|
2 members (2 invisible),
307
guests, and
27
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,219
Posts415,295
Members5,881
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268 |
Fr. Dcn. Randy:
Looking at the picture you posted, the representative of the Roman Catholic Church appears to be not a Cardinal as he is not wearing "reds" at all.
He does not look like Cardinal Jaworski, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of L'viv, either.
Could he be Archbishop Ivan Jurkovic, the Apostolic Nuncio (since 2004) to Ukraine?
Amado
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 501
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 501 |
Has the Ecumenical Patriarchate confirmed this news? This was issued last month by the EP: PRESS RELEASE During its regular session, held on June 23-25, 2008, The Holy and Sacred Synod reviewed the invitations of His Beatitude Alexy, Patriarch of Moscow, requesting a Patriarchal Delegation to attend the festivities of the 1020th anniversary of the Christianization of the Kievan Rus and of His Excellency Viktor Yushchenko, President of Ukraine, to His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to personally lead the aforementioned festivities. Having evaluated the invitations of the Church, Nation and the Ukrainian people, and in honoring their feelings, the Mother Church – as the one who originally guided the Ukrainian people into baptism – decided to respond to the aforementioned invitations through the sending of a Patriarchal Delegation under the personal leadership of His All Holiness. At the Patriarchate, 2 July 2008 From the Chief Secretariat of the Holy Synod http://www.ec-patr.org/docdisplay.php?lang=en&id=951&tla=enI wouldn't trust Asia News for accurate reporting, so please let's stick to the topic. Also let's all pray for good weather this weekend for the outdoor celebrations and that all participating will be richly blessed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 |
I think you are right Amado; since both the Cardinal and the Nuncio were invited by the President I suppose the Nuncio gets the "bumping rights" as the official representative of the RCs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,923 Likes: 28
Moderator Member
|
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,923 Likes: 28 |
Looking at the picture you posted, the representative of the Roman Catholic Church appears to be not a Cardinal as he is not wearing "reds" at all. The cope the RC bishop is wearing is one of the colors for funerals. If you look closely his zucchetto appears to be cardinal red. BOB
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,028
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,028 |
It seems that both the UOC-KP and the EP have DENIED that there will be any concelebration or communion this coming July 26. Emphases mine. http://www.risu.org.ua/eng/news/article;23571/
“Schism in World Orthodoxy Being Prepared in Kyiv,” Says UOC-MP Rep
22.07.2008, [17:09] // UOC-MP //
Moscow-Kyiv— Ukraine is again on the edge of a serious interchurch conflict, like that which happened in the 1990s, with seizing of churches and physical conflicts of Orthodox groups. But this time not between the Kyivan and Moscow patriarchates but between the Moscow and Constantinople patriarchates. So said Archimandrite Kyryl (Hovorun), head of the Department of External Church Contacts of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Moscow Patriarchate (UOC-MP) on 21 July 2008.
According to Fr. Kyryl, literally in the last few days discussions have become active between Kyiv and Constantinople with the direct participation of Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko. The content is this: already during Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople’s trip to Kyiv for the celebration of the 1020th anniversary of the Baptism of Rus-Ukraine on 26 July there is an agreement that the patriarch will announce the joining to his church of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Kyivan Patriarchate (UOC-KP) and Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (UAOC). In such an event, both these structures will lose any self-government; Patriarch Filaret (Denysenko), head of the UOC-KP, will cease to be patriarch but will become a metropolitan, and, in addition, only the patriarch of Constantinople will have the right to appoint metropolitans and bishops. However, canonical status will be gained. To the present, neither the UOC-KP nor the UAOC are recognized by other national Orthodox churches. Under such conditions, a significant number of parishes of the Moscow Patriarchate in the western part of the country can transfer under the jurisdiction of Constantinople, for this will already be a canonical church.
According to Fr. Kyryl, this will lead to very sharp conflicts in the religious environment and in Ukrainian politics, new seizures of churches, and, most importantly, to a schism in all world Orthodoxy. For then a global conflict will start between the Moscow and Constantinople patriarchates. Part of the Orthodox churches will stand on the side of Moscow, part with Constantinople.
According to Fr. Kyryl, all this can make doubtful the trip of Russian Orthodox Patriarch Alexis II to Ukraine for the celebration. Patriarch Alexis II named two conditions for his participation in the event: (1) Patriarch Bartholomew refusing to make a statement about the status of the UOC-KP and (2) no participation of Ukrainian “schismatics” in religious services with the patriarch of Constantinople.
Fr. Kyryl does not exclude the possibility that the transfer of the UOC-KP “under Constantinople” can happen, if not during the celebration of the Baptism of Rus, then later. Discussions about this are going on very actively, he said, though not without difficulties. According to Fr. Kyryl, Yushchenko and Patriarch Filaret would like the UOC-KP to receive autocephaly (self-government) from Constantinople very soon. But he said that Patriarch Bartholomew I has other plans. “Now his church has 3 million members, spread over the whole world. Receiving Ukraine, he significantly will increase his flock. Yushchenko expects that he will not refuse at the last minute,” said Fr. Kyryl.
However, the UOC-KP and Patriarchate of Constantinople categorically deny that during the celebration Patriarch Bartholomew will make similar statements.
The UOC-KP confirms that it is considering transferring under the jurisdiction of Constantinople as one possible future variant and that dialogue is going on with Patriarch Bartholomew; however no one will announce this on 26 July (even more so because Patriarch Bartholomew does not want to start a dispute with Patriarch Alexis).
UOC-KP Bishop Yevstratii (Zoria) told the newspaper “Sehodnia” (Today): “This question was considered at a meeting between the delegation of the Patriarchate of Constantinople and us in Kyiv that happened in May of this year. It was organized through the mediation of Viktor Yushchenko. But no decision has yet been made, and during the trip of Bartholomew he will not talk about the UOC-KP joining his patriarchate.” Sources:
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 |
[quote]The UOC-KP confirms that it is considering transferring under the jurisdiction of Constantinople as one possible future variant and that dialogue is going on with Patriarch Bartholomew; [/quote]
The best news of all - emphasis mine.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,028
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,028 |
[quote[u]]The UOC-KP confirms that it is considering transferring under the jurisdiction of Constantinople as one possible future variant and that dialogue is going on with Patriarch Bartholomew; [/u
The best news of all - emphasis mine. This is precisely what puzzles me. I thought that the UOC-KP is struggling for an autocephalous Patriarchal church? If this transfer of jurisdiction does happen, then the UOC-KP will in fact be abolishing itself and accepting the reduced status of an Archbishopric. Even if the UOC-KP were to dissolve and come under Constantinople, I don't think the UAOC and certain hierarchs of the UOC-KP will be happy. Even if the UOC-KP were to then claim, "oh, don't worry, after we become part of Constantinople, Constantinople will make us autocephalous and allow us to become a canonical Patriarchate", there would still be three serious questions: a) If the UOC-KP abolishes itself, then does that not validate the UOC-MP's criticism that the UOC-KP was never a legitimate Patriarchate in the first place? Patriarchates have disappeared in the past, but never voluntarily in order to come under another Patriarchate. b) What assurance will the UOC-KP have that it will, indeed, be granted its autocephaly very quickly? If there is anything that Constantinople has shown in the 20th century, it is that it relinquishes as little power as it can. (Same with Moscow in general.) c) Will not such a move impact negatively on the UGCC? UGCC's main argument for patriarchal status is that it is a mature, local Eastern church. If the UOC-KP -- which is far larger than the UGCC -- were to dissolve itself to come under the EP, then why should Rome recognize the UGCC's patriarchal status?
Last edited by asianpilgrim; 07/23/08 05:40 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 |
Take this report for whatever it's worth - and no, I don't know what "KED" is - Fr. Serge
KED: July 23, 2008
Church tension running high
The head of the Church of Greece, Archbishop Ieronymos, will attend a
service in Kiev on Sunday despite threats by the Russian Orthodox Church
that it could split from the Ecumenical Patriarchate over possible
recognition of the Ukrainian Church.
The service in Kiev, held to mark 1,020 years since the
Christianization of the Russians, has taken on an air of controversy
after Russian Patriarch Alexy II launched a verbal attack against the
spiritual leader of Orthodox Christians, Ecumenical Patriarch
Vartholomaios.
Vartholomaios responded yesterday by sending a letter to Alexy calling
his remarks “insulting.”
Alexy had called for Orthodox leaders to boycott the service in Kiev
but, in a vote held by Greece’s Holy Synod yesterday, it was decided
by 11 votes in favor to one against that Ieronymos should go. He will be
accompanied by the bishops of Chios and Preveza.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 |
As an RC in the Phillipines you certainly seem to have quite a fascination with the UOC-KP situation. Hmmm.
One must start the dialogue somewhere, and at least the UOC-KP is willing to take that first step rather than rely on the Soviet era bullying the UOC-MP seems to think still works on everyone else to enforce the false primacy of Moscow, a system of bullying and coercion in place ever since Godunov (as Fr. Borys Gudziak well documents) forced Patriarch Jeremias II to consecrate the first Patriarch of Moscow.
It is not without precedent - upon the death of Patriarch Mystyslav and his successor the UAOC has returned to a Metropolitanate. That doesn't invalidate anything, and is simply a manifestation of the wishes of the particular Church's Synod.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,959
Moderator Member
|
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,959 |
A celebration of the triumph of Christ with actions that do not reflect Christ at all. What would Christ say about all this? So sad....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,028
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,028 |
As an RC in the Phillipines you certainly seem to have quite a fascination with the UOC-KP situation. Hmmm. I've always been interested in current events in the Churches that have apostolic succession. And, for reasons that are too complex to explain now, I actually get asked a lot of questions by many of my countrymen about these things... For that matter, should anything dramatic happen in Ukraine in the next few days, I just might find myself writing a report on this situation and putting it on Rorate Caeli, and I'd like to have as much background info as I can gather.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,658
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,658 |
It would not be fair if the UOC-KP seeks recognition by Constantinople if this does not involve other Churches in Ukraine (UAOC, UAOC-C, etc) who come from the original UAOC and the UOC-MP.
A fair solution must include all the Ukrainian Orthodox and not only a group of them, whose leader has done positive things but is not exactly the most legitimate moral authority. Patriarch Filaret should offer his resignation in case the autocephaly is granted, so that a Sobor, presided by Patriarch Bartholomew, can be held with participation of the UAOC and delegates from the diaspora Chuches of the UAOC and the AUOCA.
Then, a new Patriarch would be elected and it would not be that easy for others to separate again, as they would indeed loose legitimacy and place themselves outside World Orthodoxy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 |
I suggest that the solution does not depend upon us!
Fr. Serge
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,923 Likes: 28
Moderator Member
|
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,923 Likes: 28 |
It would not be fair if the UOC-KP seeks recognition by Constantinople if this does not involve other Churches in Ukraine . . . Why?  If a group wants to approach the Ecumenical Patriarch to establish communion with him, and through him to the rest of the canonical Orthodox Churches, why is that unfair to others who do not want to do so? If a group of us are standing in the rain and one of us asks to be taken in out of the rain, why does this one have to wait for the others? I understand that the situation is far more complicated than that, but the comparison does bring the question into focus. On the other hand, I rather doubt that the EP would take the groups under its jurisdiction and then immediately make them autocephalous. Autocephaly comes with years of maturity during which a normal Church's life flowers. At the present, the various groups don't "play well together" so cutting them loose might be a disaster for them all. There are those who feel that they need to be tightly bond to the MP; there are those who want to be in communion with Rome; there are those who want to be autocephalous--two groups that have yet to get together. Out of all this, it seesm that making one group of them all and letting them be autocephalous is not a formula for peaceful growth in the Faith. In Christ, BOB
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,658
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,658 |
I am interested about the situation of the Ukrainian Churches because nearly all of them, with the exception of the UOC-MP, have a presence in Latin America:
Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church - Mefodyi:
A Colombian prelate who had been ordained by a schismatic Brazilian breakaway group was received by Metropolitan Michael Champion who did not re-ordain them (I find them very doubtful). They have some worship houses in Colombia and Venezuela.
Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church - Moisey:
A Mexican prelate who had been part of a vagant jurisdiction was received by this Church. They have renounced vagantism and are now quite Orthodox (despite the strange conduct of Moisey in Ukraine). The problem is that I don't know if they were properly re-ordained. They have some monasteries and missions.
Ukrainian Autonomous Orthodox Church in America - Ioan
They left Moisey's group and are now autonomous. They consecrated Bishop Chrysostom of Ecuador, who was an Antiochian Orthodox priest (there are no doubts about his orders). In South-America they are doing a very good job.
The thing here is that if the first UAOC (and its diaspora diocese) merges with the KP and becomes a part of the EP, the Colombian group will become canonical but their orders would still be doubtful. They would have to be re-ordained, no canonical hierarch would concelebrate with them unless they are re-ordained.
Same with the group of Bishop Daniel of Mexico, in case they seek union with a unified UAOC, they would need to be re-ordained.
Bishop Chrysostom is the most serious of all, but his Church does not seem to take part in the negociations with the EP.
It would be wonderful if all of them are included in an Exarchate for Latin America. Canonical or not, the Ukrainians are open to a native Orthodoxy, the Canonical groups (with the exception of the OCA) have no interest in evangelizing, and opening missions for our Latin American nations.
They stay with their small churches and their ethnic community.
|
|
|
|
|
