The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Deirdre Glasheen, JohnFromRuthenia, Michael Labish, meeklytrying, Jm Rkque
5,785 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
3 members (3 invisible), 111 guests, and 29 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Byzantine Nebraska
Byzantine Nebraska
by orthodoxsinner2, December 11
Church of the Holy Trinity (UGCC) - Brazil
Church of the Holy Trinity (UGCC) - Brazil
by Santiago Tarsicio, March 17
Papal Audience 10 November 2017
Papal Audience 10 November 2017
by JLF, November 10
Upgraded Russian icon corner
Upgraded Russian icon corner
by The young fogey, October 20
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,074
Posts414,145
Members5,785
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4
#175525 05/23/03 04:17 PM
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 231
S
Member
OP Offline
Member
S
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 231
In another thread, there has been some discussion about the "Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church-Sobornopravna" under Metropolitan Stephan.

As far as I understand from their homepage www.uaoc.org [uaoc.org] they have no direct relationship to the UAOC in Ukraine. They were, it seems, under the UOC-KP for a while, but recently they consecrated a former deacon of the UOC-KP and gave him the title "Metropolitan-Archbishop of Kyiv and all Rus'Ukraine". Still, Metropolitan Stephan of Toronto remains the Primate of the synod.

Recently there seems to have beem a schism within this juridiction. The link to the Western European eparchy have been removed from their homepage without any explanation. According to the Western European homepage http://site.voila.fr/F.C.O./ , the eparchy was granted a tomos of autocephalicy by the FORMER primate of the UAOC-Sobornopravna, Metropolitan Alexis, and it now calls it self "Eglise Orthodoxe Occidentale".

Fr.Lev said they were not a "play church" but compared them to ROCOR. But I'm not sure what to think, judging from the information on their homepage they seem a bit suspicious to me.

However, I don't really have enough information to really make a jugdement about them. Does anyone else have some more information about this jurisdiction?

Christian

#175526 05/23/03 04:36 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,184
Likes: 5
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,184
Likes: 5
Dear Christian,

Here in Toronto, every UGCC parish acts like it is "sobornopravna" and "avtokefalna!" smile

Alex

#175527 05/29/03 08:57 AM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 779
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 779
Dear Christian -

It all remains a bit hazy, but the Western Europeans - who I think are nearly all converts -have linked up with some vagante Mickey-Mouse American Orthodox Patriarchate. The UAOC sobornopravna seems to have washed their hands of them and is taking European clergy who refuse to be part of this schism. I have a friend who is one of these clergy. From what I see through him, the UAOC sobornopravna is legitimate and sound.

Spasi Khristos -
Mark, monk and sinner.

#175528 06/01/03 12:17 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 571
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 571
Slava Isusu Christu!

I talked with Metropolitan Philip back in 99. He was very humble and had a deep love for the Ukrainian and Carpatho-Rusyn Byzantine Catholic Churches. I most certainly believe, although "canonical" Orthodox in America dispute his Juridiction's legitimacy, nevertheless, His Beatitude has valid Episcopal Orders and himself and his clergy and people are very Orthodox and at the same time being also very Ukrainian-Byzantine Catholic in spirit; it's interesting, they have a deep love and respect for the Holy Father and yet are Orthodox. What a joy! The UAOC could not be classed as a vagante group; it has real Churches, real people and truly valid Orders. Many Years to His Beatitude Philip!

In Christ,


Robert Horvath

#175529 06/01/03 01:34 PM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 779
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 779
I'm slightly confused by the last posting. The First Hierarch of the UAOC sobornopravna in America is Metropolitan Stefan.

Spasi Khristos -
Mark, monk and sinner.

#175530 06/01/03 08:36 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 571
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 571
Yes it's Stephan; I was thinking about Metropolitan Philip (Antiochian) at the time.

It was early:)

#175531 06/02/03 05:20 AM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,658
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,658
Regharding the "Orthodoxy" of this uncanonical group. They have "glorified" several Western saints who are not Orthodox saints and there is even a fraternity linked to this Church and dedicated to St. Francis of Asissi.

http://www.franciserafin.es.vg

How can this be Orthodox?

#175532 06/02/03 07:48 AM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 779
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 779

#175533 06/02/03 07:51 AM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 779
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 779
Please be careful with your use of words. This Franciscan nonsense is not part of the sobornopravna, but of the vagante minded schismatics that left the UAOC to share communion with some vagante 'American Patriarchate'. This is the sort of heretical mentality the American UAOC bishops were trying to contain, but to no avail. I have been in touch with Metropolitan Michael over the last few days and have to say that there is nothing unOrthodox about this Church. As for uncanonical. How can they be uncanonical when they were granted a tomos of autocephaly and received a canonical episcopate?

The UAOC sobornopravna should not be judged by the rubbish on the Spanish website. The Spanish website is neither Orthodox or linked to the UAOC, no matter what lies the vagantes of 'Bishop' Pablo, 'Metropolitan' Kallistos and his army of newly 'consecrated' bishops may spread. They are schismatics and should be considered such. THEY DO NOT BELONG TO THE UAOC SOBORNOPRAVNA!!!

Spasi Khristos -
Mark, mok and sinner.

#175534 06/02/03 01:49 PM
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 231
S
Member
OP Offline
Member
S
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 231
Concerning the canonicity of this jurisdiction, I am still not convinced.

"How can they be uncanonical when they were granted a tomos of autocephaly and received a canonical episcopate?"

From whom did they recieve a tomos of autocephality?

At one time they were under the juridiction of Patriarch Philaret of Kiev, why aren't they any more? On what terms did they leave the Kiev Patriarchate?

And their priest in Vancouver, Fr. Demetri Moamar, "served in Damascus, Syria, as Dean for the Patriarch of Antioch, His Beatitude, Ignatius IV, for fourteen years." Why doesn't he anymore? Did he recieve a canonical realese from the Patriarch of Antioch?

Christian

#175535 06/02/03 02:40 PM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 779
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 779
The Ukrainian Autocephalous Church received a Tomos of autocephaly from the Patriarch Gregorious VII of Constantinople in 1924 and the Apostolic lineage was ensured by Patriarch Dionisii of Warsaw in 1941.

The UAOC continued in exile, but in the light of the reception of various Ukrainian groups into the Ecumenical Patriarchate, Constantinople changed its tune and branded the free autocephalists (in exile) as uncanonical schismatics.

This is the way the story has been related to me, though I am not a Church historian or cleric of the sobornopravna. However, I have checked out basic facts, and they seem to back up this purported history.

Are they 'uncanonical' simply because they stand free of Constantinople and don't feel forced to trawl the 'Orthodox social club' for recognition. They don't need to stamp of approval from Constantinople to possess the fullness of the Church.

As for the Kyiv Patriarchate link, and that of an individual priest, I remain woefully ignorant and not particularly interested. I am an outside observer, observing good fruit on this tree whilst other trees labelled 'Orthodox' produce bitter and rotten fruit. 'By their fruits shall ye know them'.


Spasi Khristos -
Mark, monk and sinner.

#175536 06/04/03 07:15 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 348
D
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 348
Quote
Originally posted by Fr Mark:
The Ukrainian Autocephalous Church received a Tomos of autocephaly from the Patriarch Gregorious VII of Constantinople in 1924 and the Apostolic lineage was ensured by Patriarch Dionisii of Warsaw in 1941.

The UAOC continued in exile, but in the light of the reception of various Ukrainian groups into the Ecumenical Patriarchate, Constantinople changed its tune and branded the free autocephalists (in exile) as uncanonical schismatics.
Reverend Father,

Actually, Most Blessed Dionisii (Valedinskii)
was never a Patriarch, but the Orthodox Metropolitan of Warsaw. Autocephaly was granted
in 1924 to the Polish (i.e. existing in the territory of Polish Republic) Orthodox Church.
Under German occupation, Metropolitan Dionisii
was at first replaced by Bishop Seraphim (Lade)
of Berlin, but when he accepted Germans' terms
(change of Church's name into "Holy Autocephalous
Orthodox Church in the Generalgouvernement" and
consecration of two Ukrainian hierarchs) he
returned to his see.
It's true that Bishops from that jurisdiction
formed in 1942 the "second" Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church and consecrated many
other bishops. Almost all episcopate of mentioned UAOC escaped from Ukraine before return of Soviet
troops. In 1949 (?) in German town of Aschaffenburg a schism occurred - Bishop Gregory
(Ohiychuk) severed communion with the rest of the
UAOC. Bishop Gregory formed the UAOC Sobornopravna, the smallest Ukrainian Orthodox
jurisdiction outside Ukraine.

Sincerely,
subdeacon Peter

#175537 06/05/03 08:59 AM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 779
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 779
I didn't realise I'd typed 'Patriarch'. This was a mistake as I know the Polish Church is only autonomous. Did Constantinople not grant autocephaly to the UAOC directly?

Spasi Khristos -
Mark, monk and sinner

#175538 06/05/03 01:03 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 348
D
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 348
Quote
Originally posted by Fr Mark:

Did Constantinople not grant autocephaly to the UAOC directly?
Constantinople could not to do so, as the request
was from the Polish Church (part of Moscow
Patriarchate, since 1918 uder Polish rule) supported by the Polish government. The only existing at those times Ukrainian Autocephalous
Orthodox Church was that of Basil Lypkivs'kyi,
metropolitan consecrated by laying hands of
clergymen and laity (without bishops). Such
Church had no possibility to obtain any recognition from Constantinople and, of course,
never applied for any.
BTW, UAOC had no structures in Polish Republic.


Sincerely,
subdeacon Peter

#175539 06/05/03 04:07 PM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 779
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 779
Many thanks, Subdeacon Peter,

This is very interesting. In its history, the UOAC sobornopravna website says:-

"1924 - A Tomos was issued by His All-Holiness Gregorios VII, Ecumenical Patriarch, re-establishing the historic Kyivan-Rus (Ukrainian) Metropolitanate as an Autocephalous Church, placing the responsibility of establishing a new Synod of Bishops upon His Beatitude, the Metropolitan-Archbishop of Warsaw, Dionisij Waledynskyj."

Is this straight history, or heavily doctored?

Spasi Khristos -
Mark, monk and sinner.

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4

Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2022 (Forum 1998-2022). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5