www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Split deepens among Orthodox in Ukraine

Amen, Amen, Amen.

The problem is this issue and what underlies it is bad for unity, either within our without Orthodoxy.

Borislav said: Well unlike the Protestants and the Catholics during the reformation we are not chopping each others heads of.

Yeah, because this is 2007 and not 1507 and we all know such actions would never go over in Europe in the 21st century. Roll it back half a millenium and I'd guarantee heads would be rolling...

Logos - Alexis

Or, just go a few years back and bodies (with or without heads) would be disappearing!

Are you trying to say that Orthodoxy never in its history faced any heresies or adversities?

Unlike Rome, every eastern orthodox Patriarchate has been taken attacked DIRECTLY on their own land. Be it by Communists or Muslims we have been under attack since the 7th century.


Somehow we have been able to solve our problems without the Inquisition eh, burning people at the stake, massacring thousands of none believers etc...

Check your history.

While I pray for the reunion of all Christian Churches, the reunion with Rome and Orthodoxy can not and will not happen until Rome stops claims of infallibility and supremacy.

Than there are issues like the purgatory and the Immaculate Conception.

Time will tell

Establishing a Ukrainian Catholic Patriarchate in Kiev will make the schism between Orthodox and Catholic even worse. The UGCC needs to stay in Lvyv where it belongs.

On the other hand if this post is saying that there should be 1 united ORTHODOX Church in Kiev with some form of communion with UGCC in Lvyv, I would be all for it..... But for that the Pope would needs to become just like any other Orthodox Bishop. He should have primacy of Honor, not supremacy.

The vast majority of Orthodox in Ukraine will never enter into Communion with the Pope outside of an entire Orthodox - Catholic reunion. And who would fall for "we've entered into formal Communion with the Pope but that does not mean that we have severed Communion with any Orthodox Patriarchates that are willing to maintain a "dual communion"?

Anyone that would do that would become a Catholic. Plain and simple.

Met. Vladimir (Sabodan) would be elected the Primate of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine that was united, by seemingly any objective set of criteria. Even EP North American Ukrainians admit that. He has virtually all of the Eastern and Southern Russian speaking parts of the Country. It's mathematical and despite what some say publicly to the contrary, privately they recognize that.
By the way, the only Met. of Kiev that all NA canonical bishops that are from Ukrainian background (EP, OCA and MP) are in full communion with is ... Met. Vladimir.


Christ Is Among Us! Indeed He Is And Ever Shall Be!

Three Cents

I have and came to find out ... that within the Eastern Church "heretics" were burned, massacred, etc. All you have to do is study the history of the Old Believers in Russia to discover what happened to people who disagreed with the official Orthodox line. Or, study the history of the monophysite communities in the reach of official Byzantium? Or, study the history of the Russians against the Kazan and in the Crimea as Russian bishops and priests rejoiced in the triumph of the Cross over the Muslims and celebrated the shedding of Muslim blood in the name of Christ. Or, travel in the more recent past to Kosovo and read the accounts of Muslims whose hearts were cut out in the shape of a cross, etc.

This illusion continues to be expressed by some within the Eastern tradition and I think it is very sad. The East must repent of its violent sins against people just as the West did through the actions of the holy Father PJPII.

Dear Borislav,

Actually, or at least in the Greek world, it was always the infighting of one against the other that was their downfall. (Hmmm! Plenty of attrocities there). Without this, they would never have been conquered by the Muslims. Too many times we tend to place the blame on others. Then again, maybe we Orthodox have formed some sort of 'martyr' complex.

Then again what about communism that was rampant in the Balkans before, during and after WWII. Again, it was infighting.


All the issues will be solved. The Holy Spirit will open peoples hearts in whichever way our Lord so Will. They will start seeing the reality and desperation of the world situation, cease their self love, and begin to form a comprehension of their Christian brethren and why and how their differences came about.

I believe both his All Holiness Bartholomew and his Beatitude Pavle have called us as Orthodox Christians to repent and seek forgiveness on a number of fronts. My own Metropolitan has honored Greek Catholic martyrs and is overall a symbol of charity and love. There is of course much more we can do, and much more I can do.

Please don't paint with so broad a brush though.

Patriarch Nikon who started the persecution against the Old Believers was condemned in His lifetime. The same can not be said for the people who did worse things in the Latin Church.

What does rejoycing at successful defense of our motherland from Muslim occupants have to do with this conversation.

Also the Ethnic cleansing in Kosovo was never supported by the Serbian Orthodox Church. Do you actually believe that the Serbian Patriarchate called for cutting out of peoples hearts?

Saying that the East is Historically as violent as the West is preposterous.

Yes we had a dark page of our History with Old Believers, but the Patriarch who started this horrible ordeal was condemned in HIS LIFETIME.

This is the only example of Hierarchy of the Eastern Church engaging in this kind of persecution.

Actually, you are incorrect (historically speaking). If you don't like my example of the Old Believers, how about the Russian Church's persecution of the "Judaizers" in the 15th century. The use of force was debated by St Nilus of Sora and St Joseph of Volokolamsk. St Nilus opposed it but the majority of the Bishops with St Joseph adopted the use of force in the fight against heretics. (There is some historical debate over exactly what happened and when -- but the basics of the story remain undisputed. The leaders of the Judaizing heresy were tortured and burned at the stake unless they recanted of their heresy. Few in the Russian Church opposed this -- except for the valiant efforts of St. Nilus of Sora.)

I have never read that the burning at the stake of the Archpriest Avakkum was repented of -- can you provide links? I would be interested in reading this.



NB: The attacks against Kazan were instigated by the Russians. There was no defense of the motherland against the attacks of the Muslims in this instance.

As for another myth ... it should be noted, that there were always religious leaders in the West who opposed and questioned the use of force within and by the Church. This was a major assertion of St Francis of Assissi. Remember, it was Catholic priests who were the harshest critics of the enslavement and slaughter of native peoples by the Conquistadors.

I think that the condemnation of Patrarch Nikon and the current belief of the Old Rite being as fruitful as the new = condemnation of the burning at the stake of Avakkum, don't you?

Also let us not forget that Avakkum was giving blessings to His followers to set themselves on fire, thus making Him not only dangerous to the Orthodox Church, but to the very souls of His sheep.

Attacks against Kazan instigated by Russians? What were the Tatars doing on Russian land in the first place? This was defense of Russian lands indeed! Kazan served as a strong hold for Tatar Khan's to stage ransacking of Russian lands.

I would agree that the more recent acceptance of the Old Believers by the MP does come close to the apology offered by Pope John Paul II. Although I have never seen an actual apology offered, have you? I would be very interested if you have -- just send me the link.

In terms of Kazan, what were the "Tatars" doing there? The short answer is: Living there as they and their ancestors had been doing for (at least) hundreds of years. Although scholars disagree over when the town of Kazan was established, it had been in existence for hundreds of years before the invasion of the Muscovites in 1552. Thousands were massacred in the Russian war of aggression. (For a short overview of the history of the Tartar people, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatars. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazan for a brief overview of the history of Kazan.) It was not until the ruthless slaughter of the original inhabitants and the forcible evacuation and/or Christianization of the original inhabitants that Kazan was included within the purview of the "Russian motherland."