News From January 1, 2003 to
Present Date
The
latest issue of the Ukrainian Orthodox Word, Vol. LIII Issue X, October 2003
has done the same. However, instead of taking credit for a temporary victory,
the bishops took the opportunity to perpetuate the big lie with the
following: “Deliberate deceit was utilized throughout this case in defining
the term hierarchal…” “the term ‘hierarchal’ as utilized in this judgment means
simply that there is a hierarchy of administration.” That
very statement is the big lie that cannot be allowed!
American
courts consider only two types of religious organizations: hierarchal and
congregational. The most familiar hierarchal structure is the Roman Catholic
Church where both the spiritual and temporal assets are in direct control of
the hierarchs. It is most clearly summarized by the statement that “all assets
of a congregation are held in trust for the church and the diocese thereof”.
This argument was used in the Paterson Court by Bound Brook against Holy
Ascension and it was further used in the Superior Court. The judge in Paterson
dismissed the argument outright, but Judge Mahon did not. Now the matter is in
the hands of the Appellate Court, as has also been reported herein.
As
proof of Archbishop Antony’s intentions to exercise his newly recognized
control over parish assets and finances, we refer you to his actions against
St. Michael’s Parish in San Francisco where in a written letter he threatened
to dissolve the parish, sell the church and hold the money in “escrow” unless
the parishioners submitted to his whims. There have been no religious services
at St. Michael’s since the summer, funerals have been conducted without clergy
and the church is under lock and key. The highlights of this infamous letter
and the verbal threat from Father
Diakiw are contained
herein. To read the complete story
go to St. Michaels Parish .
It is
unconscionable that the old myth of “nothing changed” is still being foisted on
the trusting, unsuspecting faithful while the legal noose is being tightened
step by step by the reckless hierarchs residing in Bound Brook.
With God’s help and clear
deliberation by the Appellate Bench, this too shall pass away.
**********************************************************************
Dear Holy
Ascension Parishioners, Friends and
Supporters of our
Beloved Ukrainian Orthodox Autocephalous
Church
“Pay, Pray and Obey”
COURT
RULES THAT THE UOC-USA IS A HIERARCHAL CHURCH…. AND
THAT
WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE ORDER, ADMINISTRATION OF HOLY ASCENSION PARISH, CLIFTON,
NJ SHOULD BE TURNED OVER TO THEM….
But as someone once said: IT
ISN’T OVER UNTIL IT’S OVER…
On
September 3, 2003 the court issued its most recent decision in our case. A copy of the Order is posted below. Among
other matters, the court ruled that the UOC-USA is a hierarchal church and that
within 60 days of the Order administration of the parish should be turned over
to them.
One
lone judge was responsible for making this decision----one lone judge, who knew
that no matter what his decision would be, the decision would be appealed to a
higher court. And he was right....
If this ruling is allowed to stand, then your
participation and vote on how the parish is to function will become irrelevant.
·
All decisions, as is currently within the Catholic Church, will become
the sole prerogative of the bishops.
·
The bishops will control all parish property and bank accounts.
·
Any elected parish board can be removed at the whim of the
bishops.
This has happened in other parishes. If we let this decision stand, this can now
happen legally in EVERY UOC-USA parish, not only our own!
This decision will
impact every Ukrainian Orthodox Church in the United States!
While this is not the decision we had hoped for,
prudence required that we prepare to appeal.
WE ARE PREPARED TO APPEAL THIS DECISION AND FEEL CONFIDENT, AS DO OUR
ATTORNEYS, THAT OUR CHANCES ARE EXCELLENT TO WIN THIS NEXT ROUND OF BATTLE.
Voluminous documentary and testimony evidence that
have been complied by our lawyers completely support our case. This will be provided to the higher courts
for their careful review. The recent decision against Holy Ascension IS NOT supported
by the history of the Church or of our parish.
It is NOT supported by law. We
are prepared to prove this point.
We are in the first stages of beginning the appeal
process. At the same time, we will also
be filing a motion with the Court to maintain the status quo pending the
appeal.
For the immediate future, however, nothing changes
within our parish, and our services and activities continue as before. Our picnic this coming weekend continues on
schedule.
More importantly, remember, these are not even
bishops of a Ukrainian church. They
have abandoned it, but remain in control of the property and money in Bound
Brook. They now want also to control our
parish. “Pay, pray and obey” will be
your next marching orders unless we are successful in the appeal process.
This issue is complex—and certainly difficult for
those unfamiliar with the uniqueness of our Ukrainian Orthodox Autocephalous
Church to comprehend. Much easier to render a decision which will remove it
from the hectic, paper-laden local county court system...
The decision is remarkable in several respects. The
Court ignored the fact that the very same UOC-USA constitution states that the
Church is “Sobornopravna”. In
addition, the same constitution states that the Church is a Ukrainian church,
and is to be independent in all aspects of its life. It is not simply a diocese of the foreign church in Istanbul,
governed by a Turkish citizen speaking Greek.
However, the Court Order -- if it remains
unchallenged – would have us turn over everything that we and our forbearers
have built to a handful of renegades who have violated that Constitution, left
the parish and the Church, and opted instead to joined a foreign jurisdiction –
while demanding our assets!
Ironically, the court’s decision is
enormously helpful in confirming the warning that we had raised years ago. If
anyone had any doubt about the betrayal of our church, the Court’s ruling on
the supposed “hierarchal” nature of the church and its implications should open
everyone’s eyes. While this is not the decision we had hoped for, prudence
required that we were prepared to appeal it.
WE WILL NOT ALLOW THAT TO
HAPPEN.
WE
ARE PREPARED, AND WILL APPEAL THE DECISION.
We will keep you informed of developments as they
occur.
This is YOUR parish. This is YOUR Church.
KEEP IT THAT WAY!
Save Our UOC Committee
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The implications of the Court Order will affect
for generations all Ukrainian Orthodox parishes in the United States.
============================================
Court Order
============================================
MICHAEL
F. REHILL CONTENTIONS AND CLOSES THE
CASE
345
Kindermack Road
P.O.
Box 714
Westwood,
New Jersey 07675 REASONS SET FORTH
(201)
666-8001 ON THE RECORD
Attorney
for Plaintiffs September
3, 2003
_____________________________________
OF
THE USA; ARCHBISHOP ANTONY, : SUPERIOR
COURT OF NEW JERSEY
et
als. :
SOMERSET COUNTY
: CHANCERY
DIVISION
Plaintiff(s) : Transferred
from Law Division
:
: DOCKET NO.:
C-12067-99
vs. :
: CIVIL
ACTION
:
JOHN
LUCHEJKO, et als. :
Defendant(s) :
And :
:
John
Luchejko, et al., UKRAINIAN :
ORTHODOX
HOLY ASCENSION CHURCH :
OF
PASSAIC, NJ, INC. :
:
:
Third
Party Plaintiff(s) :
:
vs. : FINAL
JUDGEMENT
:
METROPOLITAN
CONSTANTINE, AND JOHN:
DOES
1-100 (fictitious names, individually, jointly :
And
in the alternative) :
:
Third
Party Defendant(s) :
This Court having considered the stipulations,
testimony and evidence offered at the hearings in this matter on November 19,
2002, March 18 and 20, 2003, and for the reasons set forth on the record on
September 3, 2003,
IT IS on this 3rd Day of
September 2003,
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1.
Declaratory
Judgment is hereby entered in favor of plaintiffs Richard F. Jendras, Debra E.
Burgan, Jerry E. Burgan, Olga Piropato, William Kuzbyt, Madeline Kuzbyt, and
Gary Markovich and against defendants-counter claimants-third party plaintiffs
as follows:
a.
The
Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the United States of America is a hierarchical
church, and defendant, Holy Ascension Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Passaic, New
Jersey (hereinafter “Holy Ascension Parish”) is a member thereof.
b.
As
a member of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the United States of America, Holy
Ascension Parish is subject to its Constitution and bound by its decisions.
c.
Pursuant
to the express terms of the Constitution of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of
the United States of America, Holy Ascension Parish may not withdraw from the
Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the United States of America.
d.
Pursuant
to the express terms of the Constitution of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of
the United States of America, Holy Ascension Parish may not hire or terminate
any member of the clergy without the consent of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
of the United States of America.
e.
Holy
Ascension Parish has unlawfully failed to make required payments of dues and
membership fees to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the United States of
America.
f.
Holy
Ascension Parish has unlawfully employed a priest without the consent of the
Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the United States of America.
g.
The
individual plaintiffs have been recognized by the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of
the United States of America as the lawful leadership of Holy Ascension Parish.
2.
Defendants
are hereby ordered within sixty (60) days turn over the administration of Holy
Ascension Parish, including all books and records thereof, to the plaintiffs
herein.
3.
The
Counterclaims and Third Party Complaint are hereby dismissed.
Signed_____________________
Roger F. Mahon, J.S.C
===============================================
“I am embarrassed
to be an Orthodox Christian”
“to…. scream, cry and hang
ones head in shame that I belong to the same faith as His Beatitude”
“at least Symonenko is being
honest about who he is, what he represents. He is Consistent”
In the August issue of Ukrainian Orthodox Word (Vol.
LIII Issue VII, August, 2003) we find a very interesting article titled
“Shame”. The author unabashedly points out that “once in a while I am
embarrassed to be an Orthodox Christian”. The article goes on to lambaste His
Beatitude Metropolitan Vladimir Sabodan of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church,
Moscow Patriarchate for giving an award, Order of St. Volodymyr the Great, to
the leader of Ukraine’s Communist party, Petro Symonenko.
We have no quarrel with the author nor the intent of
the article, for rightfully this despicable act of Metropolitan Sabodan, which
reveals the true red nature of Moscow’s lackey in Ukraine, should be
extensively publicized.
What we do find ironic is
that this same “Metropolitan” Sabodan also bestowed an eparchial panahia on
Archbishop Vsevolod of Scopelos on April 21, 2002. Archbishop Vsevolod not only
accepted the “gift of brotherly love” but also committed to celebrated with
Metropolitan Sabodan the UOC- Moscow Patriarchate jubilee in May of the same year.
In reviewing the Ukrainian
Orthodox Word of April, May and June of last year we find no articles critical
of Metropolitan Sabodan. We find no admonition of Archbishop Vsevolod from the
Consistory of UOC-USA nor any of its hierarchs for the Archbishops acceptance
of the panahia from Moscow’s red lackey. Where was the indignation at that
time? Where was the outrage printed in the Ukrainian Orthodox Word?
The author of the article
praises Symonenko at least for being honest about who he is, what he believes
in and for being consistent in his beliefs. But where is the consistency and
continuity of thought, actions, deeds and words from the “pantheon” of
Ukrainian Orthodoxy in America? Certainly Archbishop Vsevolod was “not
embarrassed to be an Orthodox Christian” nor embarrassed in accepting the
panahia from Metropolitan Sabodan.
Of course not!
They are “canonical brothers”!
In
conclusion, the author prays… “May God give (Metropolitan Sabodan) the time to
repent”.
And
within that prayer we would also include Archbishop Vsevolod, Metropolitan
Constantine and Archbishop Antony.
*************************************************
…The (UOC-USA) Sobor is merely advisory
…the Points of Agreement supersede this (UOC-USA) Constitution.
…the Points of
Agreement are much more important than anything
in the (UOC-USA) Constitution.
…(the) agreement
which the Bishops of South Bound Brook made
with the Ecumenical Patriarchate and do
not choose to talk
about publicly (supersedes the
Constitution of the Church).
…Metropolitan
Constantine and Archbishop Antony are titular
bishops of the Sees of
the Ecumenical Patriarchate
“They are clearly less than free agents as bishops by being given
titular Sees”.
“That is a demotion in their canonical
rank”.
Professor Thomas E. Bird
We are presenting the
final and most interesting testimony by Professor Thomas E. Bird.
To read the full testimony of Professor Thomas E. Bird please go to Part 7 of our continuing installments of the trial proceedings of UOC-USA, Archbishop Antony, et alls, Plaintiffs vs. Ukrainian Orthodox Holy Ascension Church, Clifton, NJ, Defendants.
Direct examination of
Professor Thomas E. Bird, witness for the Defense.
To read the 7th installment go to trial Testimony Phase II Part 7
To read the 6th installment go to trial Testimony Phase II Part 6
To read the 5th installment go to trial Testimony Phase II Part 5.
Cross examination of Rev. Bazyl
Zawierucha, witness for the Plaintiffs.
To read the 4th installment go to trial Testimony Phase II Part 4.
To read the 3rd installment go to trial Testimony Phase
II Part 3
To read the 2nd installment go to trial Testimony Phase
II Part 2.
To read the 1st installment go to trial Testimony Phase II Part 1
Excerpts from
Professor Thomas E. Bird testimony:
Up until November of 1994, there was no ecclesiastical officer who was superior to the Metropolitan of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church U.S.A. …………(after December 1995) the Metropolitan of the UOC-USA is no longer the final arbiter of church life in this church; that indeed all he and his bishops can do is suggest.
************************
Q. Are Bishops Antony or Archbishop
Antony, Metropolitan Constantine and Archbishop Vsevolod,
are they hierarchs of an Autocephalous Church?
A.
Absolutely
not. There is no way. There is no canon lawyer in the world who would support
that claim. They are subject to the Ecumenical Patriarchate. There is no
(UOC-USA) Autocephalous Church ……What is more, the Ecumenical Patriarch is on
public record as having assured the Patriarch of Moscow that he will not at
anytime in any way support the notion of a Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox
Church. He is in writing on record making that promise to his fellow Patriarch
(of Russia, Alexej)
*************************
Q.
Does the Ecumenical Patriarchate since 1995 recognize the autocephaly of the
Ukrainian
Orthodox Church of the United States of America?
A. Absolutely not.
….. It can only recognize an Autocephalous Church that it does not control and
it
controls the UOC-USA.
***************************
Q…..
the phrase "omophorion," what does that term mean?
A. The omophor is a sign and symbol of authority. In this
context, omophor means juridical control. It means juridical submission.
….. It is
clearly, in the context of these points (of Agreement), intended to mean
juridical
control, juridical authority, juridical submission.
Q.
Does that mean virtually or administratively?
A. It certainly means virtually, but in these points (of
Agreement) it also clearly means
administratively
because it says that the canonical head of this ecclesiastical entity (UOC-USA)
is
the Ecumenical
Patriarch. That is more than spiritual; that is administrative. When you are
using
the word
"canonical," you are talking legality.
****************************
… Metropolitan Constantine and Archbishop Antony are titular
bishops of the Sees of the
Ecumenical
Patriarchate…… They are clearly less than free agents as bishops by being given
titular Sees.
That is a demotion in their canonical rank.
****************************
Q. Now this church……the Ukrainian Orthodox
Church of the United States of America, is the
Church which was established in 1924 by Archbishop John
Theodorovich, correct? Simply the
same church with additions coming in?
A. I couldn't possibly agree to that.
No.
Q. You could not agree?
A. No.
Q. It is not the same church?
A. No, because that church was
autocephalous. This church is a suffragan of a foreign,
ethnically different church.
***************************
……The Sobor is merely
advisory and has to submit everything that it does in terms of Episcopal
appointment and the
creation of jurisdictions to the Ecumenical Patriarch Synod.
**************************
…….the Points of Agreement supersede this (UOC-USA)
Constitution.
…….the Points of Agreement are much more important than
anything in this (UOC-USA)
Constitution.
*************************
……(the) agreement which the Bishops of South Bound Brook
made with the Ecumenical
Patriarchate
and do not choose to talk about publicly (supersedes the Constitution of the
Church).
…... the actions of that Synod of Bishops of
South Bound Brook, in negotiation with the Ecumenical
Patriarchate, supersedes any document of the
(UOC-USA) Church.
…….the facts demonstrate it. It doesn't seem
to me that it needs to be demonstrated because the
Bishops themselves are acting as though that
is their reality. They don't do anything without the
approval of
the Ecumenical Patriarchate. They tried to. They tried to give Bishop Vsevolod
an
arch-Episcopal title and they were publicly reprimanded by the Ecumenical Patriarchate and
told they did
not have that authority, and that when the Ecumenical Patriarch decided to
promote
Bishop Vsevolod he would let them know, and in God's good time he did.
**************************
“If
a lie is repeated often enough
it
will eventually be believed”.
We are not sure who coined the
above phrase but the relentless propaganda machine continues to churn out
disinformation from Bound Brook as evidenced by two recent articles in “The
Ukrainian Weekly” and its sister publication “Svoboda”.
The June 29, 2003 issue of The
Ukrainian Weekly presents a full-page account of the commemoration in South
Bound Brook on the occasion of the 10th anniversary of repose of His
Holiness Patriarch Mstyslav.
What caught our attention was one
very important sentence within this press release written by Hieromonk Daniel
Zelinsky, Office of Public Relations..…..
“It was through his (Patriarch Mstyslav)
efforts that the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A. and Diaspora has now
taken its rightful place at the altar of world Orthodoxy…..”
This same phrase was repeated in “Svoboda” (June 27, 2003)
in Ukrainian language.
But the facts are completely different then what the Office
of Public Relations of UOC-USA wants us to believe.
Please note the following:
IT WAS THROUGH THE TRAITOROUS ACTS OF UOC-USA BISHOPS THAT
THE INFAMOUS POINTS OF AGREEMENT WERE SIGNED IN 1995 AFTER PATRIARCH MSTYSLAVS DEATH IN 1993.
IT WAS THROUGH THE TRAITOROUS ACTS OF UOC-USA BISHOPS IN 1995
THAT UOC-USA HAS BECOME A “DIOCESE”
OF THE CHURCH OF CONSTANTINOPLE.
IT WAS THROUGH THE TRAITOROUS ACTS OF UOC-USA BISHOPS IN 1995
THAT UOC-USA HAS GIVEN UP ITS AUTOCEPHALLY
(INDEPENDENCE) TO A FOREIGN CHURCH.
IT WAS THROUGH THE TRAITOROUS ACTS OF UOC-USA BISHOPS IN 1995
THAT UOC-USA REJECTED
OUR MOTHER CHURCH IN UKRAINE WHICH WAS UNITED UNDER PATRIARCH MSTYSLAV.
IT WAS THROUGH THE TRAITOROUS ACTS OF UOC-USA BISHOPS IN 1995
THAT UOC-USA HAS BEEN
SPLIT APART WITH
MANY PARISHES FIGHTING COURT BATTLES IN ORDER TO RETURN UNDER THE OMOFOR OF THEIR
MOTHER CHURCH IN UKRAINE.
IT WAS THROUGH THE TRAITOROUS ACTS OF UOC-USA BISHOPS IN 1995
THAT PARISHIONERS HAVE BEEN SPLIT APART, BISHOPS AND CLERGY ARE MISTRUSTED AND CHAOS REIGNS WITHIN UOC-USA.
IT WAS NOT THROUGH PATRIARCH MSTYSLAV’S EFFORTS BUT THROUGH THE TRAITOROUS ACTS OF UOC-USA BISHOPS THAT THE UKRAINIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH
HAS… “TAKEN ITS PLACE AT THE ALTAR OF WORLD ORTHODOXY”
Bound Brook should not give “credit” to
Patriarch Mstyslav for the CHAOS that has been created since 1995
by the Bishops of UOC-USA.
Indeed, Patriarch Mstyslav for
years sought recognition from world Orthodoxy but NOT at the
expense of independence (autocephaly), NOT at the
expense of being a “Diocese” subservient to a foreign Patriarch and certainly NOT at the
expense of forsaking a unified, worldwide, Ukrainian Orthodox Church which he
united when he was elevated to First Patriarch of All Rus-Ukraine.
But the propaganda machine continues to spew
disinformation from Bound Brook.
Another interesting point is the first paragraph of the
above mentioned article of The Ukrainian Weekly where Patriarch Mstyslav is now
referred to as “Prime Hierarch/Metropolitan” of
UOC-USA and Diaspora. What happened to the title of “Patriarch/Metropolitan”
that has been used by Bound Brook until we brought this absurdity to everyone’s
attention? What in heavens name is a “Prime
Hierarch/Metropolitan? It seem that Bound Brook cannot find a title for
Patriarch Mstyslav that will suit all of their needs.
*************************************************************
Patriarch Filaret’s visit to the US on June 20-July 1, 2003
We are posting a detailed report written by Dr. Dmytro
Stepovyk, Professor at Kyiv Spiritual Academy, of Patriarch Filarets visit to
the Unites States. This report is written in Ukrainian and a translation into
English is not available. Go to Patriarch visits the US.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Holy Trinity Parish,
Bridgeport, CN June 22, 2003
His Holiness Filaret, Patriarch of Kyiv and All Rus-Ukraine
explained…
“………they are deceiving the faithful when Patriarch Mstyslav is
given the title posthumously of Patriarch in Ukraine and Metropolitan in the
United States”.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Patriarch???….
Metropolitan???… or
Patriarch/Metropolitan???
In various publications and pronouncements, including the current issue (Vol. LIII Issue VI, June, 2003) of the official UOC-USA publication “Ukrainian Orthodox Word” we see the title of “Metropolitan/Patriarch Mstyslav” utilized by UOC-USA Consistory. What in heavens name is a Metropolitan slash Patriarch?
We did an extensive web search utilizing the various search engines but could not come up with an explanation or an instance where a dual title is utilized in any Orthodox Church.
BUT…… the continuing explanation from the propaganda organs of South Bound Brook is that “Mstyslav was a Metropolitan in the United States and a Patriarch in Ukraine”. A greater level of absurdity cannot be imagined since Metropolitan Mstyslav was elevated to “Patriarch” in Ukraine of one, whole, worldwide, Ukrainian Orthodox Church thereby UNITING all of Ukrainian Orthodoxy. The Bishops of Bound Brook PARTICIPATED in that ceremony in Kyiv, Ukraine. “Patriarch Mstyslav” was recognized, greeted and venerated by all the clergy and faithful in the United States as a “PATRIARCH”. A “Patriarchal Fund” was created by UOC-USA. Monies are being collected in the name of “Patriarch” Mstyslav not “Metropolitan” Mstyslav. A memorial service is performed every year for “Patriarch” Mstyslav not “Metropolitan” Mstyslav. During every Sunday Liturgy in every Ukrainian parish in the United States Patriarch Mstyslav is memorialized and remembered in everyone’s prayers as a “PATRIARCH” and NOT as a “METROPOLITAN”.
As Professor Bird testified in Phase II (Part 6):
“…the very sound canonical reason that
one cannot be a bishop of two separate jurisdictions simultaneously”.
Then why OFFICIALLY does the UOC-USA Consistory continue the charade of “Patriarch” in Ukraine but “Metropolitan” in the USA? The answer is simple. When it comes to collecting MONIES he is a “PATRIARCH” in the USA. When it comes to being PART of one worldwide Ukrainian Orthodox Church then he is a “METROPOLITAN” of a “DIFFERENT CHURCH” in USA and not the spiritual leader of one united worldwide Ukrainian Orthodox Church. The Bishops of Bound Brook under the infamous Points of Agreement signed in 1995 disgraced the memory of PATRIARCH MSTYSLAV. They would rather be UNDER the jurisdiction of a spiritual leader, a Greek Patriarch, residing in Turkey then be in communion with the mother Church in Ukraine UNITED by none other than “PATRIARCH MSTYSLAV”.
Absurdity at the highest level.
**********************************************
Continuing
Testimony from
Professor Bird
during
Phase II trial in
Hunterdon County
Justice Center
March 18, 2003
Professor Bird is an expert on European Literature,
Slavic Literature and Linguistics. He taught History of Christianity,
Ecumenical Orthodoxy, Orthodoxy in the United States, the Slaves and Byzantium
at Fordham University and the City University. Professor Bird Authored multiple
scholarly publications on Religion in the Soviet Union, Patriarchal Autonomy
and Orthodox-Roman Catholic dialogues. He is a recipient of numerous
prestigious awards in Ukraine and the US. He is a truly qualified expert whose
credentials are impeccable.
During
his testimony Professor Bird testified that the Ukrainian Orthodox
Church of the United States of America from 1950 to 1995 represented itself to be a continuation of
the Ukrainian Autocephalous Church of Ukraine…. that the most dramatic and memorable restatement
of that fact was by Patriarch Mstyslav in the early '90s when he once again proclaimed total continuity, no change, from 1921, '36,
'50, '90s. We are the same church…………..
In
his testimony Professor Bird continued that the Bishops of UOC-USA saw
themselves as part of that 1921 church, 1940’s church and part of that autocephalous church, with or without that word in
their title.
******************************************
Question to
Professor Bird,
witness for the
defense of
Holy Ascension
Church, Clifton, NJ
“…an Autocephalous Church,
the term autocephalous, what
did that
mean?”
Professor Bird replies:
Greek words, auto is self, cephaly is head. Means, that literally says,
that the Church is self- headed. What interpretation has been given to the word
is that an autocephalous church has a chief bishop, a Primate. His title may be
Archbishop, his title may be Metropolitan, his title may be Patriarch.
Typically it is Metropolitan or Patriarch, and there is no one above that
Primate. There is no higher instance. That church is totally independent and
self-governing.
WHILE
IN PREVIOUES TESTIMONY…………….
Rev. Bazyl Zawierucha
testified that
“autocephalous” paragraph has been continually in the
Ukrainian Orthodox Church Constitution going all the way back to the
1920’s.
And in previous testimony
Rev. Bazyl Zawierucha testified that the Ecumenical Patriarchate of
Constantinople does not recognize UOC-USA as Autocephalous!
During cross-examination of Rev. Bazyl
Zawierucha the following question was asked:
“Does the Ecumenical Patriarchate of
Constantinople recognize the UOC of the United States as autocephalous?”
“I don’t think it is recognized as autocephalous
…..
“In these Points of Agreement, I don’t see the
word”
………admitted Rev. Bazyl Zawierucha
*********************************************************
Archimandrite
Andriy
Finally
Speaks out!
(and
a response from Father Andriy further down the page.)
The
current Issue III, March 2003, of Ukrainian Orthodox Word the official
publication of UOC-USA contains an article by Archimandrite Andriy Partykevich
titled “What’s Wrong with You Ukrainians?” It is a well-written article but the
most interesting statement that Archimandrite Andriy makes is in the last
paragraph:
“It is time to ask the question: How much longer? How much longer
must Ukraine wait for ecclesiastical
order and recognition by world orthodoxy?……
Finally it truly disheartens me that the only person in the entire
world who has the moral authority to heal the scandal of a divided Ukrainian
Church is the Ecumenical Patriarch who has not moved unilaterally to do
whatever is necessary to recognize an autocephalous Ukrainian Orthodox Church
headed by a Patriarch of Kyiv and all Ukraine.
How much longer?”
These are truly amazing words not only that Archimandrite Andriy wrote them BUT that the UOC-USA Consistory published them. It has been a long time since May 22, 1995 when Father Andriy directed some very uncomfortable questions to Metropolitan Constantine concerning the signing of the Points of Agreement with the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Since then Father Andriy has been rather quiet. No comments or published articles. No criticism of any type as though a heavy hand has descended upon the head of Father And