The following article was brought to our attention due to the extraordinary insight of its Canadian author. Unfortunately we do not know the author, the date or the source of its publication BUT it is certainly interesting reading.
Under Whose Omophorion (Jurisdiction)?
The question that many of our faithful are
asking is: Why is it that our Church (Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada)
recognizes the Orthodox Churches of Russia, Greece, Constantinople, Bulgaria,
Rumania, etc., however, refuses to recognize, or have anything to do with, the
Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Kiev Patriarchate?"
If we, as Christians, believe that
everything on earth we do is either with God or against God, then the actions
we are taking are either for the Kiev Patriarchate or against it. Our Church
claims it has taken a neutral position in this matter. By claiming neutrality,
She has played directly into the hands of the Moscow Patriarchate. Is our
hierarchy happy with this situation? Are they content to know they may serve
with chuzhij (non-Ukrainians) while forgetting their brothers in
Ukraine? Is the sake of canonicity greater than the unification of the
Ukrainian Orthodox church as a whole?
If we were to unite with the
UOC-Kiev Patriarchate, or show sympathy to Her plight, we'd be condemned by the
rest of the canonical Orthodox world. Statements of a slanderous nature
would arise from every corner, especially, from Moscow Patriarchate. We would
be condemned by the canonical Orthodox world with such terms and catch
phrases as schismatic, sect, splinter group, Petluirist and ultra-nationalist.
I admit, that when we joined in
Eucharistic Union with the Patriarchate of Constantinople, I was in favour.
Finally, our Church could have a voice in the Orthodox world. However, after
getting over the initial euphoria, certain events happened to change my view of
our new canonical standing. Ukraine gained its independence. The next
logical step was to strive for an independent (autocephalous) Church. However,
several obstacles still stand in Her way. Firstly, the division that exists
between the three branches of Orthodoxy in Ukraine (UOC-Moscow Patriarchate,
Ukrainian Orthodox Autocephalous Church, and Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Kiev Patriarchate). Secondly, (closely
associated with the first), is Moscow's unwillingness to let go of Ukraine from
her ecclesiastical jurisdiction (more so for financial and chauvinistic reasons
than spiritual). Finally, the Diaspora's stand or lack of sympathy toward the
Kiev Patriarchate.
With the aid of hindsight, which we
know is always 20/20, let us review the past events that have led us to these
crossroads. When we joined in Eucharistic Union with Constantinople there was
nothing pulling at us to do so. Although many canonical Orthodox
churches may have viewed us as schismatics, this did not stop them from
actually engaging in public forums with our church (UOC of Canada). So what was
pulling at us to join World Orthodoxy? Memory recalls our late great
Metropolitan Ilarion, who said (I paraphrase), "If we are to join in union
with Constantinople, then it must be as one equal with another". When we
joined Constantinople in 1990, was it one equal joining with another, or one
accepting the subservience to a greater ecclesiastical power? Or was it the
decision of certain individuals who wanted to set their mark on history, their
right to claim, "We did come to an understanding with Constantinople,
while Metropolitan Ilarion could not." However, what can the UOC of Canada
truly claim? The UOC of Canada can claim that since we accepted Eucharistic
Union with Constantinople, She has placed us in a precarious position where are
unable to assist the Kiev Patriarchate fight the forces that collaborate
against Her. The UOC of Canada can claim they have assisted, although
unknowingly, in the division of the Orthodox community in Ukraine, thus
propagating socio-religious turmoil in Ukraine and allowing Moscow to live by
the old Roman adage, "divide et imperium" (divide and
conquer).
Can we hear the laughter? Can we hear them
laughing in Moscow, Constantinople and other centers of Orthodoxy? Obviously,
we do not. We have neither eyes to see nor ears with which to hear. The canonical
Orthodox laugh and say, "Ukraine is once again under Russia's
ecclesiastical mastery, and the khakhly (Russian word for Ukrainian,
denoting peasant) are ignorant enough to support us". How can we let this
situation continue?
Whatever action we take, we shall be
condemned. However, if we do not act then we support and continue to support a
Russian dominated Ukrainian Church; therefore, we support the continuing
Russification of the Ukrainian Church; we maintain our canonical foothold and
do not speak in support of the Kiev Patriarchate. With great power comes great
responsibility. One who saves a nation commits no crimes in the eyes of God.
However, our clergy lacks the fervor, fire and resourcefulness to act. What is
the matter with our clergy? One often feels that they are apathetic to the
whole situation that they would have slept through the Sermon on the Mount.
" I appeal to you therefore, bretheren, by the mercies of God, to present
you bodies and a living sacrifice,
holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not conform to
this world but be transformed by the renewal of you mind, that you may prove what
is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect." (Romans
12:1-2)
Let us not forget the history of the
Orthodox patriarchates of Serbia and Bulgaria. They established their own
autocephalous churches (19th century) without the consent of Constantinople.
For over twenty years Constantinople refused to recognize these patriarchates.
However, Constantinople eventually realized the political reality and
recognized them.
So why is the temporary Ukrainian
situation so different? Is it that we fear to insult the prestige held by the
Moscow Patriarchate? Is it so difficult for the Russian Church to
survive without Ukraine? Is it so strenuous for the Russian Church to think of
an independent Ukrainian Church, that once again, they are promoting the old
concept of "Moscow Third Rome?" Or is it another stratagem devised by
Moscow to justify its subjugation of foreign churches?
Had our learned Church leaders had the
foresight to see the problems they would face today when Ukraine became
independent, (I suppose they, too were caught in the euphoria) many of our
ecclesiastical problems could have been avoided. The UOC of Canada could have
contacted the Patriarchate of Constantinople and said, "Now that our
motherland (Ukraine, in 1991) is independent, we need to draw up a new
agreement; we consider the last one null and void." If other national
Orthodox Churches (e.g., Greeks, Russians) were in the same predicament as we,
would they forsake their brothers to remain canonical? No, they would
not. "For you are called to freedom, bretheren; only do not use your
freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love be servants of one
another." (Gal. 5:13)
Also, the Ukrainian Bishops in the
Diaspora's open letter to Patriarch Filaret, where they openly, yet so
diplomatically, requested him to drop the various Ukrainian Orthodox parishes
in the USA, in other words, for these parishes not to fall under Patriarch
Filaret's omophorion (jurisdiction). It is interesting to note that the
Diaspora bishops dare to criticize Filaret, who was once a canonical bishop, and also a
candidate for the Moscow Patriarchate. "For we know, bretheren beloved by
God, that He has chosen you [Filaret]; for our gospel came to you not only in
word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit." (1 Th. 1:4)
Further, Patriarch Bartholomew's visit to
Odessa, Ukraine, where he met with Patriarch Alexei, Here they decided that the
UOC-MP (Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Moscow Patriarchate) was the only canonical
church in Ukraine. This being the case many of our brothers and sisters are
automatically labeled and damned as schismatics. Are they to be condemned for
standing up for an independent Ukrainian Church, while we, sit so peacefully
and ineffectually in the Diaspora, can proudly claim, "We are canonical
and perhaps some day you will be too; if you decide to join the UOC-MP and
depose Patriarch Filaret."
The question remains, "Under whose
jurisdiction should we belong?" For those with little or no affection for
Ukraine the answer is with Constantinople. For those whose hearts, minds and dushi
still yearn for Ukraine, their response would be with the Kyiv Patriarchate.
Perhaps our hierarchy should take to heart the hard lessons learned by the
Ukrainian Orthodox Church in the USA. Here, over 15 parishes switched their
allegiance to the Kyiv Patriarchate. Do not be surprised if a similar
phenomenon should occur in Canada. If the UOC of Canada hierarchy wishes to
avoid the American experience, this question over jurisdiction needs to be
decided by a Sobor. Its voice needs to be heard and listened to as to which way
our Church will go: with the rest of the canonical Orthodox World that
supports the Moscow Patriarchate, or with its brothers and sisters of the Kyiv
Patriarchate.