The Church of Christ Cannot be Closed or Cancelled

Report from the general meeting of the clergy, monks and laity of the Zaporozhie Diocese concerning the ban on the UOC

Photo: hramzp.ua Photo: hramzp.ua     

On August 23, 2024, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church held a discussion concerning the law adopted by the Parliament of Ukraine "On the Protection of the Constitutional Order in the Sphere of Activities of Religious Organizations" in the Holy Protection Cathedral under the chairmanship of the Administrator of the Zaporozhie Diocese, Metropolitan of Zaporozhie and Melitopol Luka.

Photo: hramzp.ua Photo: hramzp.ua     

Of 236 elected delegates (priests, monastics and laity), 216 were present at the meeting. The Ruling Bishop of the Zaporozhie Diocese of the UOC, His Eminence Bishop Luka, presented his report (the text follows below).

Photo: hramzp.ua Photo: hramzp.ua     

According to His Eminence, no matter what goals the authors of this law had in mind —overt or covert —the task of our Church remains unchanged: To bring people to God.

Photo: hramzp.ua Photo: hramzp.ua     

“The mission of the Church is the salvation of humanity. The Church saves, heals people, unites them with Christ. Everything else is secondary. The Church always looks at all phenomena and processes occurring on earth from one angle: Whether it harms or does not harm the soul of a person, and how this relates to our future lives and salvation. That is why it is so important not to become embittered, not to fall into condemnation, not to lose love. And because iniquity will abound, the love of many will grow cold; But he who endures to the end will be saved (Matthew 24:12,13). Lawlessness in our country has increased, but we must endure to the end. Seeing how churches are being destroyed, we must not give way to anger. Experiencing expulsion from our churches, we must not condemn the persecutors. Hearing slander against us, we must not spit out curses in response. Therefore, let us not be despondent, but think about how to live in the new conditions.”

Photo: hramzp.ua Photo: hramzp.ua     

The Church of Christ, as the bishop repeatedly emphasized in his report, cannot be banned by any laws.

"If desired, it is possible to close or take away a church—that is, a building in which believers gather to perform services. But the Church of Christ, which includes the bright Angels, the Righteous of the Old Testament who were led by the Lord from hell to the Kingdom of Heaven, all Orthodox Christians—living and dead—united by faith and love, cannot be closed or canceled. The Church is not a building, but a divine-human organism. The Church does not replace God for man, but rather gives us an opportunity to feel the fullness of our relationship with Him. Not all our problems are solved here, but with God's help, we can find answers to many of them."

Photo: hramzp.ua Photo: hramzp.ua     

Then the Zaporozhie archpastor suggested looking at the situation that had arisen as a new opportunity provided by the Lord:

“Since the right of citizens to choose their own faith and the church where they would like to go to pray—guaranteed by the Constitution of Ukraine—has been trampled, we still have the right to defend our rights in governmental bodies and courts. We live in a legal system in which judicial precedent is recognized as the main source of law. This is when every court decision becomes a precedent that can influence the further application of the law. And this means that there should be constant communication between all the communities of the diocese on all legal and judicial issues. It is necessary for the members of the parish communities to unite around their pastors, becoming a true Orthodox family, not forgetting what Christ said about us: Where two or three gather together in My name, I will be with them.

Photo: hramzp.ua Photo: hramzp.ua     

After the report was finished, the participants of the meeting began discussions, the results of which was the final resolution adopted and supported unanimously (given below).

The general diocesan meeting ended with the singing of the prayer “It is truly meet” and the bishop's blessing. Then, at the main entrance to the Holy Protection Cathedral, the clergy with their Archpastor gathered for a commemorative group photo.

Photo: hramzp.ua Photo: hramzp.ua     

***

On our prospects in light of Bill 8371

Dear fathers, mothers-abbesses, brothers and sisters!

On August 20, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted law 8371, in its latest version renamed as the law “On the protection of the constitutional order in the sphere of activities of religious organizations.” But, in fact, the authors of this law, without any embarrassment, call it by another name—the law banning the UOC.

For opponents of the UOC, the vote was a success. After all, the highest offices recently pronounced the need to ensure “spiritual independence” of the Ukrainian state, which coincided with the visit of a representative delegation to Phanar which included high-ranking government officials and leaders of the OCU.

This means that the authorities plan to use the mechanisms of the law to liquidate the UOC, accusing the Church of illegal activities, crimes against the state system according to cliches and labels persistently cultivated in our media.

In favor of the current political climate and a political decision adopted at the highest level—indiscriminately and without evidence, contrary to common sense and real facts—the UOC is accused of a variety of possible wartime crimes.

It is worth noting that where a political decision is made, most often the mechanisms for protecting civil rights and freedoms of a democratic society cease to operate.

We expect that the “expert” organizations and authorized government bodies will present the UOC communities with “instructions” to eliminate “ties with the governing center on the territory of the aggressor country” according to already prepared templates and in search for illusory traces of the “Russian world.” And the only satisfactory solution for them will probably be to coerce a change of jurisdiction.

What options do the clergy and laity of our Church have after its ban?

The first is joining the OCU.

It is expected that, based on Law 8371, unconstitutional pressure will be applied to the UOC, with the aim of forcibly transferring its communities to the OCU.

It is obvious why the UOC cannot join the OCU without serious consequences of canonical violations and damage to the nature of its church.

What happens if you mix clean water with dirty water? Unfortunately, nothing good. You will just get more water, which you can't drink.

Transfer this comparison to the spiritual sphere, and consider—will God's grace remain with you or not?

Moreover, the Lord Jesus Christ gave a clear definition with which we can always distinguish the true from the false: A good tree cannot bear bad fruit.

Does God’s grace fill structures that seize other people's churches, beat and maim believers, pour tons of dirt and lies on those who are hypocritically called “brothers”?

Of course not. And therefore, I consider it unacceptable to lose the most sacred thing that we have.

We need to remember another important fact: Nobody likes traitors. And nobody values ​​them. By going over to the OCU, many of our clergy will become not second-class, but third-class people. Just look at how the so-called “bishops” from the “Kiev Patriarchate” treat the so-called “archbishops” who came from the UAPC in the OCU. It is immediately obvious who is part of the highest caste and who is not. Just imagine what kind of attitude will be formed there towards our defectors if the OCU feels that it no longer needs to pretend and everything can finally be taken from us by force. They will be perceived by Dumenko's organization as cattle, as “marginals” who will have to prove to the end of their days that they are “not Muscovites” and “not agents of the Kremlin.”

The second option is the transition to control under the Patriarchate of Constantinople. We are in discussions about joining the ranks of the Phanar Exarchate, which already exists and functions on Ukrainian soil.

However, what will such a step give us? In my deep conviction—nothing. Moreover, it might radically worsen the situation.

The hypothetical option of joining the Constantinople Exarchate, for the UOC, means essentially the same thing as a transition to the OCU. It is the same as entering the same room through a different door. Joining the Patriarchate of Constantinople means automatic unification with its entire composition, where the OCU is already present.

Let us remember a simple fact: Patriarch Bartholomew treacherously and without any grounds legalized the Ukrainian schism, simply spitting on the Orthodox faith, its canons and common sense.

In fact, he crossed the Rubicon. For him, there are no more “red lines” in the spiritual sphere. This means that Phanar's further deviation from the purity of the Orthodox faith is only a matter of time.

And the time is soon approaching. After all, next year Patriarch Bartholomew is planning to make a “breakthrough” in the matter of “restoring unity” with the RCC. In particular, the Phanariots are publicly talking about the possibility of a common celebration of Easter with the Catholic world in the very near future. After which the restoration of Eucharistic and prayerful communion would follow.

In light of this, our transition under the omophorion of Constantinople means only one thing: We will move further and further away from the Orthodox faith, following the Phanar’s course towards unity with the Vatican—a Vatican, by the way, which every year more openly supports LGBT issues and other “values”s alien to Christianity.

Do we want to plunge into a new union, into a fetid spiritual swamp, together with the Patriarchate of Constantinople in the future? I think that this question can safely be considered rhetorical.

The third option is to search for other alternatives in the form of private, individual transfers of communities to the jurisdictions of other Local Churches with which the UOC has Eucharistic communion (Romanian, Polish, Serbian, etc.). This poses the danger of a collapse of order in church life, controversial canonical justification, jurisdictional chaos and the threat of self-destruction of the UOC. And based on the example of attempts to register the ROC in Ukraine, we see that the authorities will not allow this.

The fourth option is the proclamation of unauthorized autocephaly.

We began this path on May 27, 2022. And time has shown that this step led to nothing. Not only did it not remove the contradictions in the relationship between our Church and the authorities, but it also demonstrated to the latter our weakness and readiness to make concessions, which ultimately led to the vote for the law banning the UOC.

Our full-fledged autocephaly is not needed by Bankova, Phanar, or the OCU. Even if we had proclaimed it, they would not have recognized it, who said that it was simply an attempt by “Kremlin agents” “at the instigation of Moscow” to preserve themselves until better times. In the best case, they would have temporarily used it as a tool to sever our ties with other Local Churches and gain time to ensure the unification of the UOC with the OCU.

It must be noted with regret that the division of Universal Orthodoxy into many jurisdictions is a sad process that is initiated and supported by both Patriarch Bartholomew and the enemies of Orthodoxy, who are guided by the unholy principle of “divide and rule.”

Indeed, the unauthorized proclamation of autocephaly will automatically make us schismatics, including in the eyes of many Local Churches.

The fifth option is to remain faithful to God and the Church.

Yes, this will be associated with great problems and troubles. Yes, it will make us

much. Yes, it will be extremely difficult and burdensome. We must understand that by maintaining our canonical structure, loyalty to Jesus Christ and the Church, we incur the wrath of local authorities and radicals who seethe with hatred and often live in our neighborhoods. We are faced with a choice: To bow before the “mighty” power or to be persecuted, but to be a partaker of Divine Grace.

We all know that He who endures to the end will be saved (Matthew 24:13).

The Lord will not abandon us. Unless, of course, we abandon Him. Therefore, today each of us will be forced to answer the question: Who is more important to me—Christ or the state? Am I in the Church for the sake of Jesus or for a crust of bread?

If we talk about more mundane things, then let us turn to historical experience—in particular, at the example of the Uniate organization. It was banned by the Soviet government and went underground for decades. And then, when the external situation changed, it abruptly restored its position. And if this was possible for a structure far removed from Orthodoxy, then why shouldn’t it be possible for us?

It is very important now not to become embittered, not to fall into condemnation, not to lose love. And because lawlessness will increase, the love of many will grow cold; but he who endures to the end will be saved (Matthew 24:12, 13). Lawlessness has increased in our country, but we must endure to the end. Looking at how churches are being destroyed, we must not give way to anger. Experiencing expulsion from our churches, we must not condemn the persecutors. Hearing slander against us, we must not spit out curses in response.

Therefore, let us not be despondent, but think about how to live in these new conditions.

First, do not be afraid to speak about our Lord Jesus Christ, the truth about the Church and what we hear and see in our Church.

Secondly, I call on all priests to keep Antimins, vessels and myrrh in secret places. Even if our churches are taken away, we will be able to continue to serve the Liturgy and perform the Sacraments. Think over this, and find places to hold services.

Thirdly, I ask every member of the community to actively participate in the life of the community. I ask rectors who have decided to remain faithful to the Church in these times to remember that they can only rely on the community, only in the community can they find support. Communities must unite around their pastors and become a reliable support for their pastors in the future. After all, with the ban on the Church and the gradual seizure of churches, priests will be deprived of the opportunity to properly provide for their families.

Fourthly, I propose considering the issue of creating a mutual aid fund that could, in case of urgent need, provide operational support to the clergy and communities of our diocese.

+ LUKE, METROPOLITAN OF ZAPOROZHYE AND MELITOPOL

***

FINAL RESOLUTION
Diocesan Assembly
Zaporozhie Diocese of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church

08/23/2024 Zaporozhie

Preamble:

We, the participants of the Diocesan Assembly of the Zaporozhie Diocese of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, recognizing the importance of freedom of religion and the need to ensure peace and harmony between the citizens of Ukraine, express our deep concern in connection with the act of religious terror and genocide unleashed against the faithful children of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, especially in connection with the adoption of the law “On the protection of the constitutional order in the sphere of activities of religious organizations,” the initiators and authors of which directly ban the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

Considering:

  • The Constitution of Ukraine, which guarantees freedom of conscience and religion.

  • International human rights norms and agreements, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights.

  • The US Department of State’s 2023 Report on International Religious Freedom: Ukraine.

  • Growing tensions between different religious groups and their negative impact on social unity and stability in the country.

  • The involvement of political forces in the process of inciting interfaith hatred and attempts to interfere in the internal affairs of religious organizations.

  • The recent “agreement” given by members of the All-Ukrainian Council of Churches and Religious Organizations in support of ensuring the “spiritual independence” of Ukraine, which we consider as compromising with the authorities and a treacherous step towards the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

  • The latest information on the initiatives of the Ecumenical Patriarchate to “settle” the situation in the Ukrainian church issue, including the arrival of the Phanar commission to study and discuss possible solutions.

We emphasize:

  • The inadmissibility of implementing the law “On the protection of the constitutional order in the sphere of activities of religious organizations,” which restricts the activities of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church on the basis, as stated, of its affiliation with a Church located in a state that is recognized as having carried out or is carrying out armed aggression against Ukraine and/or temporarily occupying part of the territory of Ukraine and which is of an unconstitutional nature characterized by a destructive focus on the constitutional order and a violation of Ukraine’s international obligations.

  • The need to respect the independence of religious organizations and the inadmissibility of interference by state bodies or political parties in their activities.

  • The importance of observing laws and regulations aimed at protecting the religious freedoms of all citizens of Ukraine, regardless of their religious affiliation.

  • The inadmissibility of discrimination on religious grounds, the use of aggressive rhetoric, hate speech and incitement of interfaith hatred in public speeches and the media, which may lead to further aggravation of conflicts and division in society.

We call upon:

  • The people of God—the believers of the Zaporozhie diocese of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church—to stand firm in faith and follow the canonical tradition, obey the Holy Synod, strengthen prayer and fasting, and be decisive in defending their constitutional rights and freedoms. Protect their churches within the legal framework.

  • Representatives of fraternal Orthodox Churches: Raise their voices in defense of the UOC from religious terror and genocide, as well as the destruction of Orthodoxy in Ukraine.

  • The President of Ukraine: refuse to sign and rather veto the law “On the protection of the constitutional order in the sphere of activities of religious organizations,” since its action may aggravate interfaith and social tensions and contradict the fundamental principles of freedom of conscience.1

  • Deputies of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine who did not support the law “On the protection of the constitutional order in the sphere of activities of religious organizations” to exercise the right of constitutional representation and appeal to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine regarding the compliance of this law with the Constitution of Ukraine.

  • Political parties and their leaders: Refrain from using religious topics for political purposes and stop trying to discredit the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and other religious organizations.

  • Law enforcement agencies: Ensure the protection of the rights of believers and their churches and take measures against those who violate the law and infringe on freedom of religion.

  • Mass media and journalists: Observe the principles of objectivity and professional ethics when covering issues related to religious topics.

  • International human rights organizations and the world community as a whole: Pay attention to and give a proper legal assessment of the discriminatory policy towards the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

The unity of the Church is deeper and more sacred than any other form of unity in the earthly created world. The Church lives in this world, but its Being is not of this world. Its unity refers to a Being which is supernatural. It is based on the grace of the Holy Spirit: We are one body and one Spirit, just as we were called in one hope of our calling (Eph. 4:4).

We are not bound and united into church unity by any political or social factors, but by Christ Himself, and the Holy Spirit transforms us into one Body of Christ and ensures our unity.

This resolution is an appeal for the preservation of peace, stability and mutual respect in Ukraine, as well as an expression of hope for a constructive solution to the issues that have arisen in the spirit of dialogue and cooperation.

August 24, 2024

Chairman
Diocesan Assembly
His Eminence
Metropolitan of Zaporozhie and Melitopol
Secretary, Diocesan Assembly
Archimandrite Leonid

1 Unfortunately, President of Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky did sign the legislature, despite pleas from the largest religious organization in Ukraine, as well as various international organizations.—OC.

Comments
David10/15/2024 5:26 am
Amen!
nun Cornelia10/14/2024 4:28 pm
David, I am also happy to exchange views with you, and hope that nothing I've written offends you, nothing meant personally. In the final analysis, at the head of the Church is our Lord Jesus Christ, and He knows best. If we ourselves remain faithful, He will settle things the way they should be. We can never go wrong by praying for our church leaders, and follow Christ's commandment to "judge not." Especially since we have no way of knowing everything that goes on.
David10/14/2024 8:04 am
Mother Cornelia:  This will be my final post, posted in gratitude for this exchange.  The gaslighting I am referring to is the ugly tendency in recent times to deny that X is "a real country."   "Ukraine isn't a real country."   "Macedonia isn't a real country."   "Palestine isn't a real country."   Or on the flip side:  "You are Russians with a country dialect!"   "You are actually Greeks! (saw this recently---that some Greeks deny the Arab identity of Levantine Christians, claiming they are Arabicized Greeks)"  "You are actually Bulgarians!"   Acting in this way doesn't heal wounds, it deepens them.   I am not speaking from any anti-Russian POV.   The Russians are not at fault for everything, but that doesn't mean there is no fault at all.   Self-reflection is important, as we know.   My only criticism of the Moscow Patriarchate is that they should have granted autocephaly to Ukraine years ago, when it became clear that this war was on the horizon.   That criticism is quite common among UOC supporters in the other Local Churches.   The forces of nationalism and ethno phyletism dismembered the EP in the 19th Century.   The sad irony there, is that Russia supported those movements (with a mixture of spiritual and geopolitical reasons, as the Ottomans were mortal enemies at the time).   Now those same forces have come to the MP's door.   I don't think it is right.   Any of it.   But, this is where we are.   Patriarch Porphyrios of Serbia also had his hand forced by NATO and the EP on the Macedonian Question.  The Serbian Patriarchate did the right thing and granted unconditional autocephaly, despite all that occurred before (and it was very bitter and acrimonious).   The MP's position in the Baltics and elsewhere has become untenable.   The forced expulsion of the MP from NATO Eastern Europe (and beyond) has horrifyingly become an actual discussion.  The MP faces the same choice that the EP in the 19th Century and Serbia recently faced.   The people will follow their Bishops who have their welfare front and center. The ecclesial map will change again. Moscow can't stop that. What can happen is doing the right thing to mitigate the harm of this new reality and allow unity in Christ to continue.
Linda10/14/2024 7:27 am
May God watch over Vladica Luke and his flock. May the Mother for God protect them and keep them strong! I pray that this diabolic persecution will soon end.
nun Cornelia10/13/2024 12:23 pm
David, I believe you are misusing the trendy word "gaslighting". Who here is trying to quell the complaints of another by insisting that the reality they see is not reality? In the West, everyone has been a little brainwashed by Hollywood and the media to see Russians as always at fault for everything, ever oppressing the little people. But Estonians were never oppressed by the Russian Church, or the Russian Empire either. Quite the contrary, the land of Estonia (just like Ukraine) was a vague thing before the peoples there became part of the Russian Empire. And that usually came about after aggression coming from Western Europe to Russia, much of it being played out on those bordering lands. The Soviet Union, if you recall, oppressed Russians probably more than any other ethnic group, persecuting the Russian Orthodox Church--of course as they did all religions, but the Russian Orthodox Church was by far the most meaningful Church of the Russians. Estonia was much freer under the Soviets than the Russian Republic, and it received the largest government subsidies. That's not to say that Estonia would not have been better off without the Soviet Union, but remember that its annexation was the result of a lost war, which the Russians did not start, but nevertheless lost millions of people in. But all that aside, I emphasize that the Church is not the government, and the government should not tell people which Church to go to. Now that is something Westerners may not grok, because how many times in history did Western countries brutally force people into their state religions? I can't answer to the venerable bishops you cited, because you did not bring in any specific quotes. Somehow I get the feeling that you are putting words in their mouths. But mainly, what I want to say is that as Christians, we are not supposed to egg people on from across the ocean to hate other people--something which only hurts the hater. Ordinary Estonians are not rabid haters of Russians, but their Western-controlled government is. The ironic thing is that people like Kaia Kallas, who is the most rabid anti-Russian person in the European Parliament, is the daughter of the First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Republic of Estonia! So, let's be Christians, and just get along.
David10/13/2024 7:13 am
Mother Cornelia: Thank you for having this conversation. When I refer to the "Estonia Compromise," I'm talking about the bargain that the EP and MP made to avoid a larger schism. Your historical background is helpful to illustrate an important point---that while there are Estonian (and Latvian and Lithuanian) converts, the nucleus of these MP jurisdictions are the Russian minority, which have lived in the Baltics for a very long time, as noted. Those Estonian "nationalists" are the product of a very old conflict, as we know. Russification in the time of the Czars (and Soviet times) bore bitter fruit up and down the former Russian Imperial Sphere. America did the same, with "Americanization" birthing much of the cultural conflict we see today in the US. The "nationalists" have decided to "de-Russify," using similar tactics (government strong-arming, discrimination, etc). My heartfelt question is this: Has Russian society or the MP itself ever reflected on the consequences of that past and sought to address them, beyond telling them that they need to "forgive and forget"? Forgiveness has to come from healing, and that can't be done if the Russians are denying or gaslighting. As for "worldly opinions," I am merely echoing the criticisms of Metropolitan Neophytos of Morphou, Archbishop Anastasios of Albania, and others. Heck, even the Notes of Arab Orthodoxy blog posted an article rebuking the MP in similar fashion. You're right, people are not cattle. But, the Bishops need to lead. That is the very criticism Metropolitan Neophytos made, that the MP was shortsighted, noting that it is the responsibility of the Bishop to read the situation and act accordingly. If the Bishops had told their people what was at stake, opinions would have changed. I think that is the tragedy here. A failure of leadership (and love).
A. Aguilar 10/12/2024 11:01 pm
Mother Rees. You are truly a ''gem''. Thank you for always being on hand to provide understanding on all of the ''tough'' issues of our time, in a simple, yet powerful way. Thank you Mother. Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!
Nun Cornelia10/12/2024 10:52 am
David, just to give you a little history. The "Estonian solution" was not a compromise, it was simply the Constantinople taking over the existing Russian Orthodox Church because the Russian Church couldn't do anything about it. The vast majority of the faithful in Estonia were Russian, because Estonia was pre-WW1 part of the Russian Empire, and Orthodoxy was brought there by the Russians. The famous Pukhtitsa Convent in Estonia, for example, was founded by St. John of Kronstadt. Constantinople, with the help of the new independent Estonian government forced the New Calender on the faithful, and when post WW2 Estonia became part of the Soviet Union, the faithful immediately went back to the Russian Church and the Old Calendar. There has always been an aversion among the faithful of the Russian Churches against Constantinople's modernizing tendencies; moreover, Constantinople does not give its constituents a choice--Old Calender or New. Thus, because of this meddling we now have two Churches in Estonia, which is not very canonical. But they have coexisted for the sake of peace. The Estonian Church is made up of Estonian nationalists, the congregations are very small, while the Russian Churches and Convent are very alive, and do not want to join Constantinople. We can't treat living people like cattle and tell them to go where we deem it better, for the sake of some geopolitical order, for them to go. We are talking about God's children, God's Church, the Body of Christ. The Russian Church may have made mistakes from your worldly point of view, but do not forget, that the head of the Church is Christ Himself. And you have to allow that perhaps, contrary to your opinion made from the other side of the world, people want to remain in the Church that spiritually feeds them, and preserves order in Church life.
David10/12/2024 4:31 am
Jacob, the "Estonia Solution" was the pre-war compromise. Nothing jusifies the EP's myopic and hamfisted attempt to "solve the problem," especially when the information of the disastrous consequences was out there (much like the Iraq War). With that said, I think we should face reality. The aftermath of the Soviet Union's break up, in hindsight (as always) was not handled well. The anti-Russian hatred in the former Warsaw Pact countries and SSRs should not have been swept under the rug (or gaslighted). Patriarch Alexei, for all his holiness and piety, believed he could turn the page and heal from that period together. That of course is the Christian hope, but geopolitical realities are what they are. Many in Eastern Europe never got over it, especially in Ukraine. Nathaniel Davis in his book "A Long Walk to Church" writes of this in his Epilogue, about the strife brewing under the surface. The Estonia compromise was THE way forward, but neither side was interested. Looking back, Moscow granting autocephaly to its former SSRs (or allowing parallel EP jurisdictions for those who wanted them) was the only way to preserve the peace, especially with NATO provocations. The only other option was war, which would hasten the separations that were inevitable, and leave the MP in a compromised position. That is what is unfolding now. It isn't good. It isn't right. But, the MP's shortsightedness (a rebuke echoed by anti OCU voices in the other local Churches) also led us here. I support the canonical Balkan Churches. If they go underground, I will pray for them. But I also pray that the Moscow Patriarchate will reflect on their own mistakes, and do the right thing when the time comes (autocephaly for the UOC and any other who apply).
Jacob10/11/2024 11:20 pm
David: Ala Estonia? The Estonian government is also now after the Orthodox Church there under the Moscow Patriarchate. Everywhere, hypocrites. Telling people how and where they should worship, banning their 1000-year-old Church because of "democracy". Their "democracy" should be called demonocracy.
David10/11/2024 4:17 am
Each Metropolis will have to make its own decisions when it comes down to it. This makes sense for their Metropolis, for the simple fact that Russia has already annexed their region (on paper for the moment, but the Russian military is slowly securing the area). Any decisions they make will be nullified by the coming Russian victory. I say that with no lamentation or triumphalism----that is just the reality of the situation. There can be no talk of dialogue or settlement until the guns are silent. Each Metropolitan will have to decide what to do. For some (in the Western part of Ukraine), the EP Exarchate may be an option. I think people are missing the significance of this dialogue. That such an Exarchate is being considered at all is an acknowledgement by the EP (or some key figures in the Phanar at the very least) that the Tomos has failed, and that an Exarchate (a UOC-EP) was the way it should have been from the beginning, ala Estonia. Perhaps some are hoping for the OCU to implode on its own, going the way of Philaret, making the Tomos a dead-letter and providing a face-saving solution for everybody.
Here you can leave your comment on the present article, not exceeding 4000 characters. All comments will be read by the editors of OrthoChristian.Com.
Enter through FaceBook
Your name:
Your e-mail:
Enter the digits, seen on picture:

Characters remaining: 4000

Subscribe
to our mailing list

* indicates required
×