The following statement was made by Subdeacon Borislav on a closed thread:
I hope you do see how that statement could not only be problematic but downright offensive to Ukrainian and Russian Orthodox Christians.
Apparently this is not the case for many Orthodox Christians in Ukraine since both the hierarchy of the UAOC and the UOC-KP have addressed his Beatitude as Patriarch in correspondence and in person. Joint services such as Molebens, Panakhydas, etc. have been served by the chief hierarchs together, including the huge celebration with the copy of the Shroud. This does not seem like the kind of relationship those who hold grave offense would have towards one another. Since the UOC-KP alone is now the majority Orthodox confession in Ukraine, the combination of the UOC-KP and the UAOC would indeed be the majority of Orthodox believers in Ukraine. I will make no comment of "canonical" or "non-canonical" since this is to be decided between the Orthodox confessions themselves.
As was mentioned on the closed thread, the Union of Brest allows the hierarchy of the UGCC to be intact. Since we are not a Roman Church, and since the election of a Patriarch is not a dogmatic issue requiring intervention from the Church of Rome, but rather an internal election of a particular ritual Church, it is for the UGCC to decide.
As I mentioned previously, even in Orthodoxy as with Patriarch Mystyslav and other autocephalous candidates, "World Orthodoxy" does not always recognize the candidates to the Patriarchate immediately. In fact with Bulgaria it occurred even after Constantinople declared that church to be excommunicated and without grace. The Bulgarian Church did nothing during that time except be the Bulgarian Church.
Regarding Patriarch +Mstyslav, Subdeacon Borislav should ask his own hierarch Archbishop Anthony if he has ever commemorated +Mstyslav as Patriarch. I suggest he also read previous proceedings of his own Church's Metropolitan Council. In 2005 Resolution 16 stated:
"15. With gratitude acknowledges the labors of Dr.George Krywolap, Editor-in-Chief and the members of the Editorial Board of the Patriarch
Mstyslav Commemorative Book. The Metropolitan Council commends them for diligently seeking out and recording for posterity important documents,which focus on the three offices served by the late servant of God: President of the Consistory of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA, Metropolitan of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA and the First Patriarch
of Ukraine’s reborn Autocephalous Church.
Resolution 22 of the same council furthermore ends with this statement "...and in memory of the Ukrainian Orthodox Museum’s founder and benefactor, His Holiness Patriarch Mstyslav
The series of resolutions from this council are signed by Metropolitan Constantine, Archbishop Anthony, and Archbishop Vsevelod. I'm sure more examples could be found, such as the 1990 instruction from the UOC-USA Consistory requesting Mstyslav to be commemorated as "His Holiness, Patriarch Mstyslav". If the point is that the UOC-USA has never considered +Mstyslav as Patriarch, that is certainly not borne out by UOC-USA conciliar documents signed by the hierarchs.
And we are being criticized for commemorating our chief hierarch as Patriarch?