“A humble monk” in a bishop’s mantle: what's behind Dumenko’s visit to Athos
Most Athos monasteries did not accept the head of the OCU, despite pressure from the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
At the beginning of October 2025, the head of the OCU, Epifaniy Dumenko, made a four-day visit to Mount Athos. The OCU leader described his visit as an “ordinary pilgrimage” and explained that he came to the Mountain as a “humble monk”.
However, judging by photos showing Dumenko dressed in a bishop’s mantle, as well as information from Athonites that access to Karyes (the administrative capital of Athos) was blocked during the head of the OCU’s visit, there was no question of monastic humility.
At the same time, most Athonite monks took this visit with serious concern – after all, it was the first time in the entire existence of the so-called OCU that its head had set foot on the Holy Mountain. Yes, Ukrainian media presented this fact as an unequivocal "victory" of the OCU representatives over the Athonite brotherhood, which had resisted Dumenko’s presence in the “Domain of the Mother of God” for six years. Epifaniy’s visit was called "historic" and broadcast live, and overall, everything was done to create the impression among the average Ukrainian that Athos was “ours”. But, in reality, things are not quite so.
Who initiated the visit?
Let’s start with the fact that Dumenko’s visit to the Mountain was not initiated by the Ecumenical Patriarchate, under whose jurisdiction the Athos monasteries fall. This is an important point – the monks themselves did not invite Epifaniy.
Moreover, the Greek resource Romfea reported that a few days before Dumenko’s visit, the Holy Community [Hiera Koinotis], the governing body of Mount Athos, made it clear that it would not officially receive him, attempting to avoid tension within the Athonite community. According to reports, many monasteries on the Holy Mountain, despite pressure from the hierarchs of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, refused to receive the head of the OCU.
At the same time, the visit’s program was kept in strict secrecy, and out of twenty Athonite monasteries, only two – Xenophontos and Pantokrator – expressed a willingness to receive Dumenko.
Sources from Athos also claimed that, to avoid protests from the Holy Community, an unofficial visit of loyal monasteries was being arranged for Dumenko. Then, with the assistance of the Metropolitan of Melitene, a “pilgrimage” to another 2-3 monasteries and the Holy Epistasia was planned. The goal was to take the necessary photographs and announce that Athos recognizes the OCU.
Long before the visit, it was clear that this was not a personal pilgrimage, but an attempt to legitimize the presence of the OCU in the Athos territory – a place that for a millennium has been regarded by Orthodox Christians as a site of special spiritual feats and a voice of canonical purity.
The route and escorts
According to official data, Epifaniy’s visit was pre-approved by Patriarch Bartholomew. Dumenko arrived on October 9, accompanied by Metropolitan Apostolos of Melitene – a representative of the Ecumenical Patriarchate who was assigned to escort the delegation throughout the trip. Additionally, the Governor of Athos, Alkiviadis Stefanis, a former Greek Minister of Defense, traveled with Apostolos.
The escort team spoke for itself: the “pilgrimage” would have been very difficult without administrative support. Moreover, the presence of a government official (the Governor of Athos) alongside the head of the OCU strongly resembled an attempt to exert pressure on the monastic community.
In the end, within a few days, Dumenko visited the monasteries of Xenophontos, Iviron, Esphigmenou, Simonopetra, Pantokrator, Stavronikita, and the Elijah Skete. All of these monasteries are known, to varying degrees, for their loyalty to Constantinople’s policies.
It should be emphasized that the Holy Community – the main governing assembly of the Holy Mountain, uniting the twenty monasteries – refused to receive Dumenko officially.
In fact, the meeting in Karyes took place only at the level of the Epistasia—the executive body under the Protos, consisting of four representatives from the monasteries, who rotate annually.
To an outside observer, this might have looked like an official reception, but on Athos, the difference is well understood: the Protat represents all of Athos, while the Epistasia is only its current administration. Reception by the Epistasia does not mean recognition but is a courtesy extended to maintain outward calm. Moreover, even within the Epistasia, there was no unanimity regarding the OCU – not all epistates attended the meeting with Epifaniy.
Overall, the refusal of the highest governing body of Athos to receive Dumenko clearly expressed the position: Athos is not ready to recognize the head of the OCU. This decision was the response to the attempt to impose a “new church reality” on the Holy Mountain.
Reaction of the Athonite Brotherhood
The reaction of the Athonites was, in many ways, expected. The overwhelming majority of monks preferred to avoid personal meetings with the OCU delegation. Even in the monasteries that Dumenko did manage to visit, the atmosphere was far from welcoming.
For example, his service at the Elijah Skete of the Pantokrator Monastery was extremely sparsely attended, with only his entourage and a few monks from the skete taking part.
Moreover, according to reports from Athonite circles, twenty monks at Vatopedi Monastery stated they would leave the monastery if hegumen Ephraim agreed to receive Epifaniy. A similar situation unfolded at the Great Lavra, where the abbot was persuaded of the need for a “dialogue” with the OCU; however, the brotherhood firmly rejected such a “dialogue”. As a result, Dumenko’s visit itinerary was changed. The facts make clear that Athonite monasticism is not yet ready to fully become a tool of “church politics”.
This was confirmed by an open letter from Athonite kelliotes (who are far more numerous than the monks living in the main monasteries), in which they protested Dumenko’s visit. The document stated that the head of the OCU and his delegation do not belong to the canonical Church, and that the monasteries which concelebrated with him had spiritually surrended.
The monks described what had happened as a “fall” and warned of a “spiritual contamination” which, in their view, would spread “like spiritual gangrene through concelebrations and joint prayers” with those who received Dumenko. The kelliotes emphasized that anyone who allowed such actions bears personal responsibility before God.
The letter also mentioned external pressure. During the visit, the center of Athos was blocked off by security services due to fears of possible protests from the monks. In general, the Athonites themselves say that Dumenko’s arrival became a true test of faithfulness for many that, unfortunately, not all managed to pass.
What was it really?
In fact, Epifaniy’s visit to Athos had no spiritual meaning.
The head of the OCU did not go there to pray but to create the appearance that his structure is a full member of the Orthodox world and that its presence on the Holy Mountain is natural. For this purpose, the Ecumenical Patriarchate used loyal monasteries as a kind of foothold for “quiet” influence.
The essence of this tactic is clear: after the Athonites officially refused to receive Dumenko in 2021 and again in May 2025, the Patriarchate in Phanar decided to gradually promote the issue of “Ukrainian autocephaly” through subordinate monasteries.
In reality, Dumenko’s visit was an element of pressure on the Athonite brotherhood, through which Athos is being drawn into a game pursuing political rather than church goals.
For Constantinople, especially considering the position of other Local Churches, it was important to show that Athos does not resist but “accepts” the new realities. Even if this concerns only a few loyal monasteries, the informational impact was made as loud as possible. The goal was to create the illusion that the Holy Mountain is open to the OCU. The monks’ boycott of the visit was attempted to be portrayed as the opinion of an insignificant “marginal group” representing those unwilling to submit to current realities.
However, the majority of Athonites look not at the fine words of Dumenko and his subordinates, but at their actions – seizures and desecrations of churches, physical violence against believers, and sacrilege against holy objects. For them, the question of “recognizing the OCU” is not political but spiritual: is it possible for those who behave like enemies of the Church to be present in the Domain of the Mother of God? The answer is clear to every monk raised in the tradition of the Fathers: no.
Conclusions
To be fair, there are those on Athos who show a certain loyalty to the OCU. The motives for this position vary: respect for the Ecumenical Patriarchate, personal attachment to Patriarch Bartholomew, financial considerations (it’s no coincidence that Dumenko was accompanied by Ukrainian businessman Matsola, the main sponsor of the Simonopetra Monastery), and finally, “Greek solidarity”. These sentiments cannot be ignored: they truly exist on the Holy Mountain.
Those monks should remember that monasticism has always been the guardian of the Church’s purity. When monks stop distinguishing the line between truth and political loyalty, between the Church’s canons and solidarity, the very foundation of their monastic service collapses. Perhaps that is why there is a saying on Athos: “Humility without truth turns into betrayal.”
Yes, on the surface, Epifaniy’s visit passed quietly. There were no open conflicts. Yet neither Dumenko nor his entourage view the visit as a victory: Athos made it clear that despite the pressure, it still stands firm. At the same time, it becomes apparent that the form of pressure is changing: instead of trying to “break” the Athonites, the plan is to gradually “lull” them. And although many have already “fallen asleep”, others believe that what is happening may not be the end for the Holy Mountain, but a reminder of why it exists: to preserve the purity of the Church, not to seek the comforts of the world.
