www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall ORTHODOX CHURCHES UNDER THREAT IN UKRAINE - PATRIARCH KIRILL

ORTHODOX CHURCHES UNDER THREAT IN UKRAINE - PATRIARCH KIRILL

25 January 2016
http://risu.org.ua/en/index/all_news/orthodox/orthodox_world/62270/

Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Kirill expresses his concern about "the scale of the persecution of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow patriarchate in Ukraine", Interfax and Russia beyond the headlines inform

"Over thirty churches of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church have now been taken over and at least ten are under the threat of attack by schismatics and nationalists, who are trying to prevent what is happening as voluntary transition of believers to the so-called Kyiv patriarchate," the patriarch said during a meeting with the heads of Orthodox Churches in Chambesy, Switzerland, on the preparations for the All-Orthodox Assembly, the patriarch's press service reported on Saturday.

"In actual fact, it was a real bandit, raiding takeover: they hold a meeting of people who are unrelated to the community, then they fake the charter documents with the authorities' assistance, take over the church using nationalist militants, and they throw the church community and the priest out in the street," he said.

Patriarch Kirill said communities of the canonical church driven away from churches win all lawsuits, "but schismatics and their semi-bandit military groups ignore court rulings."

He expressed concerns about the actions taken by some hierarchs of the Constantinople patriarchate, who express their support to the schismatics, allegedly on behalf of the Constantinople patriarchate, during visits to Ukraine thus causing division among believers.

The Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Kyiv Patriarchate and experts deny such allegations and explain the transition by the crisis within the Ukrainian Orthodox Church affiliated with Moscow.

In two years, 60-70 parishes of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) have joined the Ukrainian Orthodox Kyivan Patriarchate, says Viktor Yelensky, expert in religions, member of the subcommittee on state policy for freedom of conscience and religious organizations of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Culture and Spirituality, EuroMaidanPress with the reference to Radio Svoboda informs.

The MP denies that the government is applying pressure on the parishioners and priests to switch to either patriarchate.

"But this is the tendency now – if a priest expresses anti-Ukrainian sentiments in his parish, parishioners usually move to join the Kyivan Patriarchate”, MP said.

UOC-KP SYNOD REQUESTS PATRIARCH BARTHOLOMEW TO SEND COMMISSION TO UKRAINE AS PATRIARCH KIRILL MISLEADS ORTHODOX WORLD

25 January 2016
http://risu.org.ua/en/index/all_news/orthodox/orthodox_world/62273/

The speech of Patriarch Kirill Chambésy at a meeting of the Local Orthodox Churches on the situation in Ukraine caused an immediate response from the Synod of the UOC-KP, which was held in Kyiv on January 23 under the chairmanship of Patriarch Filaret.



The Synod of UOC-KP expressed outrage, calling the speech of Kirill biased, not objective, filled with references to non-existing or wrongfully presented and distorted facts.



As the UOC-KP stress, this statement gives the Synaxis participants a wrong idea about the real situation in Ukraine, including the issue of transition of communities from the Moscow Patriarchate under the omophorion Kyiv Patriarchate. “Therefore this statement, being a public false statement that misleads other people, is not worthy of the title of bishop and the position of the Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church that Kirill (Gundyaev) holds,” goes the resolution of the Synod of the UOC-KP.



The bishops of the UOC-KP explain this behavior of the Head of the Russian Orthodox Church by the fact that Kirill is dependent on the government of Russia, which, starting from the end of February 2014 has waged the military, informational and economic aggression against Ukraine that is still ongoing, and has occupied Crimea and a part of the territory of Donetsk and Luhansk regions.



Therefore the bishops of the UOC-KP emphasize that “there are objective reasons to believe that the statements and actions of Patriarch Kirill (Gundyaev) of Moscow and of the Moscow Patriarchate on the whole towards Ukraine are influenced by the Russian authorities and are part of their aggressive policy.”



The UOC-KP points out that the leaders of the Church of the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine, both in the center and locally, categorically reject any proposals of dialogue, speaking only the language of ultimatum and ignoring the real desire of their own parishioners to leave the jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate.



“In cases where there is a possibility of a peaceful local settlement of the issue of using the church building and other parish property by means of alternative service of the two parts of the former community of the UOC MP, the central leadership of the Church of the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine opposes this idea, deliberately exacerbating the conflict,” goes the decree of the Synod.

The UOC-KP reminds that no independent international institution such as the UN, OSCE or other authoritative international organization have proven the accuracy and objectivity of the statements made by the Moscow Patriarchate on the so-called seizure of churches in Ukraine.


The bishops of the UOC-KP once again have testified at the Synod that the “Kyiv Patriarchate continues to urge the leadership of the Church of the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine for constructive dialogue in order to develop a clear and acceptable to both parties mode of exercise by believers and their communities of the right to adhere to one or another church guaranteed Laws of Ukraine.



Due to the false accusations put forward by the Patriarch against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, the Synod of the UOC-KP asks that Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew sent an authoritative ecclesiastical commission to Ukraine to further study the case and report to the Local Orthodox Churches.

The UOC-KP stressed: “Given that the Moscow Patriarchate side is a party of the conflict and is depending on the authorities of Russia as the aggressor state and fits under a number of objective accusations, we believe that representatives of the Moscow Patriarchate cannot be included in the said commission, but only may provide testimony and evidence.”

Perhaps we should ask Swan of Endless . . . to bring some of his wisdom to bear on all this . . .

It would be an interesting read . . .

Alex

Everything they say about +Kirill is true. Unfortunately the KP does not represent a viable alternative.

Dear Endless Swan,

If the UOC-KP grows to a formidable size - it may well become the viable alternative for Ukrainian Orthodox.

They won't give a dam or a flying duck about what the MP thinks (they don't already for the most part).

Again, the KP may even begin to get members from the UGCC - I can certainly see that!

Sorry for suggesting you are a Russophile! Not that there's anything wrong with that!

(We Ukrainians are sensitive about those things - comes from hundreds of years of Russian oppression, you see, so we really can't help it )

Alex

The KP does not enjoy universal trust even among Ukrainian Orthodox schismatics. Keep in mind that Filaret was an MP bishop for decades and a Russian chauvinist who zealously cooperated in persecuting the UGCC. Then the USSR collapses and Filaret- who many thought would be the next Moscow Patriarch- doesn't get the spot. At the drop of a hat he becomes a Ukrainian nationalist and breaks away, making common cause with nationalist elements and paramilitary groups. I do not think Filaret or the people around him are capable of unifying Ukrainian Orthodox.

An interesting interview of Fr. Cyril Hovorun (of the UOC MP): http://risu.org.ua/en/index/expert_thought/interview/62242/

He seems skeptical of the possibility of a single Ukainian Orthodox Church:

"I am not sure that in Ukraine there will be the One Local Church that is the only canonical Church. Ukrainian society is pluralistic and has identified itself as such. We have a similar phenomenon in ecclesial life. Many religious sociologists, studying the situation in Ukraine, think that establishment of the One Local Church is unlikely here. I do not think that even in a strong state, which is still weak, and God forbid that it should be weaker than society, unification of churches may be possible. Normalization of the situation in Ukrainian Orthodoxy envisages a significant element of plurality."

Yes, I've read that article, but being of the UOC-MP and given the current situation of general Ukrainian Orthodox revolt against their "loving Mother Church" in Moscow, it is entirely predictable that the author is skeptical of a single united Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

If I were of the MP and shared their ecclesial geopolitics, I would also be very much against the idea for the reason that the idea of unity with the MP is now a lost cause there since the MP is viewed as part of a hostile foreign power for the most part. ALSO, the more subtle issue involved is that there are Ukrainian hierarchs within the UOC-MP, as well as many priests, who want unity with the UOC-KP AND want an entirely autocephalous Orthodox Church independent of the "loving Muscovite Church." One would daresay that should such a canonical church ever come about, the pull (away) factor would win.

It is no surprise, and no news, that a UOC-MP cleric is against a unified Ukrainian Orthodox Church using tendentious sociological arguments.

Whenever clerics and theologians with no training in the social sciences pretend to venture into that field from a popular perspective - it really is amusing.

Alex

Alex, if you actually read the article then you would very well know that Fr. Cyril does not share the MP's ecclesial geopolitics. You simply saw two things: that he is in the UOC-MP, and that he may somewhat disagree with your opinion. I guess this made you see red and the rest of the article was dismissed accordingly. Again your kneejerk Russophobia gets in the way of your reading comprehension.

Swan,

You actually don't know me and so your assessment of what I said betrays more of what you are about - but I don't know you and can leave off the privilege of knowing more indefinitely.

I've corresponded with the author - have you? I didn't think so.

If YOU had taken the care to read what I said, then you would have seen that I ONLY took issue with his one point. I NEVER said that Fr. Hovorun agreed with the policies of the Moscow Patriarchate completely - which he does not. He is actually quite courageous in maintaining his position while under attack by others for his refusing to go into uncanonical autocephaly. However, he himself knows that his position is not only very difficult but may even become untenable in future.

He shares my own views on the policies of the MP and so he would probably be considered to be in possession of the same "knee-jerk Russophobia" that you used to describe me. I wish you and others would must stop with that term as it is nothing more than a cheap shot, unbecoming of someone of your intelligent/cultured stature. But then again, I may be misjudging you.

This makes for great forum debate - no wonder that we've lost so many of our previous participants here.

And I certainly don't need this type of knee-jerk judgmentalism in my life.

You and this forum can go your way and I go my way.

Signing off,

Alex

The fact is, Alex, that you dismissed him as a cleric of the MP. You said he is "against" a unified Ukrainian church, which he clearly isn't- he just doesn't think it's realistic. You said "If I were of the MP and shared their ecclesial geopolitics, I would also be very much against the idea", which would suggest to most readers that you consider Fr. Cyril to share the MP's ecclesial geopolitics. Your backpedaling is unconvincing.

Anyone can see from various threads that any issue involving Russia- whether in Ukraine, Syria, or intra-Orthodox ecclesial politics- gets you fired up and nearly incapable of rationally pondering anyone's idea that doesn't consist of a complete demonization of Russia.

Dear Endless Swan,

Yes, I'm against the Russian government and Russian imperialism. My point is that you make people like me to be against Russians period. Get a life.

I was not backpedaling but put MYSELF in the position of being an MP cleric - if you yourself would stop seeing RED whenever I say something critical of the Russian government or its religious arm, the Moscow Patriarchate.

As for the charge you level against me - sorry, but I see it as a compliment not as a put-down. God forbid if I should ever become pro-Russian government/patriarchate! Your sense of history is very pro-Russian in that way - and if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck . . . you are a Russophile and don't back-pedal on that either.

Vozdrastvie!

Alex

I rest my case.

I have never demonized the Russian people - that is your argument which is simply not true. The Russians as a whole are under yet another iron curtain - this time with a Church willing to collaborate with the government.

As for Fr. Cyril - he CANNOT be in favour of a unified Orthodox autocephalous Church, as the UOC-MP had promised they would seek in the early 1990s.

That is just against the policy of the MP and he, as someone under the MP, can't/won't go against it.

Don't see how that can be any clearer. So rest your case.

Alex

I withdraw anything and everything I said that has given Swan offense. Confession time for me.

Alex