Latest News, Articles and
Commentary from Abroad
*************************
UKRAINIAN
PATRIARCH REACHES OUT TO ROME
By Mara D. Bellaby
ASSOCIATED PRESS
-----------------------------------------------------------
KIEV -- Defying the stance of the Russian Orthodox Church, one of Ukraine's top
religious leaders said last week he sees no obstacles to greater cooperation
between the Orthodox Church and the Vatican.
The statement, made during an AP interview on Wednesday, indicated yet another
difference of opinion between Russia and the former Soviet republic of Ukraine,
where pro-Western leaders came to power this year.
The Moscow Patriarchate accuses the Roman Catholics of encroaching on its
territory and blocked the late Pope John Paul II's long-held wish to visit
Russia, the world's most populous Orthodox nation.
Patriarch Filaret, head of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church's Kiev Patriarchate,
said the churches have much in common and should cooperate in emphasizing the
importance of the family and moral values.
"Today the task and mission of Christian churches -- Orthodox, Catholic,
Protestant -- is to support moral values and support spirituality and morality
in European civilization," Patriarch Filaret said. "We don't need to
be afraid of Rome, or the Greek Catholics."
The new pope, Benedict XVI, has declared a "fundamental commitment"
to heal the divide between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches. Unifying
the two churches is "desirable, but today it is not realistic,"
Patriarch Filaret said, but he added that greater cooperation is possible.
The World Council of Churches, the Geneva-based fellowship that includes the
Orthodox churches, welcomed Patriarch Filaret's comments and said he hoped the
Roman Catholic Church and the Russian Orthodox Church would be encouraged to
work for fuller unity.
“To hear those comments, that the Orthodox churches are feeling confident they
can address bigger issues [is an indication of] mending fences," the Rev.
Samuel Kobia, a Methodist pastor who is the current WCC leader, told AP in an
interview in Rome.
The Roman Catholic Church is not a member of the WCC but participates on several
levels. Mr. Kobia was in Rome to meet with Benedict on Thursday.
Cardinal Walter Kasper, a German prelate who is president of the Vatican's
Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity, declined to comment on
Patriarch Filaret's remarks, noting that he had not yet read them.
But he noted, in a telephone conversation with AP in Rome, that Patriarch
Filaret "doesn't speak for the other patriarchs."
The Kiev Patriarchate is outside the Moscow Patriarchate, which has been
among the Vatican's harshest critics on contentious issues such as reputed
Catholic evangelism in the former Soviet Union and property disputes.
The Russian church has accused Catholics of "poaching souls" on its
traditional territory, leading to tension between the churches since the
collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. There are an estimated 600,000 Roman
Catholics in Russia, and the Vatican insists it is only looking after its
flock.
Russian Orthodox Patriarch Alexy II, in a newspaper interview published
Wednesday, said the Vatican would have to make the main effort to heal troubled
relations between the two churches.
****************************
14.04.2005, [19:35] // Digest //
Belarus and Ukraine Report - www.rferl.org/reports/pbureport/ -
8 April 2005
Who has legal jurisdiction over the Orthodox Church in Ukraine, the Ecumenical
Patriarch in Constantinople or the Moscow Patriarch? This question has been
debated for centuries and Moscow was the correct, if not always legal, answer.
This suddenly came into doubt when Interfax and the website of the Religious
Information Service of Ukraine (www.risu.org.ua) reported that on 24 March a
representative of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople told Ukrainian
President Viktor Yushchenko that "the Moscow Patriarchate consists of the
territory which it encompassed to the year 1686." The visitor, Archbishop
Vsevolod of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA, added that Kyiv's
subjugation to the Russian Orthodox Church that began that year was not
ratified by Constantinople.
The statement sent shock waves throughout the Orthodox Church establishment in
Ukraine and Russia, and it soon became an object of speculation as to its
implications if this was indeed the case. The website of the Ecumenical
Patriarch in Constantinople (www.patriarchate.org) has neither confirmed nor
denied the statement.
A number of mostly non-canonical issues are involved in the dispute, the main
one being ownership of Orthodox Church property in Ukraine.
In Ukraine, there are three Orthodox churches: the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of
the Moscow Patriarchate, the Orthodox Church of the Kyivan Patriarchate, and
the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church. The largest by far is the Church
of the Moscow Patriarchate, which has 9,049 communities, 122 monasteries, and
7,755 churches (840 churches are under construction).
The Kyivan Patriarchate has 2781 communities, 22 monasteries, 1825 churches,
and is building 217 more.
The Autocephalous Church has 1,015 communities, 1 monastery, 697 churches, and
is building 101 churches.
[RISU note: see http://www.risu.org.ua/eng/resources/statistics/org2004 for
more up-to-date statistics on all three communities.]
Among the properties belonging to the Moscow Patriarchate are such historical
sites as the Monastery of the Caves (Lavra) in Kyiv and the St. Sophia
Cathedral, also in Kyiv.
[RISU note: St. Sophia is held by the Ukrainian government, not the Moscow
Patriarchate.]
If the Church of the Moscow Patriarchate were to come directly under the
jurisdiction of Constantinople, then the Moscow Patriarchate would stand to
lose not only title to property but also enormous influence in Ukraine, where
it has traditionally played an important role as a pro-Russian-oriented organization.
The political role of the church was evident during the Ukrainian presidential
election last year, when many priests openly took part in campaigning for
Viktor Yanukovych. According to the obkom.net.ua website, the pro-Moscow church
not only supported Yanukovych's candidacy but actively agitated for separatism
in the eastern regions of Ukraine after Yushchenko was declared the winner.
The patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church, Alexis II, made an indirect
reference to the 24 March announcement in comments to the annual meeting of the
Fund for Unity of Orthodox Nations in Moscow on 28 March, Interfax reported.
Alexis told the gathering that the president of Ukraine had stated that he
would not tell people which church to attend and he hopes that this promise
will be kept. Other members of the Russian clergy have avoided making any
statements on the topic.
In Kyiv, Oleksander Lytvynenko of the Razumkov Center for Political and
Economic Studies told Interfax on 29 March that it would be unwise for
Constantinople to interfere with religious affairs in Ukraine. In the past,
such interference has hardly led to positive changes, he said, adding,
"Today it could provoke conflicts and political speculation by those
forces in society who used the Orthodox church issue during the last
elections." (Roman Kupchinsky)
• http://www.rferl.org/reports/pbureport/
**********************************************
UKRAINE REPORT 2003, No. 99: ARTICLE NUMBER NINE
=========================================================
UKRAINIAN CHURCH LEADER ACCUSES MOSCOW
BRANCH OF INFLAMING RELIGIOUS TENSIONS
Den, Kiev, in Russian 24 Oct 03; p 6
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Oct 28, 2003
The Kiev Patriarchate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is gradually gaining
recognition as the national church, its head, Patriarch Filaret, has said.
He has accused the Ukrainian church subordinated to the Moscow Patriarchate of
becoming more aggressive and inflaming religious tension. Filaret sees no
benefit from unification with the Autocephalous Orthodox Church.
The following is the excerpt from an interview Filaret gave to correspondent
Klara Hudzyk, entitled "Patriarch Filaret on independent church for
independent state", published in the Ukrainian newspaper Den on 24
October; subheadings have been inserted editorially:
Over the past eight years, the primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the
Kiev Patriarchate, the patriarch of Ukraine and all Russia-Ukraine, Filaret,
has been developing with a firm hand an independent national Orthodox church,
defending the right of the Ukrainian people to such a church not only from some
foreign churches, but also often from their own authorities. To a considerable
extent, thanks to Patriarch Filaret the idea of Ukrainian autocephaly did not
drown in the storms of recent years, and did not become yet another fiasco of
the young state. Here the Kiev patriarch talks about gains and losses of his
eight-year patriarchy.
[Hudzyk] Your Holiness! Eight years have passed since the day when you were
elected patriarch of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kiev Patriarchate
(UOC KP). What changes have taken place in that church since that time? How
have its structures developed? What was the main thing in your judgment?
Progress over
past eight years
[Filaret] Eight years ago, just like today, I was faced with the task of
asserting and developing an independent national Ukrainian Orthodox Church in
Ukraine. Fairly significant progress has been made in the church's development
over that time. It can be confidently asserted that the UOC KP has been
validated as a national church. Before 1995, there was still a question of
whether that church should exist or not. Today our church has become so strong
that the question "to be or not to be" is ruled out. It is truly a
national Orthodox Church.
In order to be convinced of this, it is worth looking at specific changes in
the life of our church and compare what there was at the time of my
enthronement in 1995 with what there is today. First, we had only 19 eparchates
then, and only in Ukraine; today there are 33, including four abroad. We have
eparchates in every region, and two in some. As for bishops, before 1995 there
were 18 and today - 37.
And as far as church communities are concerned, eight year ago there were a
little over 2,000 of them in the church, whereas now there are over 3,600. It
is noteworthy that the biggest growth in the number of parishes of the KP is in
eastern and central Ukraine. Churches are being actively erected: over
the past eight years, the KP has built several hundred new churches on
Ukrainian territory. This autumn alone I have consecrated four churches.
We are actively engaged in developing spiritual education. Before 1995, the
church had one theological academy and three seminaries. Now there are two
academies - in Kiev and Lviv. We have a theological faculty at Chernivtsi
University and a theological institute in Ivano-Frankivsk, as well as six
theological seminaries. The number of monasteries has increased from 10 to over
30. They are not large in terms of numbers of inhabitants, but this depends on
the numbers wanting to live there, and there are not that many today.
[Passage omitted: further progress over past eight years]
Among the achievements I also see the fact that despite Moscow's constant
efforts to cut the KP off from the world, we are gradually emerging from that
isolation. Today we have contacts with Constantinople patriarchy and with the
Bulgarian and Macedonian churches. After a break of several years, we are being
invited to international conferences held by the Roman Catholic Church both in
Ukraine and abroad.
Last year I was at a reception at the UNO where Ukraine culture was
demonstrated. So, despite all the efforts of our ill-wishers, the KP is coming
out into the world as a great church of a great country that has to be reckoned
with. [Passage omitted: need to build relations with other orthodox churches]
Relations with
Ukrainian authorities
[Hudzyk] What is the attitude of the Ukrainian authorities and Ukrainian
society to the Kiev Patriarchate? How has that attitude changed over the past
eight years?
[Filaret] The situation surrounding the church was unfavourable from the very
beginning. You remember the scrimmaging on St Sophia Square [in 1995]? That was
a clear manifestation of the attitude of the authorities to the KP. More than
that, it was an attempt to destroy the KP as a church and to join it either to the
Autocephalous Church or the UOC of the Moscow Patriarchate [MP].
The atmosphere has somewhat changed now. Nobody is now dreaming of the total
elimination of the KP; they are even trying to build good relations with it.
However, the authorities are in no way facilitating the development of the Kiev
Patriarchate, quite the contrary - they are supporting the UOC MP in every way.
If there had been an equal attitude to both churches, our achievements would
have been far greater. Now we often see this picture: when a MP parish wants to
transfer to the KP, they "are not allowed" - local authorities fail
to re-register them. But on the whole, compared with 1995, the situation has
somewhat improved.
Moscow
Patriarchate becoming more aggressive
[Hudzyk] How has the UOC MP changed over these years? After all, the existence
of such a reality as the Kiev Patriarchate could not have failed to affect that
church.
[Filaret] Of course, there have been changes in the MP. That church has become
more aggressive, which is seen in the numerous violent actions in the
Kiev Pechersk Lavra [Monastery on the Caves, the official residence of the UOC
MP], and also in other regions where they attack KP parishes and inflame
religious enmity, where aggressive sermons are delivered from pulpits. There is
also a total ban on the episcopate and clergy of the MP associating with the
clergy of the KP.
This is a very negative phenomenon - after all, we live in the same country.
Meanwhile, there is a gradual recognition taking place among the clergy of the
UOC MP that the process of forming an independent Ukrainian church is
irreversible. A considerable section of priests and bishops are ready in their
souls to unite with the KP, but are not bold enough to do so. And precisely
because of the position of the authorities, especially local authorities,
because of their sympathy for the UOC MP. Therefore, the waverers choose a more
advantageous and safe path.
Relations with Autocephalous
Orthodox Church
[Hudzyk] It is known that the UAOC [Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church] is
not going through the best of times: some people even consider that the church
as such does not exist now. Is the KP envisaging unification with that church?
[Filaret] There was a time when we wanted that unification to take place and we
signed accords with the UAOC leadership in Kiev and Constantinople. But it did
not produce results. So now I don't see any great benefit from possible
unification. After all, there are processes of division, confrontation and
enmity within the UAOC. And I fear that it will all continue, but on a large
scale, after unification with the KP. I also do not want unification with the
UAOC to be short-term. That's not serious.
Incidentally, I want to recall another achievement of the past eight years -
the unity of the Kiev Patriarchate. Before 1995, there were differing trends
here and an internal struggle. There is none of that now. [Passage omitted: no
regrets over past]
Russian intentions
Recent years have shown that the idea of an independent UOC is a true one. I
think that even the Moscow church in Ukraine feels that it is here temporarily
and that sooner or later it will have to unite with the Kiev Patriarchate into
a single national church.
Previously they were convinced that nothing would change in Ukraine in the
final analysis - they would "play" at independence and then return to
the Russian empire. Some people still think like that today. But the historical
process is working against them. Just look - they created the CIS, a "paper
empire". I think that the same thing will happen to the SES [single
economic space - economic union with Russia]. What is now happening in the Sea
of Azov [dispute over Tuzla Island] is good evidence of Russia's real
intentions.
It somehow turns out that everything that Russia does to annex Ukraine only
alienates us from it. They themselves are digging a gulf between Ukraine and
Russia, a gulf that it will later be difficult to overcome. And all their hopes
of subordinating the Ukrainian church are only wishes. It won't happen.
[Passage omitted: support for KP from various political parties]
Amendments to freedom of conscience law
[Hudzyk] How do you view the draft law on amendments to the current law on
freedom of conscience?
[Filaret] Our church views it negatively. The Greek Catholic and Roman Catholic
churches and major Protestant associations share that point of view as well. We
jointly signed an appeal to the president [Leonid Kuchma] and [Volodymyr
Lytvyn] the chairman of the Supreme Council [parliament] against this bill.
Why? Because we see this bill as a time bomb that will inflame religious enmity
in Ukraine on the grounds of church property.
Giving a church the rights of a legal entity means the right to ownership of
property and land. As a result, the Moscow Patriarchate will get full ownership
of church property on the territory of Ukraine. Regardless of the will of
believers. Both of our glorious lavras [major monasteries] will also become the
property of the Moscow Patriarchate. [Passage omitted: struggle for
property and land already in progress at Pochayiv lavra]
Meanwhile, it has long been known that whoever is in possession of these two
lavras is in possession of the soul of the Ukrainian people. Among other
things, the struggle for the lavras is part of Russia's overall policy with
regard to Ukraine. So we are against the passing of this bill at this stage.
The church has the right to be a legal entity, but not in conditions of a
divided Ukrainian Orthodoxy. Let the church first unite and become fully
independent. (END) (ARTUIS)
**************************************
Autocephalous Brotherhood
Claims Administration Violates Canons
LVIV, UKRAINE, Nov 23, 02 (RISU.org.ua) – The All-Ukrainian
Brotherhood of St. Andrew the Apostle of the Ukrainian Orthodox Autocephalous
Church (UAOC) claims that the present administration of the UAOC was formed in
violation of church canons. The brotherhood released a statement on 21 November
2002 that speaks about this matter and the elimination of a religious split in
Kyiv.
The reason for the statement was an announcement by Metropolitan Mefodii of
Ternopil and Podillia on 14 November 2002, in which he called a sobor
(assembly) of the UAOC for 11 December 2002 without the blessing of
Metropolitan Konstantyn, an Orthodox hierarch in the US who is considered the
spiritual head of the UAOC. According to Metropolitan Mefodii, this will
be a hierarchical sobor without participation of the laity.
The authors of the statement maintain that obstacles in the recognition of
Metropolitan Konstantyn as the head of the UAOC were placed by the highest
state authorities of Ukraine with the recommendation of Metropolitan Kiril of
the Russian Orthodox Church, head of the Department of External Religious
Affairs of the Moscow Patriarchate. This claim is based on the recording
released on 14 November 2002 containing a talk between Ukrainian President
Leonid Kuchma and Stepan Senchuk, former head of the Lviv regional
administration and made on 11 July 2000..
“The laity of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church has grounds to
suspect that the present administration of [the UAOC] has been formed in
violation of church canons and because of the interference of the highest state
authorities of Ukraine. Hence… its canonical authority is doubtful… and
absolutely not in accord with church law,” reads the statement.
In addition, the authors of the statement demanded the restoration of the
Patriarchal Council headed by Metropolitan Konstantyn, or a representative,
assigned by him. They also asked Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople and
the bishops of the Church of Constantinople, as well as the permanent
conference of Ukrainian Orthodox bishops in the diaspora, which belongs to the
jurisdiction of the Constantinople patriarch, “to take the Orthodox community
of Ukraine under their protection. At the national sobor of the UAOC from 14 to
15 September 2000, the church declared its repentance before the mother church
and proclaimed its desire to join a single national Ukrainian Orthodox Church
through adherence to church dogmas and canons under the religious guidance of a
canonically recognized and spiritually authoritative archpastor.”
http://www.risu.org.ua/?l=en
*******************************************************
Patriarch Bartholomeos sued for death-threats
Greek businessman Vasilaki Filordi, who has sued 23 people including Fener
Orthodox Greek Patriarch Bartholomeos for embezzlement, presented a petition to
the Kadikoy Prosecutor's office on Friday claiming that they are threatening
him with death.
Vasilaki Filordi had sued Bartholomeos and 22 others claiming that they
misappropriated $3.3 million which was allocated for the opening of a theology
department at Heybeli Island Clergy School.
Filordi demanded the punishment of Patriarch Bartholomeos, Patriarch deputy
Metropolitan Bishop Theoliptos, Sen Sinod Parliament members and Ismail Sitki
Kucuk because of "threatening with death and blackmail."
Filordi identified himself as a "Turkish citizen who is the member of
Christian Orthodox community living in Turkey," in the petition and
demanded a bodyguard from the Kadikoy Prosecutor's office for the protection of
her life.
Ankara- Turkish Daily News November 30, 2002
http://www.turkishdailynews.com/old_editions/11_30_02/for.htm#f8
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Orthodoxy as semi-official religion of Russia
RUSSIA'S WELL-CONNECTED PATRIARCH
As Church Enjoys Revival of
Influence, It’s Past Remains Clouded
by Sharon LaFraniere
Washington Post Foreign Service, 23 May 2002
Click Well Connected
Monitoring news
media reports about religion in Russia and other countries of former USSR
Copyrighted material. For private use only.
If you quote material, please credit the
publication from which it came. It is not necessary to credit this Web page for
any print use of the material. If any electronic reproduction is made, please
acknowledge the URL: http:www.stetson.edu/~psteeves/relnews/
NEW CONFLICTS BETWEEN
MOSCOW AND KIEV PATRIARCHATES
28 May 2002
On Sunday, seven priests of the Moscow Patriarchate seized the St.
Nicholas' church of the Kievan Patriarchate in Poltava and conducted a service
there. The entrance to the church was blocked by a group of militant young
people. They arrived by microbus, which bore Kiev state numbers, and
established a living barricade in front of the church door and, using physical
force, did not allow priests and parishioners to enter the church nor allow
those already in the church to exit. They beat the priest of the St.
Panteleimon's church of the Kievan Patriarchate, Fr Grigory, after which he was
hospitalized.
A report from members of the parish of St. Nicholas' church noted that
all of this happened in the presence of a squad of police headed by the deputy
chief of the Poltava city department of MVD and a representative of the
Department for Religious Affairs of the Poltava provincial administration,
Viacheslav Perevariukh, who did not intervene in the events. In connection with
this, members of the parish appealed by open letter to Ukrainian President
Kuchma and Prime Ministry Kinakh. They asked from protection from the
encroachments of the Moscow patriarchate, info-NEWS reports. (tr. by PDS,
posted 29 May 2002).
*******************************************************************
Same news item as above
from St. Michael’s Golden-domed Monastery
web site of UOC-KP,
Kyiv, Ukraine.
Свято-Михайлівський
Золотоверхий
Монастир - Новини
http://www.zolotoverh.org.ua/page3.php
31-05-2002 Напад на
парафію
Київського
Патріархату в
Полтаві.
Сім
московських
священиків
на чолі групи
войовничо
налаштованих
молодиків
захопили в
неділю
Свято-Миколаївську
церкву УПЦ
Київського
Патріархату
в Полтаві та,
перекривши
вихід з
храму,
провели там
службу.
Нападники
прибули на
мікроавтобусі
з київськими
номерами,
виставили
перед церквою
живий заслон
та не
дозволяли ні
священикам,
ні
парафіянам
входити в
церкву та виходити
з неї.
Крім того, вони
побили священика
Свято-Пантелеймонівської
церкви УПЦ
Київського
Патріархату
о.Григорія, в
результаті
чого він був
госпіталізований.
У зверненні
членів
громади
Свято-Миколаївської
церкви
говориться,
що все це
відбувалося
у
присутності
загону
міліції та
представника
відділу у
справах
релігії при
Полтавській облдержадміністрації,
які не
втручалися у
події. У
зв’язку з цим
члени
церковної
громади
звернулися з
відкритим
листом з проханням
про захист до
Президента
України Леоніда
Кучми і
прем’єр-міністра
Анатолія Кінаха.
За
повідомленням
Part.org.ua
P.S.
Найцікавішим
у цій
ситуації є
те, що на сайті
Московського
Патріархату
в Україні події
в Полтаві
подаються з
’точністю до
навпаки’. На
злодії шапка
горить?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DOES
UOC-USA NOW PROMOTE REPETENCE BY THOSE THAT DESIRE
A
UKRAINIAN AUTOCEPHLOUS CHURCH ,
NOT UNDER MOSCOW’S THUMB?…..
DELEGATIONS OF THE PATRIARCHATES OF CONSTANTINOPLE AND MOSCOW MEET IN THE CRIMEA
A regular meeting of official delegations of the
Patriarchates of Constantinople and Moscow took place in the
Crimea on 18-20 April 2002. The
Patriarchate of Constantinople was represented by Metropolitan
Meliton of Philadelphia, General Secretary of the Holy Synod, and by Archbishop
Vsevolod of Scopelos. The delegation of the Moscow Patriarchate consisted of Metropolitan
Agafangel of Odessa and Ismail, a permanent member of the Holy Synod of the
Russian Orthodox Church, Archpriest Nikolay Balashov, secretary for
Inter-Orthodox relations of the Department for External Church Relations of the
Moscow Patriarchate, and S.N.Govorun, a
Moscow Patriarchate staff member.
The participants in the meeting were hosted by
Metropolitan Lazar of Simferopol and the Crimea and by the Ukrainian
government, which was represented by V.D.Bondarenko, Chairman of the State
Committee of Ukraine on Religious Affairs. Members of the delegations got
acquainted with the church life in the Simferopol diocese, visited churches and
historical places of interest in the Crimea.
The delegations met in the atmosphere of fraternal
love and mutual understanding. They discussed topical problems of
inter-Orthodox relations, including those connected with the activity of
schismatic groups, which cause damage to church unity.
Regarding the schisms in Ukraine, it was noted that the
solution of this problem must be based on the holy canons of the Church applied
in the spirit of Gospel love.
Metropolitan Meliton of Philadelphia, General
Secretary of the Holy Synod of the Church of Constantinople, reaffirmed the
position of the Church of Constantinople that a schism can be overcome only in
the spirit of the canonic tradition of the Orthodox Church, and the necessary
condition for healing it is repentance by schismatics.
The participants in the meeting took into account
the opinion of the Ukrainian government expressed by V.D.Bondarenko. The
parties agreed to continue consultations for coordinating the actions aimed at
the healing of schisms.
************************************************************
It’s “deja-vu” all over again
but this time
on the other side of the
world……..Australia.
We
have received confirmation of the lawsuit that is under way in South Australia
against a parish that expressed its desire to join the jurisdiction of
Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Kyiv Patriarchate.
Background Information:
On May 3, 1998 at an Extraordinary General Meeting
of St. Michael’s Parish, Adelaide, South Australia the parish membership, by a
majority vote, declared its intent to leave the jurisdiction of Bishop Ioan, ruling
hierarch of UAOC in Diaspora, Diocese of Australia and New Zealand and join the
jurisdiction of Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Kyiv Patriarchate.
The decision of the Extraordinary General Parish
Meeting of St. Michael’s was not implemented (for unknown reasons) until St.
Michael’s General Parish Meeting on May 3, 2000, at which time the Parish
Council, by a majority vote, was authorized to form a Special Committee to
implement the decision of the Extraordinary General Meeting of May 3, 1998.
The Special Committee proceeded to implement the
decision of the parishioners of St. Michael’s by officially notifying the
offices of Kyiv Patriarchate of the intention of St. Michael’s Parish to join
its jurisdiction. The Special Committee also officially notified Metropolitan
Constantine, ruling hierarch of UAOC in Diaspora under whose jurisdiction the
Diocese of Australia and New Zealand belong, of St. Michael’s intentions to
join UOC-Kyiv Patriarchate.
A minority of St. Michael’s Parishioners (eight
members) disagreed with the majority decision and the Parish Board and
consulted an attorney and implemented legal action in the Australian Supreme
Court against the parishioners and the Parish Board of St. Michael’s.
Without the approval of the 15th Sobor of
UAOC in Diaspora or the approval of the Diocese Council and ignoring the
internal UAOC Church Court, the Consistory of UAOC authorized financial legal
support to the minority of dissenting parishioners of St. Michael’s Parish. As
of June 30, 2001 this financial aid consisted of $41,022.18
On January 9, 2002 a formal letter of response was
written and sent to all parishes and parishioners of the Australian-New Zealand
Diocese of UAOC in Diaspora explaining and clarifying the position of the Consistory
in this legal action. The explanations and clarifications of this 4-page fine
print letter can be summarized as follows:
1)
St.
Michael’s Parish, by a majority vote of its parishioners, declared their
intention to join UOC-Kyiv Patriarchate.
2)
Minority
of parishioners (eight) opposed this action and consults an attorney for legal
assistance.
3)
Attorney
for the minority sends a threatening letter to St. Michael’s Parish Board.
4)
Minority
of parishioners appeals to the Consistory for assistance in a lawsuit.
5)
Minority
of parishioners file a lawsuit in Australian Supreme Court NOT on the basis of
St. Michael’s intent to join the Ukrainian Orthodox Church – Kyiv Patriarchate
but on the basis of violating the Church Constitution
6)
Consistory
denies being a party to this lawsuit.
7)
Without
the approval of the 15th Sobor or the Diocese Council and ignoring
the internal Church Court the Consistory authorizes financial support to the
dissenting parishioners which to June 30, 2002 amount to $41, 022.18
8)
This
matter is still pending resolution in the Supreme Court.
Editorial Commentary:
WHERE HAVE WE HEARD THIS BEFORE????………………………
Holy Ascension
Parish, Clifton, N.J. of course!!!!
1)
The
majority of Holy Ascension parishioners and the Parish Board voted to dismiss
their parish priest.
2)
Holy
Ascension did NOT elect to leave the jurisdiction of UOC-USA nor did the parish
appeal to any other jurisdiction to be accepted into its organizational
structure. To this day all liturgical services and traditions are continuing
within Holy Ascension Parish, Clifton, NJ.
3)
Minority
of “Concerned Parishioners” opposed the decision of the majority.
4)
Minority
of “Concerned Parishioners” hire law firm of Russin & Vecchi, Washington,
DC, official representative of Moscow Patriarchate in the USA.
5)
Attorney
Jonathan Russin sends a threatening letter to Holy Ascension Parish Board.
6)
Minority
of “Concerned Parishioners” appeals to
Consistory of UOC-USA for assistance.
7)
Without
approval of the Sobor or the Metropolitan Council and ignoring the Church Court
the Consistory of UOC-USA under the leadership of Antony, Archbishop of
Hierapolis, authorizes Attorney Mr. Robert Hedesh to file a lawsuit against
Holy Ascension Parish Board.
8)
UOC-USA
Consistory, under the leadership of Antony, Archbishop of Hierapolis denies
being a party to this lawsuit and denies providing financial assistance. This
denial is made to the Metropolitan Council of UOC-USA yet court documents show
the principal litigants are UOC of USA, Archbishop Antony, et. al.
9)
After
numerous legal setbacks Attorney Robert Hedesh withdraws from the lawsuit.
10)UOC-USA Consistory, contrary to numerous denials
that it is not a party to the lawsuit, is dismissed by the judge as a party to the lawsuit.
11)The remaining seven (7) dissenting “Concerned Parishioners”
hire Mr. Robert F. Rehill, an expert in constitutional church law, to continue this matter on the basis
of violation of Church Constitution.
12)UOC-USA Consistory, under the leadership of Antony,
Archbishop of Hierapolis, continues to deny being a party to this lawsuit and
continues to deny providing financial assistance to the remaining seven
(7) “Concerned Parishioners”.
13)At the 16th Sobor, Metropolitan
Constantine of Eirenopolis and Archbishop Antony of Hierapolis deny being a
party to this lawsuit.
14)Financial records presented to the 16th
Sobor DO NOT list financial expenditures for this legal action.
15)This matter is still pending resolution in the
Superior Court.
It appears that the canonical
hierarchs “down under” in Southern Australia, who are under direct control of
Metropolitan Constantine of Eirenopolis…via Bishop Ioan…… have had excellent
instructions.
*******************************************************
Bound
Brooks’ canonical brothers, who are bishops, priests and faithful of Moscow
Patriarchate again attack Patriarch Filaret!
On March 24, 2002, as
reported by various news services and the office of UOC-KP in Ukraine,
Patriarch Filaret was again attacked and prevented from performing the blessing
of a newly built church, St. Olha, in the village of Kalynivka in the Vinnitsia
Oblast.
Metropolitan Makarij of
Vinnitsia, member of the Moscow Patriarchate, organized hundreds of protesters
not only to prevent Patriarch Filaret from blessing the newly built house of
worship but to threaten bodily injury to the arriving patriarchal delegation.
The local police in Kalynivka prevented a repetition that occurred at
Mariupole, Ukraine where priests and supporters of Moscow Patriarchate attacked
and caused bodily harm to Patriarch Filaret.
Following are excerpts from the news release (in
Ukrainian).
“Як
повідомляє УПЦ-КП, 24
березня
Московська
патріархія
вчинила черговий
антихристиянський
випад проти предстоятеля
УПЦ КП
патріарха
Філарета та віруючих
нашої церкви.
Цього дня
патріарх прибув
на
запрошення
правлячого
архієрея,
єпископа
Вінницького
й
Брацлавського
Геронтія на
освячення
храму на
честь Святої
Рівноапостольської
княгині
Ольги до
селища Калинівка
Вінницької
області.
Місцеве
чорносотенне
духовенство
УПЦ Московського
патріархату
підбурило
своїх
фанатичних
клікуш, аби
за будь-яку
ціну не
допустити
освячення
церкви Київського
патріархату.
Як йдеться у
повідомленні,
організатором
і замовником
цього протизаконного
дійства
виступив
митрополит
Вінницький
УПЦ МП
Макарій
(Свистун). Саме
він напередодні
подій у
своєму
кафедральному
храмі
привселюдно
закликав
віруючих перешкоджати
освяченню
храму та
зірвати візит
патріарха на
Вінниччину.
"Заклики
московського
митрополита
Свистуна
були сприйняті
священиками
й
активістами
УПЦ МП як пряма
вказівка до
дій. У
Калинівку
було
стягнуто
духовенство
з
навколишніх
сіл, звезено
спеціально підготовлених
і навчених (а
часом і
оплачених)
клікуш, які
озброїлися
не лише
плакатами, а,
як
стверджують
очевидці, й
предметами,
що могли бути
використані
як зброя у
протистоянні.
Озвірілий
натовп, десь
із двохсот
осіб, не лише
хотів
зірвати
освячення, а
й намагався
побити
Київського
патріарха та
його
супровід",
повідомляють
у Київському
патріархії.
Цього
вдалося
уникнути лише
завдяки діям
міліції, що
була готова
до такого
повороту дій.
"Так звана
УПЦ МП ще раз
довела, що
вона не
визнає
земних і
Божих
законів, розпалюючи
в Україні
міжрелігійну
ворожнечу",
вважають
автори заяви.
Міліція
не
організувала
допуск
патріарха
Філарета до
храму, що на
законних
підставах
належить Українській
православній
церкві
Київського
патріархату.
Дії
митрополита
Вінницького
і
Брацлавського
Макарія
(Свистуна) можна
розцінювати
як пряме
розпалювання
міжрелігійної
ворожнечі.
Така
відверто злочинна
поведінка
московського
архієрея обумовлена
впевненістю
у
безкарності.”
********************************************************************************
Deception at the
Highest Levels continues……………..
In a recent interview Metropolitan Mefodij, the primate of the
UAOC in Ukraine, which has placed itself under the spiritual leadership of
Metropolitan Constantine of Ireanopolis, responded very negatively to the
prospects of any unification of the Orthodox Churches in Ukraine. This is
entirely contrary to his mentor’s claim in Bound Brook at the 16th
Sobor that the unification goals were achieved with great success.
Additionally, Metropolitan Mefodij restated the position that the UAOC derives
its stature from 1015 parishes.The official web site of the UAOC, www.uaoc.org.ua,
reported that as of February 2002, the UAOC consists of 11 Eparchies with a
grand total of 561 parishes and only 404 priests.
The web site is published by the Administrator of the
UAOC, Archbishop Ihor Isichenko, who of all people, should know the exact
strength of his flock. Then why, you may ask, are the inflated numbers being
floated at the highest levels of the church administration? Is it more of the
same deception practiced by Archbishop Antony of Hierapolis? And why are there
only 404 priests being listed? Does this mean that 157 parishes are parishes in
name only? Does this bear similarity to the claims floated by the UOC-USA?
Isn’t this the same as having 107 parishes listed in the UOC-USA official Church
calendar but only 48 parishes show up at the Sobor?
When
will we hear the truth from our canonical brethren?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
RFE/RL
Poland, Belarus, and Ukraine Report
Vol. 3, No. 23, 19 June 2001
PROTESTS
PRECEDE PAPAL VISIT. On 7 May, several hundred Orthodox priests and nuns
marched through Kyiv demanding that the impending visit of Pope John Paul II be
canceled. Among the antipapal slogans chanted by demonstrators, one asserted
that "The Roman Pope Is The Antichrist!"
This and similar demonstrations in recent weeks led Ukrainian
Foreign Minister Anatoliy Zlenko last week to criticize the growing protests
and call for calm during the historic papal visit, which will take place from
23-27 June.
Zlenko, who heads the organizing committee responsible for the
visit, voiced concern on 11 June about the numerous reported plans to disrupt
the pope's scheduled appearances in Ukraine.
Zlenko called the plans the work of "provocateurs and extremists
who may not be acting on behalf of their religious convictions, but rather in
order to achieve their political or other
goals."
He urged all political and religious groups to show restraint
during the pope's visit in order to avoid danger to any of the up to 2 million
people expected to gather for masses in Kyiv and Lviv.
Pope John Paul II's visit -- the first-ever papal visit to
Ukraine -- is being eagerly awaited by the country's Catholics. Composed of
both Eastern-rite and Roman Catholics, they are concentrated in western Ukraine
and make up just 10 percent of the country's religious believers, who are
predominantly Orthodox Christian.
Ukraine's Eastern-rite Catholic Church (Uniate Church), which has
strong traditional links to Ukrainian nationalism, was banned by Soviet leader
Josef Stalin in 1944. Many of its clergy and faithful were either executed or
sent to prison camps.
But the church continued to function underground until it was
legalized again in 1989. It has since rebuilt a stronghold in western Ukraine,
regaining many of the former Catholic churches taken over by Orthodox
congregations following Stalin's ban. However, tensions continue to simmer
between the country's Catholics and Orthodox.
Ukraine has three Orthodox churches. Two of them are Ukrainian,
and have welcomed the pope's visit. The third, which is the largest and has
strong ties to the Russian Orthodox Church, has condemned the trip. It says the
country's Catholics are using the visit as an attempt to convert Orthodox
believers to Catholicism.
Russia's Orthodox Church is also uncomfortable because of its own
origins in the medieval state of Kyivan Rus, based in what is now Kyiv and the
site where the region's Slavs first converted to Christianity. Two powerful
symbols of Slav Orthodoxy -- the Pecherska Lavra underground monastery and the
Church of St. Sophia, where the
first conversions took place -- are both located in Kyiv. But with Ukraine no
longer an official part of the Russian or Soviet empires, Russian Orthodox
leaders there say their claim as the leading Slav Orthodox Church is becoming
increasingly difficult to sustain.
The pope has said one of his goals in visiting Ukraine is to help
repair the Great Schism between Catholics and Orthodox Christians that occurred
in the 11th century. But his remarks have done little to soothe the Ukrainian
Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate), which has staged most of the
demonstrations against the pope's visit.
On 11 June, Russian Orthodox Patriarch Aleksii II, who has
publicly refused to meet with Pope John Paul II, said the pope's visit to
Ukraine will "cause new confrontation between religious confessions
there." Ukraine's Orthodox priests subordinated to the Moscow Patriarchate
have been using the media, as well as their
pulpits, to criticize the pope's visit.
Father Gerontii is an Orthodox priest at the Pecherska Lavra
monastery. As one of the leaders of antipapal protests, he said there is much
to lose from Pope John Paul II's visit.
"We don't want him to come here and proselytize, to be a
missionary. What do we need that for? His program is like a nightmare for
us," he said. "If an enemy comes to you, are you going to keep quiet?
And he is an enemy of man's souls."
Father Gerontii claimed that the pope will be stopped by
demonstrators if he attempts to visit either the Pecherska Lavra or the St.
Sophia cathedral.
"We will never allow him into the Lavra. The people have
said that they will lie down in order to block his path, not only for one week,
but two, three," he said. "Nobody will get into the Lavra, just as
they will not get into St. Sofia. They're our holy shrines."
The head of Ukraine's Uniate Church, Cardinal Lubomyr Husar,
dismissed accusations that the pope's visit is aimed at winning Catholic
converts and said the pontiff hopes to meet with all of the country's church
leaders. In fact, with the exception of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow
Patriarchate), Pope John Paul II will meet the leaders of all of Ukraine's
Christian denominations. Cardinal Husar said the pope will also meet with
Jewish and Muslim leaders in Kyiv.
"The accusations being made about the persecution of the
Orthodox in western Ukraine, or about proselytizing, are so far removed from
the truth it seems to me that it is difficult to accept these are the real
reasons for the cause of the disputes [between the Catholic and Orthodox
churches]," Cardinal Husar said.
The cardinal said he plans to hold in-depth talks with Moscow-
affiliated Orthodox Church leaders in the hope that dialogue will eventually
resolve disputes between the two churches. But so far, he says, those leaders
have been reluctant to engage in such dialogue.
"I would be very glad to understand the cause [of the
disputes] and why such repugnance [for the Catholic Church] exists,"
Cardinal Husar said. "It pains me to think that we may truly be, for
reasons we are unaware of, inflicting pain on our brother Christians."
Organizers say they expect more than 2 million people will see
the pope during his visit. They said last week that 600,000 invitations have
already been issued for the two scheduled services in Kyiv. The pope is also
scheduled to meet with President Leonid Kuchma before flying to Lviv, where 1.6
million people have been invited to attend additional masses.
(RFE/RL correspondent Askold
Krushelnycky wrote this report.)
*****************************************************************************
RFE/RL
NEWSLINE Vol. 5, No. 113, Part II, 14 June 2001
President
Kuchma says “NO” to Russia-Belarus Union.
In
an interview published in the Slovak daily "Pravda" on 12 June, Kuchma said Ukraine will not join the
Russia-Belarus Union. "The joining of this union is ruled out. It is
impossible. We have won our independence not for losing it [voluntarily],"
Kuchma told the newspaper. He added: "We have chosen our
union -- it is the European Union." JM
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
June 6, 2001 Kyiv, Ukraine…..UKRAINIAN ORTHODOX( Moscow
Patriarchate) BELIEVERS PROTEST POPE'S UPCOMING VISIT.
Some 3,000 people, including several hundred priest and
nuns of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate), staged a march in
Kyiv on 7 June to protest Pope John Paul II's trip to Ukraine scheduled for
23-27 June, Interfax and Reuters reported.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Patriarch Filaret Leads
Campaign for Independent Ukrainian Church
(Ed. note:
Photo to accompany this article is available from RNS Today. To download photos
from the RNS photo Web site, call 1-800-767-6781.)
KIEV, Ukraine -- Dressed in a simple burgundy cassock, flashing
the occasional gold-toothed smile and speaking in soothing tones, Patriarch
Filaret does not come off like a master of this country's religious scene, a
rough-and-tumble world where Orthodox Christianity and post-Soviet politics
meet. But the 71-year-old head of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Kiev
Patriarchate, Filaret is arguably Ukraine's most powerful religious leader, the
architect of a plan to give this mostly Orthodox country of 49 million people a
legitimate, independent Orthodox church.
As Filaret explained in a recent interview, "Ukraine is an
independent government. The biggest church is Orthodox. It is not natural for
that biggest church, which is independent of the Ukrainian government, to be
dependent on a church in another country ...Therefore, sooner or later, this
question must be decided."
The Moscow-based Russian Orthodox Church has for centuries
claimed Ukraine -- along with a vast swath of the world from the Baltic Sea to
the Pacific Ocean -- as its canonical territory. As long as Ukraine was part of
the Russian Empire and then the Soviet Union, Moscow's claim went unchallenged.
But now, independent Ukraine is home to three rival Orthodox
churches: Filaret's Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Kiev Patriarchate, the smaller
Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church and the considerably larger Ukrainian
Orthodox Church-Moscow Patriarchate, part of the Russian Orthodox Church.
Of the three, only the Moscow Patriarchate is accepted as
legitimate by the rest of Orthodoxy, the world's second largest Christian
communion after Roman Catholicism. Ukraine's two smaller Orthodox churches are
in
schism, having broken away
from Moscow.
In the last 18 months, Filaret's nine-year campaign has picked
up significant momentum. First, Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma put his
political weight behind the unification of Ukraine's Orthodox churches. Then,
world Orthodoxy's first among equals, Ecumenical Patriarch and Archbishop of
Constantinople Bartholomew I started working to broker a
unification deal between
Filaret and the Autocephalous church, holding out possible canonical status for
a new Ukrainian church.
And finally, Pope John Paul II decided to make a historic visit
to Ukraine this June, when he is widely expected to meet with Filaret and other
religious leaders. Such a meeting would boost Filaret's credibility. According
to a Canadian expert on Eastern Christianity, the pope's five-day visit might
well "create a pro-Ukrainian momentum that
Constantinople could
ride" in its bid to bring the smaller two Orthodox churches together.
"Things being volatile the way they are in Ukraine, who
knows what kinds of things might change in the next few months," said
Peter Galadza, a Ukrainian Catholic priest at the Sheptytsky Institute of Eastern
Christian Studies at St. Paul University in Ottawa.
All these developments infuriate leaders of the 80-million
member Russian Orthodox Church, by far the largest Orthodox church in the
world. More than 1,000 people in Moscow marched to the Kremlin walls on May 12
to protest the pope's visit to Ukraine. About 400 Orthodox staged a similar
demonstration in Kiev on May 17.
Some Russian Orthodox Church leaders smell a conspiracy between
Rome and Constantinople.
"Certainly the pontiff's visit will coincide with a new
attempt to break up the Russian Orthodox Church and create an independent
Ukrainian Church by means of the interference of Patriarch Bartholomew of
Constantinople, who is known for his pro-Catholic orientation," said
Bishop Ippolit in an April interview with the Kremlin-linked Web site
www.strana.ru.
The stakes are high. Ukraine is the spiritual breadbasket of
the Russian Orthodox Church. Nearly half the Russian Orthodox Church's parishes
are located in Ukraine, a country with almost one-third the population of
Russia. Kiev, where local Slav princes first accepted Orthodoxy in 988, has
huge historical significance to Russian Orthodox believers.
For the leading hierarchs in Moscow, Filaret is an especially
odious figure in the battle for control of Ukraine, partly because Filaret was
once one of them. In 1990, after years of leading the church in Ukraine, he was
a top candidate in balloting to become the new Russian Orthodox patriarch. But
as Ukraine declared its independence from the crumbling Soviet Union, Filaret
did the same with the Russian Orthodox Church.
Now he stands defrocked, excommunicated and anathematized by
Moscow for the break.
Today, Filaret's church has about 3,000 parishes. Moscow has 9,000
in Ukraine, and the Autocephalous Church has slightly more than 1,000, ccording
to Ukrainian government statistics.
While Filaret is the driving force behind unifying his and the
Autocephalous Church and getting Constantinople's imprimatur, he is also one of
the biggest obstacles. His moral authority is damaged by persistent,
well-publicized rumors -- which he denies -- that he
fathered three children in
violation of his monastic vows. Also, critics say, Moscow's anathema makes
Filaret a pariah in the Orthodox world.
In November, Bishop Makary Maletich of the Autocephalous Church
traveled from the western Ukrainian city of Lviv, to Istanbul for three days of
unification meetings at the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
After taking part in discussions between representatives of
Filaret's church, the Ecumenical Patriarchate and his church, Makary
said he realized that
"there won't be anything" as long as Filaret heads the Kiev
Patriarchate.
With a knowing look, Makary described how during the November
visit, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I first received an icon from Filaret's
delegation and then from the Autocephalous delegation.
"He just took the icon, said `thank you' and put it down.
But with the icon from our representative, he crossed it, kissed it and blessed
it," related Makary. "We can't ignore that. But we can't ignore
Filaret."
For his part, Filaret, asked if he would step down to clear the
way for a unified Ukrainian church, said, "There must be a leader who can
accomplish that unification from within. I would agree to step down if I were
to see a successor who could accomplish this. Today, I don't see him."
Makary, told of Filaret's objections to stepping down, retorted
with a laugh, "That is idol worship. I am against that."
The squabbling in Ukraine might seem arcane were it not for the
belief, held by many Orthodox believers, that worship in a canonical Orthodox
church is the only truly effective means of communicating with God. One monk
describes the difference between being in a non-canonical church and a
canonical church as the difference between "looking through a keyhole and
actually being inside the room."
Given Moscow's intransigence, only the Ecumenical Patriarch in
Constantinople seems capable of granting the Autocephalous and Kiev Patriachate
churches canonical status.
So far, the Patriarch is acting with caution. Hopeful rumors
abound within Ukraine's breakaway Orthodox churches that Bartholomew will visit
Ukraine this year. But in a fax to Religion News Service on May 18,
Metropolitan Meliton of the Ecumenical Patriarchate wrote that Bartholomew
"has judged that the conditions are not ripe for such a visit.
Consequently, at present there is no such plan or program, only good will on
both sides."
In Estonia, a former Soviet republic on the Baltic Sea which
the Moscow Patriarchate considers its territory, Constantinople took one group
of anti-Moscow Orthodox parishes under its jurisdiction in 1996, declaring that
it took the action "as a tender mother has accepted the free and unanimous
request of her children."
The Moscow Patriarchate reacted swiftly by breaking communion
with Constantinople and dropping the Ecumenical Patriarch's name from the
Divine Liturgy for the first time in centuries. The break lasted from February
to May 1996. Relations are still shaky over Estonia, where both churches now
share jurisdiction and are searching for a permanent
solution.
With just 84 Orthodox parishes, Estonia is tiny compared to
Ukraine. Moscow's reaction in 1996, however, is telling, said Galadza.
"The fact that Moscow and Constantinople could break
communion over a church as small and insignificant as Estonia, suggests that
Ukraine would be the equivalent of an H-bomb falling on Moscow-Constantinople
relations," he said.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
CONVERSATIONS OF OFFICIAL DELEGATIONS OF CONSTANTINOPLE AND MOSCOW PATRIARCHATE HELD IN ZURICH
Communications Service, OVTsS, Moscow patriarchate, 20
April 2001
Published below
in its entirety is the official communique regarding conversations of
delegations of the Constantinople and Moscow patriarchates:
On 19-20 April 2001 in Zurich were held conversations of official
delegations of the Constantinople and Moscow patriarchates. The Constantinople
patriarchate was represented by Metropolitan Ioann of Pergamum and Metropolitan
Meliton of Philadelphia, the general secretary of the Holy Synod. The
delegation of Russian Orthodox church comprised Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk
and Kaliningrad, chairman of the Department of External Church Relations of the
Moscow patriarchate, and Archpriest Nikolai Balashov, acting secretary of the
Department of External Church Relations for Inter-Orthodox relations and
foreign institutions of the Russian Orthodox church. The conversations
proceeded in an atmosphere of fraternal love and frankness. The following
decisions were adopted: 1. On the Estonian question both sides emphasized
their desire to facilitate the normalization of relations between the two
Orthodox jurisdictions in Estonia. Inasmuch as the Holy Synod of the Moscow
patriarchate has approved the draft of an agreement on settling disputed
property questions, worked out previously in Berlin, and the Holy Synod of the
Constantinople patriarchate is awaiting the opinion of its church structure in
Estonia relative to this text, the sides agreed to resume a review of this
question after the adoption of a pertinent decision by the Holy Synod of the
Constantinople patriarchate. 2. On the
Ukrainian question the following decision was reached: the two patriarchates
will act in common for the normalization of the church situation in Ukraine. As
a first step it was recognized that it is necessary to send to Ukraine a
delegation consisting of two clergymen not of episcopal rank from both
patriarchates for studying the situation and holding consultations on the spot
with everybody in this country who is involved in supporting actions which the
two patriarchates plan to take in the near future for restoring Orthodox church
unity there. Zurich, 20 April 2001 (tr. by PDS, posted 21 April
2001)
**************************************************************
PATRIARCH PROMISES
TO PROTECT RUSSIANS ABROAD.
Aleksii II told a group of Russians from the former Soviet republics that "you are flesh of flesh and blood of blood of our
people," adding that "we see it as our duty to take part in all actions aimed at consolidating the unity of our compatriots living abroad," Interfax reported. The patriarch also condemned efforts to separate from the Russian Orthodox Church orthodox congregations in Estonia and Ukraine and said that it is not yet time for Pope John Paul II to visit Ukraine, the news agency reported. Meanwhile, Russian media gave prominent play to the closure of the only Russian-language daily in Lithuania, noting that its editors had informed President Putin that the paper will cease publication, "Nezavisimaya gazeta" reported on 6 March (see
"RFE/RL Newsline," 5 March 2001). A committee headed by Duma speaker Seleznev announced the same day that a Slavic
Congress of the Peoples of Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine will take place in Moscow 1-2 June, Interfax said. PG
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Reply to Dr. Lysyjs’ article
“Sobor Unite US” as published in the
Orthodox Word, official publication of the UOC-USA.
The
following are excerpts from a Ukrainian article by Jurij Doroshenko published
in “Young Ukraine”, Kyiv, January 10, 2001.
(Translated from Ukrainian)
“Notations from church politics or….
How the American “fellows” united the Ukrainian
Churches and praised themselves”
“I
cannot disagree with Dr. Lysyj that right now, for the Ukrainian Church, there
have “opened new possibilities”, but they are not tied to the internal life of
any one of the Ukrainian diaspora churches. It would be comical to believe that
such serious processes that are occurring in the life of the orthodox faithful
in Ukraine have been initiated by several hierarchs, clergy, and, overburdened
with church matter, lay pensioners from the diaspora”.
“Dear
sir's, it is not worth to elevate your self-worth in proposing a solution
towards creating a united Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Ukraine when you are
unable to solve your own internal church problems.”
“Further you should not disseminate misinformation to the worldwide Ukrainian faithful. For according to Dr. Lysyj: Metropolitan Constantine traveled to his hierarch (in Istanbul), discussed something or other and at once His Holiness (Patriarch Bartholomew) initiates assistance to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Ukraine. Maybe this is a pretty fairytale bu