Return of Archimandrite Innocent
The Alexander and Yuryev-Polsky diocese was headed by Bishop Innokenty (Yakovlev) of Nizhny Tagil and Nevyansk - former secretary of the Vladimir diocesan administration, member of the Union of Artists of Russia, graphic artist and photographer, who is well remembered by Vladimir cultural figures
photo by the press service of the Russian Orthodox Church
On May 14, in the historical building of the Synod on Senate Square in St. Petersburg, under the chairmanship of Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Rus', a meeting of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church took place. At the event, a number of issues were discussed, in particular, the spiritual fathers approved the “Concept of the activities of the diocesan missionary department” and discussed the issue of celebrating the 1030th anniversary of the Baptism of Rus'. In addition, a number of important personnel issues were resolved. One of them concerned the Vladimir Metropolis.
As the meeting follows, the Holy Synod discussed “the state of affairs in the Alexander Diocese,” as a result of which the appointment of a new head of this division of the Vladimir Metropolis took place.
Let us recall that the united Vladimir diocese was divided into three component parts in July 2013. The new Vladimir Metropolis included the Vladimir, Murom and Alexander dioceses.
The Alexander and Yuryev-Polish diocese, divided into 5 deaneries, was formed by the decision of the Holy Synod on July 16, 2013. It unites parishes within the administrative boundaries of Alexandrovsky, Kirzhachsky, Kolchuginsky and Yuryev-Polsky districts of the Vladimir region. The administration of the diocese is located in Alexandrov, the cathedral is the Alexandrovsky Church in honor of the Nativity of Christ.
Archbishop Eustathius
Since July 16, 2013, the diocese was temporarily ruled by Metropolitan Evlogy of Vladimir. On May 30, 2014, by decision of the Synod, Archbishop Evstafiy (in the world Evgeny Evdokimov) was appointed to the Alexander See. Before that, he headed the Chita and Krasnokamensk dioceses. The tough policy of Bishop Eustathius regarding the priesthood of Eastern Siberia, as they write in open sources, has repeatedly become the subject of public criticism. According to some reports, during his service in the Chita diocese, Eustathius banned more than 50 people from the priesthood. Deacon Andrey Kuraev, according to some media reports, Bishop Eustathius “Stalin in a cassock.”
During the service of Archbishop Eustathius in Alexandrov, there was a loud scandal in which clergy, local and regional authorities, the Legislative Assembly of the Vladimir Region, supervisory authorities, residents of the city of Alexandrov, and the social movement “Essence of Time” were involved.
In October 2014, representatives of the Alexandrovsk diocese approached the deputies of the district council with a proposal to build an Orthodox center in Alexandrov, next to the Cathedral of the Nativity of Christ, which would include a school, a library and a monument to Alexander Nevsky. The construction of these objects was hampered by another monument - the fighters of the revolution of 1905-1907 (popular name - “Woman with a Flag”) on Sovetskaya Square, erected in 1987. Local deputies voted to move the monument, but the Alexandrovsk public came to its defense. Activists organized a collection of signatures for the cancellation of the parliamentary decision with an appeal addressed to the governor of the Vladimir region, Svetlana Orlova. Almost simultaneously, the deaneries of the Alexandrovsk and Yuryev-Polsky dioceses began collecting signatures for another appeal to Governor Orlova with a request to facilitate the construction of an Orthodox center in Alexandrov and the demolition of the monument to the fighters of the 1905 revolution.
The scandal had to be put out at the level of the leadership of the Vladimir region. As a result, “Woman with a Flag” remained in its place; construction of the Orthodox center did not begin.
At a meeting of the Holy Synod on May 14, Archbishop Evstafiy of Alexander and Yuryev-Polsky was “retired.” The stated reason is health status. Gratitude was expressed to the archbishop “for the archpastoral labors he endured in the Alexander Diocese.” The place of Eustathius's resting place is the Holy Trinity Sergius Lavra.
The Synod appointed Bishop of Nizhny Tagil and Nevyansk Innocent (Yakovlev) as the new Bishop of Nizhny Tagil and Nevyansk.
Most of Bishop Innocent's life is connected with the Vladimir region. Yakov Yakovlevich Yakovlev (as he was called in the world) was born in 1947 in Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk into a military family, graduated from the Novosibirsk Architectural Institute, where he later taught. In 1975 he was admitted to the Union of Artists of Russia, after which he began to professionally engage in fine arts, participating in all-Union, republican and international exhibitions. In the 80s, he helped decorate the churches of the Novosibirsk diocese as an architect and icon painter.
Vladimir Yakovlev moved to Vladimir Yakovlev in 1983. In 1992, after the death of his wife, he was ordained a deacon and then a priest. On September 1, 1992, he was appointed chairman of the construction and economic department at the Vladimir diocesan administration and a member of the Vladimir diocesan council.
On May 1, 1993, Yakov Yakovlev was appointed senior priest of the Holy Dormition Princess Convent of the city of Vladimir, on August 22, 1995 - secretary of the Vladimir diocesan administration. On April 13, 1997, the clergyman was tonsured a monk with the name Innocent, on April 12, 1998, he was elevated to the rank of abbot , on December 21, 2005, he was appointed vicar of the Alexander Monastery of the city of Suzdal and dean of the monasteries of the Suzdal district, while retaining the duties of secretary of the diocesan administration. On March 19, 2007, he was elevated to the rank of archimandrite.
A new period in Innocent’s life began in 2011, when he was appointed Bishop of Nizhny Tagil and Serov.
Vladimir cultural figures remember Innokenty well as a creative and sensible person with whom they could conduct a dialogue and find a common language on a variety of issues, including sensitive ones.
I found out about this film quite by accident, and already from the advertising poster it became clear that nothing but low-grade trash should be expected from it. But already the first minutes of viewing convinced me that my initial opinion was wrong. I have not seen such monstrous, wild, unbridled nonsense for a long time. Perhaps only Van Helsing and the Spy Kids (all parts) can compete with this film for the title of the most trashy and meaningless film ever made and at the same time claiming the pretentious title of “blockbuster”. The first thing that catches your eye is the extraordinary dynamism that is abnormal for human organs of perception. The frames change unusually quickly: the frame is one motionless angle, the frame is the next angle. There is no plasticity in the film, no more or less smooth transition, especially for scenes that show robot transformations and battle scenes. But even without this, a hyperbolic, completely abnormal play of colors is visible. Everything, from the skin of the characters and their clothing to the panoramas of cities, is literally bursting with bright colors. The soundtrack complements the overall impression: loud, expressive speech of the characters, on the verge of insanity, the roar of all kinds of engines, the grinding of metal, numerous types of sounds emanating from robots; all this, coupled with the video nearby, creates a feeling of a kind of “terror” aimed at a person’s vision and hearing. It feels like the director specifically intended to stun the viewer, to show him a colorful kaleidoscope, and therefore the audience of the film is immediately clear: teenagers 12-16 years old or so. Second. Extraordinary, out-of-the-ordinary vulgarity and outright obscenity of the film, bordering on pornography. Sexual themes are constantly exploited. It would be good if these were just lustful poses of some people, although this is completely unacceptable for a film, especially aimed at children and teenagers. This is not enough for the director! He does not hesitate to show the viewer intercourse dogs, underwear of both women and men, body movements simulating sexual intercourse, even robots and those lusts (I mean the episode when the robot spy fell on the leg of Michaela, Sam’s girlfriend, and began to imitate sexual intercourse with her leg.), endless humor below the belt - all this makes the film a huge minus. And what is the family of the main character like from the human side - Sam? Again, we see out-of-the-ordinary, dirty lust, which the parents do not even try to hide in front of their son. And this is a family model - one of the main values of any healthy society. In a word, to increase the popularity of the film, and, accordingly, the box office, the director resorted to the most banal and wretched technique: excessive exploitation of animal instincts nesting in humans. The next step in this direction and we will get legalized pornography. And the worst thing is that this film is watched not only by teenagers, but also by children of 3-4 years old! The technical side of the film, namely special. The effects and computer graphics, although excellent, do not make the film any better. It is clear that this is trash, entertainment for the eyes, but there is a measure for everything! When the majority of the film is occupied not by natural shooting, not by dialogues or monologues of characters, but by artificial graphics, then this is far from evidence in favor of the film. The plot of the film is banal, although it cannot be called completely miserable. Evil rears its ugly head, a desperate struggle with a superior enemy, as always, hope for a chosen hero, small and weak, but pure in soul and heart, “epic” battles, and, of course, a happy ending. A huge robot, 20-25 meters tall and weighing several hundred tons, the leader of one of the surviving factions - Prime, due to the philanthropy that came from an alien (!) creature, risking his life, saves the little man. It is clear that the “alien” must be understandable to the viewer, which is why robots are anthropomorphic not only in terms of their appearance, but also in their internal motivation. However, no leader who is responsible for the lives of his subordinates will ever risk himself for a purpose that has nothing to do with caring for the lives and well-being of his subordinates, and in this case brothers by “racial” identity; especially for the sake of a lower being, which in comparison with robots are people. As for multiculturalism, the director went too far here. It would be fine if there were just blacks in the film. But no! We see East Asians, people of color and Latinos. This is all the more strange since in the United States the absolute majority are white descendants of Europeans. However, this is only a consequence of the so-called. "tolerance" policy. Are there any ideas in this film? Oddly enough, there is. Loyalty, sacrifice, philanthropy. However, it is so banal that I doubt whether this can even be considered an idea. However, there is something positive in this film - a demonstration of the power of the US Armed Forces. How does the American soldier appear before us? Mighty: tall, stately, broad-shouldered warrior; strong, dexterous, brave, able to handle any type of weapon and equipment; fearless and persistent - he is able to repel any opponent, even if it is a huge, armed robot, literally from head to toe. American military equipment: the most advanced: fast, deadly, numerous, diverse, capable of performing combat missions everywhere. Organization: the army is mobile, capable of being anywhere in the world in the shortest possible time, well-coordinated - no incompetence or failures. Finally, the fact that the final battle takes place in Egypt is a clear indication of the claim to world leadership. The entire planet is a potential war zone for the US Army, they are the masters of this world. In a word, here you can feel a different way of thinking than in Russia: pride in your army and country, pride in the opportunity and right to be aggressive and strong. Think about how radical the contrast is with the positioning of the Russian army in Russia (the apotheosis is the series “Soldiers”). Finally, the last thing I wanted to say. The very idea of robots hatching from larvae (!), i.e. essentially animate, intelligent metal, the feeling of which is further enhanced by the fact of the possibility of their transformation from human automobile technology and back, has an eschatological background. That is, before us is revived inanimate matter, animate carrion. A particularly striking moment in what can conventionally be called the eschatology of the film is the Decepticon landing on Earth: huge balls of fire falling from the skies... A direct parallel with “Revelation”, where there is a mention of seven fiery tears falling from the skies. However, there is no need to delude yourself about the director. Naturally, he did not think about any eschatology. His task is to create trash and earn as much money as possible. All. The fact that he, 99%, created a film containing eschatological motives is not his “merit”, but the authors of the comic book idea, who, again, hardly thought about it. Maybe the creation of such monstrously aggressive paintings is a sign?..
