www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Rome says no go for UGCC Patriarchate

Dear Herb,

I think you have missed a major point in our argument for a Patriarchate:

We, the Church of Kyiv, ARE OUR MOTHER CHURCH !!!

And Moscow's, too !!!!!

dear 2L:

By "Tsarhorod", we mean, Constantinople, not "Moscow". (if I have understood your post correctly, or have I missed your point?)

Of course I absolutely agree with you that we are Moscow's "Mother Church."

The "Tsar" the Church of Rus prayed for was historically the one and only Emperor of the known world, the Byzantine Imperator of New Rome.

Herb

Dear Friends,

So much phyletism here!

So much emphasis placed on the Church of Kyiv in a historical role of being a Light of the Gospel in Eastern Europe!

So much bashing of the MP's view of church history!

So much disagreement with the Administrator's own view of Kyiv's (sorry, Sir, "Kiev's") role!

Keep up the great work, guys!!

Alex

I've just heard an article from radio Kyiv (Kiev).
They confirmed that the Ukrainian Orthodox Church Kyivan Patriarchate and the UAOC have nothing against establishing The UGC Patriarchate in Kyiv (Kiev). If I'm not mistaken the reporter also mentioned that the Crimean Tartars aren't against it either. ( I don't know if I understood that correctly the reporter spoke very quickly). And I see no reason for them to be for it nor against it anyway.
Lauro

OH yeah, I forgot the reporter also says that the only ones that are against the UGC Patriarchate are the Russian Orthodox and the so called Ukrainian Orthodox Church Moscow Patriarchate.(Nice guys, don't you think?)
Lauro

I think if you take this 'artificial group' and tease out the different components you will quickly notice that many are not in agreement with their hierarchs, for example:

(1) Some would be very favorable to having a Kyivan Patriarch. These are the people of various ethnic origins who see themselves as citizens of Ukraine first. They want Ukraine to have it's own Patriarch.

(2) Some couldn't care less one way or the other. I think this is the largest component since they are not practicing Christians.

(3) Some would be against it. The communist element and those who adhere to this group are now rapidly becoming a minority.

I once remember reading that a communist stated that "the Western Ukranians were too religious" and therefore were somehow "unsuited to make decisions regarding church life, including having a Kyivan Patriarch". I think that the table has turned on the commies !

Dear Lauro,

Since both Rome and Moscow condemn the UAOC and the UOC-KP as uncanonical non-entities, you would think they would have the ecumenical generosity to listen carefully to what our dear brothers, the Crimean Tatars, have to say on the matter.

Thank God we have the Tatars for our friends!

Do they have a Pope, by the way?

Alex

Well it's better if they're with us than against us. No, I don't think they have a Pope, if I'm not mistaken I think they're Amish.
Lauro

Dear Alex:

I don't think Rome has ever condemned UAOC and/or UOC-KP as "uncanonical non-entities(!)"

Rome does not meddle in the affairs of the Orthodox, especially the Ukrainians

Roma locuta est; causa finita est!

AmdG

Of course the Krym (Crimean) Tatars are for the establishment of a UCGG Patriarchate. Have you read the recent RISU story about how Russia is sending in 'aggitator - trouble makers' into Krym (Crimea). Contrary to many of our historical images of the Krym Tatars, they look just like us and are very nice people.

The Russian nationalists (from the Russian Federation) do not want the Tatars to live in peace in their ancestral homeland, and seem to have no broblem in creating another 'Chechnya nightmare' to get their way.

The Krym Tatars see the blocking of the UGCC patriarchate by the ROC for what it is - Russian Chauvenism / Imperialism, something they have been experiencing also.

SOLIDARITY or should I say SOLIDARNOSH !

Dear Amado,

Rome has assured the MP that it will only maintain ties with canonical Orthodox.

There was a whole hullabaloo about this not too long ago in the Russian press with His Beatitude Lubomyr held a public service with the UOC-KP Patriarch.

The Russian press questioned Lubomyr's loyalty to Rome's teaching on this matter and they quoted extensively from some letter from Cardinal . . .Kasper I think it was, yes, Kasper.

Our unfriendly host . . .

Since it is Lent, I won't tell you what I think of YOUR patriarchate, Big Guy!

I think you can guess, though . . .

Alex

Dear Hritzko,

In fact, our Church has a number of Tatar Orthodox saints in its calendar - at least our Orthodox do, including St Peter of the Horde and a number of others.

And the Kyivan Rus' Prince St Theodore of Smolensk married the Mongolian Khan's daughter and, with her, had two sons - both of whom are saints - David and Constantine.

With the permission of the Khan, Theodore established Churches in Mongolia and northern China.

Getting back to the Tatars, when Hetman Ivan Mazeppa sought asylum and protection with them, the Russians offered the Tatars vast sums of money for the defeated Hetman.

But the Tatars, being faithful to their religion and the Koran, refused to hand him over to his enemies.

Alex

Since my last posted questions (on a similar thread?) seemed to be answered in the way I had suspected, let me make an observation and ask you humbly if I am perhaps onto something.

I suspect that the whole issue about the Patriarchate for the Ukraine is held hostage by two titans that hem you in between them. You have Rome on the one hand and the MP on the other. Neither agrees on what should be the status of the people of the Ukraine in relation to their religious allegiance. But both seem to be in total agreement that you should not be an independent body--as a mature Church with the right of self governing. Rome is happy to have you where you are; Moscow would like to put you into the position of being in their Church or not being at all; and neither wants the Ukraine to be an entity unto itself that both would have to respect as a full major player in the ecumencial discussions that have as their ultimate goal full communion.

I hope that this does not strike anyone as too harsh, but it seems that you have been promised a Patriarchate since the time of the Union and that the time has come to establish it or admit that the promise was not meant to be kept. On the other hand, we also have to assess what this would do to relations with the Orthodox--our brothers and sisters. Still, it seems to me that in justice the Latin Church does have an obligation here to keep a promise made.

Am I off here?

BOB

No, Bob, you are the most "on" of anyone here, I think. We put both the MP and Rome outside of their mutual "comfort zone". You are exactly on target. God bless.

Let me preface by saying that I cringe at the thought of being out of communion with what I perceive as the Universal Church--the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church spoken of in the Creeds. I lost my first job after college and I was told that if I had just joined the boss' church he would have gone to bat for me. But to the point . . .

At some point in the history of all the current autocephalous churches that form the Catholic Communion newly independent churches had a period of being "uncanonical" or "out in the cold." There is a period of discomfort all around. The MP felt cut off from her Mother Church after one of the unions with Rome.

So, they both feel out of their comfort zone with you being independent. What level of discomfort are you willing to endure to establish the Patriarchate? Are you willing to go to the two "non-canonical" Orthodox bodies and propose that the three of you join and go it alone until you are recognized (or not)? Are you willing to be "out in the cold" for, perhaps, 50 to 100 years?

It seems to me that if you have prayerfully considered this and it seems that the Holy Spirit is with you no one can take Christ from you. But if it feels like it would be a nag at the conscience to make such a move it might mean that the Holy Spirit is saying "stay where you are, endure, and grow stronger by this suffering at the hands of those who oppress you."

It's lonely out in the cold. I've been there in my own spiritual pilgrimage. I can't get over the idea that I must be in communion with the Apostles and their successors and be recognized as such both visibly and inside this clay ball I haul around. I was Catholic, became Orthodox, and returned for many, many reasons. No move came without a lot of soul searching and agonizing.

Put anger aside and use this Great Lent to do the really hard work: discerning what the voice of the Spirit really is. Remember He doesn't shout in the streets and doesn't cause anger in others. He is the still, small voice that whispers to us when we have silenced ourselves and truly listen, not adding our own desires. And be prepared to have the Spirit tell you something you don't want to hear. Be prepared to shed tears.

I will continue to pray that the Lord will guide His followers in the UGCC and in the Ukraine. May His Will be done.

BOB