Tallinn, October 25, 2024
Photo: orthodox.ee
The Estonian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (EOC-MP) has responded to the recent proposal from Metropolitan Stephanos of the Patriarchate of Constantinople’s Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church (EAOC).
On September 19, the head of the EAOC proposed at a session of the Estonian Council of Churches to create a Russian vicariate to subsume parishes of the EOC-MP. The proposal came against the background of state pressure against the latter, given its canonical connection to the Russian Orthodox Church, which Estonian Parliament formally recognized as a supporter of state aggression.
The EOC-MP’s Bishop Daniil of Tartu read out its response to Met. Stephanos’ proposal at another session of the Estonian Council of Churches on October 17.
The EOC-MP firmly rejects his proposal, citing several reasons: its recent statutory changes have already expanded its independence, its clergy and laity don’t consent to such a move, and it would violate the 1996 Zurich agreements between Moscow and Constantinople that re-established the communion that was severed after Constantinople created a parallel jurisdiction and established equal rights for both jurisdictions in Estonia.
The response also criticizes Met. Stephanos for making offensive remarks about EOC hierarchs during the Soviet period, particularly noting the persecution of its previous primate, His Eminence Metropolitan Cornelius, and calls on the EAOC to fulfill its obligations under the Zurich agreements. As a concrete first step toward building trust, the EOC asks the EAOC to help resolve property issues, specifically regarding Church properties that cost the EOC-MP 21,000 euros annually in building rights fees and the historical office premises at Pikk 64 in Tallinn.
***
Your Eminence, respected Metropolitan Stephanos!
In its internal life organization, the EOC-MP is independent in ecclesiastical-administrative, Church-economic, Church-educational matters and in dealings with civil authorities, according to Patriarch Alexius II’s Tomos of April 26, 1993, which restored the autonomy that was granted to the Estonian Orthodox Church by the Supreme Church Administration of the Moscow Patriarchate and Patriarch Tikhon in 1920. Regarding our canonical ties with the Moscow Patriarchate, this did not previously limit our freedom to act in Estonia in the interests of our flock, and in the new version of the statutes, which was approved by the Church Assembly on August 20, 2024, our independence has expanded. Our connection with the Patriarchal Church – the Moscow Patriarchate—represents a canonical connection. The EAOC has similar connections with the Constantinople Patriarchate.
The Church is a divine-human organism created by God, but people with their strengths and weaknesses participate in its daily operations. And even with human frailties, the Church remains Christ’s Church, which the gates of hell shall not overcome. If we forget this fact and our attitude toward the Church reduces to changing church jurisdiction based on human considerations, we reduce church life to the level of political parties’ power-sharing. The Church would not have survived to our days in such a manner.
We agree that it is necessary to seek ways to normalize relations between the two divided parts of the Orthodox Church in Estonia. However, the model you proposed is unacceptable to us for several reasons.
As shown by the survey in parishes and discussion at the Church Assembly, there is currently no consent among our Church’s clergy and laity for the EOC-MP to join the EAOC as a vicariate. However, at the individual level, every person has the freedom to make their personal choice about which congregation they want to belong to.
Overcoming the existing division is our common goal, but achieving this requires canonical and Christianly acceptable means. Your proposed model of breaking canonical ties with the Moscow Patriarchate and reducing the EOC-MP to a vicariate to merge with the EAOC does not represent a true reunification of Orthodox Christians in our land, for the following reasons:
Before discussing possible major steps, it is necessary to restore elementary trust between people and Churches. From our side, we see that the loss of trust stems from the EAOC’s refusal to fulfill all agreements that were established during negotiations between the two Patriarchates in Zurich in April 1996. The following was agreed upon:
-
“The two Patriarchates, wishing to preserve the unity of the Orthodox Church and resolve as quickly as possible the problems that recently arose in the Estonian Orthodox Church, agreed, using extreme dispensation (“oikonomia’), that they would give the Estonian Orthodox Church freedom to choose which Church jurisdiction they want to belong to, either the Constantinople Patriarchate or the Moscow Patriarchate.
-
To implement the aforementioned agreement, both parties make the following proposal:
a) The Patriarch of Constantinople agrees to temporarily postpone the implementation of the decision of 20.02.1996 concerning the Estonian Orthodox Church. This postponement is made to regulate the situation of Estonian Orthodox parishes who choose the jurisdiction under which they wish to belong. Considering the parishes that have already formally announced their decision to go under one or another jurisdiction, the two Patriarchates are entrusted to announce in a simultaneous decision of both Patriarchs and their Synods that they recognize both the decisions made and the resulting Estonian ecclesiastical situation. Those parishes that have not yet decided the jurisdiction question will be given the opportunity to do so within four months.
b) After the adoption of the simultaneous decision of both Patriarchal Synods described in the previous point, the Moscow Patriarchate will give the Estonian Orthodox clergy under its jurisdiction the opportunity to transfer to the Constantinople Patriarchate if they wish. This also applies to clergy who are suspended.
c) Both Patriarchates work together to jointly present their positions to the Estonian government, so that all Estonian Orthodox would have the same rights, including property rights.
-
The result of the simultaneous decision of the Holy Synods mentioned in point 2a is the restoration of full communion between both Patriarchates, which cooperation has great significance for the entire Orthodox world.
-
The postponement period of the implementation of the decision adopted on February 20, 1996, as noted in point 2a, must be 4 months.
The Moscow Patriarchate has decided to restore broken relations with the Ecumenical Patriarchate.” (EAA.5355.1.480 (unpaginated))
-
The Zurich agreements, which provided for equal rights of both Patriarchates’ church structures, cannot be unilaterally changed, especially by institutions that are lower than those who made these agreements. But uniting the EOC and EAOC on unequal terms would mean violating these agreements.
-
The non-canonical transfer of the EOC to another jurisdiction, which would ignore the will of the clergy and Church people, would mean going against conscience, which would contradict the organization of Church life and violate the constitutional principle of religious freedom.
-
Arbitrarily terminating canonical ties with the Patriarchal Church constitutes a schism. Dividing the Church is a sin and canonical crime. It is impossible to build Church life on such a foundation.
And one more unpleasant moment. In remembering the Church’s sufferings under Soviet power, you allowed yourself expressions that are offensive to us and our hierarchs, attributing to them servility to the anti-Church regime and accusing them of the suffering of parishes, clergy, and Church people.
For you, who have lived most of your life in a democratic country where freedom of conscience and religion was invariably followed, it is probably difficult to understand the life of bishops who protected their flock in a totalitarian atheistic state and thereby also preserved Orthodoxy in Estonia. Moreover, how is it possible to attribute loyalty to the anti-God regime to everyone? Our previous Primate, Metropolitan Cornelius of blessed memory, who was sentenced to 10 years in prison camps for preaching the Gospel, would have had the moral right to discuss these topics. And each of the ruling bishops is remembered here with gratitude. It is painful for us to hear unfounded accusations against them.
Your Eminence! If you are truly interested in restoring our inter-Church contacts to move forward together from this position, we are ready on our part for discussions and joint search for solutions. However, based on the Zurich agreements, so that all Orthodox in Estonia would have equal rights and together seek a way out of the crisis that would be acceptable to both sides.
We still expect that you would fulfill all agreements that were achieved 28 years ago. As a first step, we call on you to take steps to resolve the return of EOC-MP church property that is currently in our use by making an appropriate application to the Ministry of Interior. Your non-fulfillment of this point means an additional annual cost of about 21,000 euros for us in building rights fees. We would also be grateful if you would appeal to Tallinn city authorities with a request not to deprive our Church of the right to use the historical office premises at Pikk 64, which are the common Orthodox heritage in Estonia. For the preservation of this long-term right of use, the EAOC received the building at Pikk 66 as compensation from the city.
We believe that such manifestation of mutual respect and goodwill would give us a good opportunity to restore trust, which could already be the basis for taking next steps.
Follow OrthoChristian on Twitter, Vkontakte, Telegram, WhatsApp, MeWe, and Gab!
