53, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:14, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 March 2022

Seems the link to the Russian-Orthodox Church in the Netherlands under "Support for the Russian invasion of Ukraine, 2022" goes to the Catholic Basilica of Saint Nicholas. There seems to be no wikipage for the corresponding Russian Orthodox Parish of Saint Nicholas of Myra in Amsterdam to change it to, so removal of the link might be necessary. Lamaredia (Kasper D.L) (talk) 13:46, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:56, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

According to Putin, Kirill's father baptized him

Why is who his father baptized even relevant let alone deserving of being in the 3rd paragragh? Many famous people's parents did many things I don't see that in the wiki page of the famous child let alone in the opening section. 51.9.50.224 (talk) 23:43, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

keep--it is evidence of a very longstanding relationship between the #1 Russian in religion and the #1 in politics. Rjensen (talk) 00:03, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Where did he get the money?

It is mentioned casually at the end that he is worth at least 4 billion us$. Can the article state how he got it? It would improve understanding of the subject. 2A00:23C7:E287:1901:3D7C:3D8A:D601:CB58 (talk) 10:43, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

A persons worth is not the amount of money they have. 82.36.70.45 (talk) 15:25, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

a suspected former Soviet spy

More and more sources are regarding Kirill as a "suspected former Soviet KGB agent" The Telegraph Patriarch Kirill, a suspected former Soviet spy, has been a staunch supporter of Mr Putin’s war in Ukraine and key to its propaganda., should we add that to the lead? Manyareasexpert (talk) 22:26, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Inconsistent spelling of family name

The anglicized spelling of Patriarch Kirill's last name (Gundyayev) in this article differs from the spelling of various family members' anglicized last names (Gundyaev/Gundyaeva). The suffix -a is of course appropriate in the feminine form, but there is no reason for the root form of the name to differ between family members. The spelling of the root form does not differ in the Russian article. A standard anglicization should be selected and consistently applied throughout this English article. Ps8v9 (talk) 06:50, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Edit request, 7 March, 2024

Revert this edit per NPOV: [8]https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Patriarch_Kirill_of_Moscow&diff=prev&oldid=1206713171 208.87.236.202 (talk) 20:08, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

 Done Thanks. Jamedeus (talk) 20:23, 7 March 2024 (UTC)