Kiev, September 18, 2019
Photo: pomisna.info
OrthoChristian previously reported on how a hierarch of the Alexandrian Orthodox Church was practically deceived into “serving” with a “hierarch” of the schismatic OCU.
When Metropolitan Chrysostom of Mozambique was serving with Greek bishops in the Langadas Diocese of Metropolitan Ioannis (Tassias), the schismatic Vladimir Shlapak suddenly appeared, presumably with the invitation of Met. Ioannis, and served with the hierarchs, seemingly without informing the hierarch of Alexandria who he was, or what was happening, before it already happened.
As was predictable, the schismatics naturally took this as an opportunity to claim the Alexandrian Orthodox Church formally or otherwise de-facto recognizes them. On their website, the press service of the OCU claims: “This [liturgy] is of great importance, since the participation of a hierarch of South Africa [of the Alexandrian Patriarchate] attests to the Eucharistic unity, and consequently, to the factual recognition of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine by another Local Church—the Patriarchate of Alexandria and all Africa.”
Archpriest Nikolai Danilevich, Deputy Head of the Department for External Church Relations of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, however, responded to these claims.
Fr. Nikolai emphasized that just because “…one bishop of the Alexandria Church served with a representative of the ‘Orthodox Church of Ukraine’ does not mean that the newly-formed denomination is recognized by the Patriarchate of Alexandria.”
The speaker of the Ukrainian Church noted that there has not been a single decision of the Alexandrian Orthodox Church on the recognition of the OCU.
Fr. Nikolai also noted that individual bishops serving with non-canonical clergy is a serious violation of the canons, and according to these canons and Church Tradition, any clergy who celebrate with excommunicated clergy risk themselves being excommunicated. As Fr. Nikolai emphasized, just because this punishment isn’t imposed, does not mean that the canonical rule itself does not exist, and therefore that it could or would not be imposed.
As a result, even if it turns out that a hierarch of another Church wants to recognize the schismatics, if he acts unilaterally and serves with those whom his Synod still does not recognize, this does not mean the schismatics gain legitimacy, but rather that the canonical bishop in question risks his own legality.
Recently, the same Greek hierarch of the New Lands, Metropolitan Ioannis (Tassias), served with schismatics in Kiev, and then the schismatic leader Epiphany immediately claimed the Greek Church now de-facto recognizes the OCU.
The Church of Greece, however, denied these false claims.
The schismatic’s method of legitimization betrays their uncanonical situation, as it is essentially based on the knowledge that no legitimate hierarch would willfully and knowingly serve with them, and therefore relies on deceit and technicalities, as a substitute for actually being canonical.
The Church already offers a path for schismatics, including schismatic clergy to return—through repentance and confession. The schismatics, however, chose not to take this path, but instead use means of deceit and technicalities.
Matfey Shaheen
