www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Cardinal Sandri visiting Ukraine

I think there are still some basic similarities. You have a church claiming primacy, and a particular church within declaring an autocephalic identity with a self-elected patriarchal structure. The result was an ensuing reluctance of the church assuming the primacy to recognize. Yes, for Bulgaria it took quite a long time.

Even within the Kyivan Church, although not involving a Patriarchate but rather the Metropolitanate, there were tensions between the natively-elected Kyivan bishops (starting with Ilarion) and the EP who sometimes had different opinios on who he wanted for Metropolitan.

We seem to have reached an impasse and will have to agree to disagree. I don't think you can compare the Catholic Church to the Orthodox Church structure or church governance.

And I will repeat my main point: the 3 Orthodox churches you mentioned were all national churches for their respective nations and were state churches. State churches do not exist in Ukraine or most democratic countries ( I am leaving out Scandinavia which is democratic).

To expand: the Orthodox Church of Poland could never have a Patriarch because it is not a national Church; the Catholic Church in Poland is a national Church. The same applies to the Orthodox Church of Czechia. Both are autocephalous but do not have patriarchs.

You can use other arguments to justify a patriarch for the Ukrainian Catholic Church, but comparing it to the national Orthodox churches of Romania, Serbia and Bulgaria, is not valid.

The Old Ritualists have a Patriarchate (several, depending on how one looks at it), and they are certainly a minority within a larger Orthodox majority. And their establishment of a Patriarchate had little to do with greater nationalism.

The establishment of another Patriarchate of Alexandria by the minority Greeks when one was already well established by the Copts is yet another example.

It may in fact be very difficult to compare one country with another. Why even bother to mention very small minority churches in the Czech Republic or in Poland. The situation is very different in Ukraine. The Czech Republic and Polish Orthodox Churches all combined probably do not equal one of the many larger UGCC or UOC-KP eparchies in Ukraine.

I'm no theologian or even historian, but every Ukrainian history (high school or university) course I have ever taken has indicated that there is proof of Apostolic succession from the time of Grand Prince Volodymyr's babptism of Rus-Ukraine in 988 to the signing of the Union of Brest of 1596 to present, to the present day Patriarch Lubomyr (Husar). There is a paper trail. The Moscow Patriarch is painfully aware that it is the daughter church of the See of Kyiv and not vice versa, and that there never has been a tranfer of 'power' from Kyiv to Moscow. The UOC-KP and the UOAC do not even make this claim. The latter doesn't even care. However, both the Ecumenical Patriarch and Roman Pontif are in agreement on the the UGCC has 'legal proof' to being the heir to the See of Grand Prince Volodymyr - and hence why the Moscow Patriarch has now started a anti-Ecumencial Patriarch 'campaign'. Two of the world's most important hierarchs telling the Moscow Patriarch that they do not recognise the 1686 absorbsion of the See of Kyivan Metropolitan becomes much more difficult to refute when it's 'just them bad Latynyky in Rome'.

For their parts, the UOC-KP does not deny the fact that the UGCC has at least what appears to be a 'legal right' to claim the Kyivan See of Volodymyr the Great. The UOC-KP does not see the UGCC as a 'Western' Ruthenian / Ukrainian CATHOLIC Church but rather as an Orthodox Church in Communion with Rome. The Ukainian Autocepholous Church has the same point of view. Both will be present at the Ecumenical Prayer Service in the St-Sophia to commemorate the 1020th anniversary of the Baptism of Rus-Ukraine. Whether the UOC-MP will attend is up for debate. IMHO, they will send some type of representative.

Yet the UOC-KP has publicly stated that the UOC-KP, UAOC, UOC-MP (Metropolitan only - not Moscow Patriarch), in addition to the UGCC are rightful 'heirs' to the See of St-Volodymyr and for this reason will attend the St-Sophia event. UGCC Patriarch Lubomyr has not corrected the UOC-KP in any way. Why ? Because, in essense, the UOC-KP is stating that there should be no problem with each of these churches having their own Patriarch since each reflects a stratum of society, a historical reality, and a solution to inter-church conflicts which have been counterproductive to the Christian Churches in Ukraine. All three see themselves as National Churches. There is a majority of the UOC-MP which see themselves as the National Church of Ukraine, and have no problem with sharing the 'spotlight' with the other three 'National Churches'.

The four Patriarchs will over time, possibly even sooner than later, merge into one Church. Why ? because as UOC-KP has mentioned on several occassions, the Kyvian Ruthenian Orthodox Church will be de facto larger than the Muscovite Orthodox Church - it will become the largest in the world and will have much more influence to mend the Scism between Rome and Constantinople. The Moscow Patriarch is trying to establish a Third Rome. Without Ukraine, this dream will be shattered. Sadly, the Russian Federation by all accounts seems to be slipping further into an abyss, further isolating itself from the rest of Christianity.

I.F.

This report from RISU:

NOTE: It would appear that the Ukrainians are planning massive protests over the fact that the Moscow Patriarch has organized and appointed himself the 'leader' of parallel 1020th Anniversary of the Millennium of Christianity Cellebrations in Kyiv.

Civil Order will be Kept at Celebration of 1020th Anniversary of Kyivan Rus Baptism
17.07.2008, [16:51] // Church-state relations //

Kyiv� Civil order during the celebration of the 1020th anniversary of the baptism of Kyivan Rus will be secured at the appropriate level. This was reported on 17 July 2008 at a press-conference by the assistant minister of internal affairs of Ukraine, Oleksandr Savchenko.

�I can guarantee that in the places of residence of the higher officials of Ukraine and of the high clergy there will be an appropriate level of civil order,� said Savchenko. In his words, a series of measures will be used. Specifically, police officers will follow the arrival in Ukraine of faithful from other countries and will be present at meetings with the clergy.

At the same time, the assistant minister did not exclude �certain problems� with law and order in the place where Patriarch Alexis II, head of the Russian Orthodox Church, will stay. �The police will do everything possible to prevent any acts of hooliganism,� stressed Savchenko.

The assistant minister also promised police escorts for all guests, but the exact amount of escorts is still unknown.

Source:

Jean Francois writes that

Excuse me? I know of not even the faintest indication that Patriarch Lubomyr or any other Greek-Catholic ecclesiastic is asserting some sort of pretension to being Grand Prince of Kyiv!

There are descendants of the Rurikide dynasty here and there, but no one seems seriously interested in enthroning one of them.

Fr. Serge

I agree with Orest; this thread should be focused on the visit of Cardinal Sandri. Any larger issues of Ukrainian ecclesiastical history, the Kyivan Patriarchate, etc. should have separate threads. Thank you. Дякую.

Are you saying, J.F., that Rome and Constantinople are in some sort of secret agreement that the UGCC is the "true" heir of the old Church of Kyiv? That is tantamount to saying that Constantinople considers the UGCC to be the true Orthodox Church in Kyiv.

If that is true, then why did Constantinople slam down the "double communion" proposal of Patriarch Lubomyr?

I'm sorry, Jean Francois, but your analysis of matters in Ukraine is simply drifting into fantasyland. Take note, I am not taking issue with you personally, but with your analysis. However, in some threads on ByzCath, you have made the following, really wild claims:

1) That there is going to be concelebration between the EP and the UOC-KP, with certain other autocephalous churches participating, and with the UGCC present;

2) That the UOC-MP will send a representative to a UOC-KP event

3) That the UGCC is the "heir to the See of Volodomyr". (What does that mean? I share Father Serge's astonishment)

In a previous post addressed to me, you invited me to speak to some people who, you say, can tell me more about the aspirations of the Ukrainian people. Well, J.F., I have no doubt that a majority of the Ukrainians want an autocephalous Church under one Patriarch. However, the point here is not what the Ukrainians want, but what the news is.

Father Serge - Thank you for the correction. I'm refering to the church of Grand Prince Volodymyr and not his Royal Dynasty.

Diak - Thank you for moving this topic to another thread.

Asianpilgrim - I was in the Philippines just over a year ago, and had the opportunity of visiting the the Annunciation Orthodox Cathedral in Paraque, Metro Manila. What a lovely parish, both people and temple. Most cogregants were in fact Roman Catholics who simply attended the Orthodox Cathedral but never actually converted. I'm not sure why.

I was invited to lunch by one of the parishoners, Ed, whom I had formerly known here in the United States. He is psychiatrist and his wife a nurse and they have their own 'hospital' in Manila. They were doing well here in the USA, but over there they seem to have a much more prominent position in society. They certainly do appreciate American trained medical professionals.

It' worth noting that Ed and Lucinda have attended both Ukrainian Orthodox and Ukrainian Catholic Churches with me. From the moment they entered he temples here in New York, they were ready to convert. I'm still working on it.

During my lunch with Ed and Lucinda we discussed the Ukrainian Patriarchate - both Greek Catholic and Orthodox. At no time did friends think that I was "anti-Russian", but rather simply articulating a centuries old need and desire of the Ukrainian people to rid themselves of their colonial masters. Taras Shevchenko articulated it best in the verse I previously posted.

I called Ed last night and asked him to meet with you at the Orthodox Cathedral in Manila. He said that there were in fact Ukrainians who attended because they did not have their own church. Ed asked that I invite you to their Divine Liturgy and have the opportunity of speaking to the Ukrainians who attend the Cathedral. Their views tend to be identical to mine.

Would you be available to meet with them in Manila ?

I.F.

PS: Here are some additonal news stories (in Ukrainian) which will help you better understand the topic at hand.

http://www.day.kiev.ua/204295/

http://www.umoloda.kiev.ua/number/1201/180/42642/

http://presscenter.ukrinform.com/photo_big.php?person_id=15

http://www.umoloda.kiev.ua/number/1203/163/42710/

Dear Jean Francois;

Thank you for the kind invitation. Send my regards also to Ed and Lucinda. I look forward to talking to them and to the Ukrainians.

I occasionally drop by the Greek Orthodox Cathedral of the Annunciation. Last time I did so was last April 25, Great Friday.

Unfortunately, at present, I act as Master of Ceremonies at a Traditional Latin Mass scheduled at 9:30 in the morning of Sundays, exactly the same time as the Divine Liturgy in Paranaque. Once my substitute is sufficiently well trained to act in my absence, I plan to take a couple of Sundays off, and in one of them I'll certainly drop by for Divine Liturgy at the Greek Cathedral.

Incidentally, there's an old Russian lady who goes to Divine Liturgy every Sunday too.