Archbishop Vsevolod as Patriarch Vsevolod in
Ukraine??
On July 6, 2001 Orthodox
Christian News Service posted an anonymous letter from a priest warning of
“nightmare scenario” if ecumenical Patriarch recognizes “renegade” Ukrainian
jurisdictions. Of great interest is mention of Archbishop Vsevolod as a
potential Ecumenical Patriarch’s appointee as Patriarch of a united Ukrainian
Orthodox church.
July 6, 2001 Orthodox Christian News Service <http://www.orthodoxnews.com>
Editor:
It is appalling the way the present Ecumenical Patriarch, Bartholomew of Constantinople, fashions himself as the "Greek Pope," with universal jurisdiction over the entire Orthodox Church. Perhaps, he learned too well and finds too comfortable, the Romish ecclesiology he learned while taking his Ph.D. at the Vatican? Be that as it may, nowhere is this papal mode of operation more evident than in his present uncanonical and unprecedented interference in Ukraine.
Under the guise of bringing unity--instead of the truth of his desire to build empire--he has brought together two uncanonical Orthodox bodies, from which one canonical Orthodox body is supposed to emerge under his omophorion. In addition, he ignores the fact that the self-styled Filaret a.k.a. Michael Denisenko was not simply deposed but excommunicated by the Holy Synod of the Moscow Patriarchate after his schismatic action of establishing a Ukrainian Patriarchate with himself as head.
Thus, the Ecumenical Patriarch considers Filaret Denisenko as worthy of leadership of a church of which he, Filaret, himself is no longer even a "lay" member in good standing!?
In fact, Patriarch Bartholomew acts unilaterally, in a geographic area over which he has no jurisdiction, for Ukraine has been subject to the Patriarchate of Moscow for many years. In fact the so-called Patriarch Filaret's actions are in direct opposition to Moscow's jurisdiction, jurisprudence, or failing that, even its advice and consent.
In short, the Ecumenical Patriarch may well find himself outside canonical Orthodoxy by this most recent reckless attempt to establish another (remember Estonia) geographical foothold for the withering Constantinopolitan throne. Apparently Bartholomew has begun to believe the purple-prose of his "neo-platonic" byzantine encyclicals and the grandiosity of his "pheme" and is acting as if there were still some eastern emperor to support his tactics.
Does he have no respect for the canons of the "Great Church of Christ" over which he presides--canons he takes such a vigorous interpretation of with the Holy Mountain? These are same canons which he used to veto the charter of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese, for example, just a month or so ago!
Does he believe the Moscow Synod and Patriarch are illegitimate, so that their actions are of no consequence, or that they will simply stand aside and let the Archbishop of New Rome seize one-third of the territory of the Russian Orthodox Patriarchate (the third Rome); not by arms but by the stroke of a pen?
Even if
the EP were to put Archbishop Vsevelod--a canonical hierarch--over the
Ukrainian Church as Patriarch, how would this remedy the fact that all of
Denisenko's ordinations, elevations, baptisms, marriages, etc. were and remain
without grace and are illicit, inasmuch as he himself was, is and remains
excommunicated from the Orthodox Church?
Additionally, would not the same principles hold for the actions of the likewise renegade Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church? Moreover, of what canonical standing would Bartholomew's interventionist actions be in unifying the Ukrainian jurisdictions in the first place?
In short, would he not find himself, by such action, canonically deposed as Ecumenical Patriarch? It is questionable whether or not any synod would ever meet to do so--because of this intervention in the internal affairs of another canonical Orthodox Church; namely the Moscow Patriarchate; and therefore, though still bearing the exalted title of "Ecumenical Patriarch," find himself a heresiarch rather than hierarch. Would not all Orthodox Christians within his jurisdiction, leaving aside the reaction of the Moscow Patriarchate, be canonically, duty-bound to separate themselves from him inasmuch as his actions are in defiance of the Holy Canons?
Has he no fear of St. Basil the Great's warning that "he who causes schism commits a graver offence to Christ than the heretic?" I fear the answer to all of the questions present a nightmare scenario for contemporary Orthodox Christians--lay as well as clerical. As an Orthodox priest, I must pray the Ecumenical Patriarch quickly comes to his senses vis a vis his "settlement" of the problems of the Ukrainian Church. Should he persist, however, in such an unprecedented and uncanonical way, I for one will feel duty bound to cease commemorating him or continuing any liturgical concelebrations with clergy or hierarchy within his jurisdiction.
I suspect many other Orthodox priests may well be presented with the same dilemma and be forced to take the same action to remain faithful to the "Great Church of Christ" over which Christ ultimately presides through his Scripture, Sacraments, Tradition and Holy Canons and not the Archbishop of Constantinople.
One cannot help but muse--in an ironic and saddened sense--over the last Bosphorion thunder from the "Great Throne" when to the all the eparchial bishops of the Greek Orthodox Church in America as well as the laity he stamped his staff shouting: "Archbishop Spyridon will be your Archbishop for the rest of his life!" I imagine many a mental eyebrow was raised and a unheard "really!" spoken.
Perhaps, in the present situation the Archbishop of Constantinople, like the former Archbishop of America, may find his "Great Throne" set firmly on sand rather than stone!
Name Withheld by Request
Editor's Note: This letter was
written to Orthodox News by an Orthodox priest whose name has been withheld by
his request. Although normally we do not publish anonymous letters, we have
done so in this case because of the obvious problems that would be involved if
the author were to be identified, and because this letter says publicly what
some other Orthodox Priests in the United States have been saying privately on
this critical issue.