Authorities In Kiev Using Ukrainian Church Autocephaly To Orchestrate New Great Schism

Kiev authorities pursued the drive for a further rift in relations with Moscow this year by pushing for a Ukrainian Orthodox Church independent from the Moscow Patriarchate, and secured the support of Constantinople, ignoring the possibility of a massive split among the believers.

MOSCOW (UrduPoint News / Sputnik - 14th December, 2018) Kiev authorities pursued the drive for a further rift in relations with Moscow this year by pushing for a Ukrainian Orthodox Church independent from the Moscow Patriarchate, and secured the support of Constantinople, ignoring the possibility of a massive split among the believers.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko championed the cause of autocephaly for the Kiev Patriarchate ahead of next year's election amid abysmal performance in opinion polls, choosing to split the troubled country further and drive yet another wedge between Kiev and Moscow before his term is out.

The Department for External Church Relations (DECR) of the Moscow Patriarchate has sounded the alarm over the religious conflict, stressing the actions of Constantinople could lead to bloodshed in Ukraine, where the believers would be forced to defend churches and relics from appropriation by the newly-recognized church.

According to the Moscow Patriarchate, Constantinople would lose its standing in the eyes of at least half of the Orthodox Christians worldwide should it recognize the independence of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, thereby splitting the entire 260-million-strong community that, according to the Pew Research Center, includes 35 million Orthodox Christians living in Ukraine and slightly over 100 million in Russia.

However, worshipers in Ukraine include more than just the congregation of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UOC-MP). In fact, Ukraine has three churches: the UOC-MP; the Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Kiev Patriarchate (UOC-KP) founded in 1992; and the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (UAOC), re-established shortly before the breakup of the Soviet Union. The latter two are not recognized by the Moscow Patriarchate.

Data from the Ukrainian Ministry of Culture shows that as of January 1, 2018, there were 12,675 religious organizations and communities within the UOC-MP, almost twice as many as in the two other churches put together 5,319 within the UOC-KP and 1,211 within the UAOC.

The UOC-MP became subject to the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) in 1686, but Moscow and Constantinople now view what happened back then differently. Moscow argues that it received full control of the Orthodox Church in Ukraine, while Constantinople says Moscow was only granted limited authority.

The UOC-MP is a self-governing church, which means it can choose its own primate, who in any case needs to be formally approved by the Moscow Patriarchate. The UOC-MP has its own supreme court, although the Bishops' Council of the ROC has the ultimate authority. It can also own property, something which could prove important in the future. The issue of who owns what has already arisen, with the Ukrainian Ministry of Justice ruling in November that the Pochayiv Lavra monastery no longer belonged to the UOC-MP.

Both the UAOC and the UOC-KP have been struggling for global recognition ever since their establishment, or, in the case of the UAOC, re-establishment. Over the last few years, their struggle has gained renewed momentum amid growing Russian-Ukrainian tensions following Crimea's reunification with Russia.

The issue of the church's independence in Ukraine has taken on a new political dimension. Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has described the recognition of the Ukrainian church's independence from Moscow as a matter of national security, comparing it to NATO and EU accession, which have been long sought by Kiev authorities.

The UOC-MP said it had lost 40 of its parishes to the UOC-KP in the two years since 2014, when the new authorities came to power in Kiev. Last year, the Ukrainian parliament wanted to debate a bill that would ensure that religious organizations whose leadership was in Russia would have to consult the Ukrainian authorities before appointing bishops and metropolitans. Over 300,000 Ukrainians signed a petition against the draft law.

In April, Poroshenko announced that the UOC-KP had sent an appeal to Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to create a single local autocephalous or independent Orthodox church in Ukraine. The president added that he had decided to send a similar appeal on behalf of the state.

Moscow responded by stressing it could not welcome any actions that might lead to a schism in the Orthodox church.

The deputy chair of the Moscow Patriarchate's DECR, Archpriest Nikolai Balashov, explained to Sputnik that the general consensus on autocephaly was reached at the Pan-Orthodox Council 25 years ago.

"The pan-Orthodox agreement ... was reached 25 years ago on the key issues of granting autocephaly: the role of the mother church [the directly superior church], the necessary consensus of all churches expressed through the agreement of their councils," Balashov said.

The church representative remarked, however, that the complete agreement on the exact procedure was not reached at the time. In 2009, the talks were renewed, and a new portion of the official document was worked out, putting an even stronger emphasis on general agreement of the churches as a precondition for granting autocephaly. The representatives of different churches then stalled over how a decree on independence should be signed.

In July, 250,000 believers attended the celebration of the 1,030th anniversary of Kievan Rus Christianization in the Ukrainian capital, despite obstacles put up by the Ukrainian authorities, the UOC-MP said.

A representative of the UOC-MP said at a press conference that the authorities in Odessa, Zhytomyr and other regions advised transportation companies against driving worshipers to Kiev. In Zaporizhia, Kiev-bound buses with worshipers were stopped and searched by the police.

Despite all obstacles, the congregation came out in large numbers to celebrate the key event in the history of Eastern Orthodoxy Kievan Rus ruler Vladimir the Great's conversion to Christianity in 988. It is said that, after his baptism, Vladimir destroyed all pagan idols and invited the city's residents to be baptized as well, setting off the process of converting his entire realm. The city of Kiev has since then held a special importance for Orthodox Christians in both Russia and Ukraine.

Shortly before the festivities, Ukrainian media reported that representatives of Constantinople's delegation had announced, during a meeting with Poroshenko in Kiev, that the procedure to establish Ukraine's own church had been launched.

The ROC head, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Kirill, decried Kiev's attempts to set up an independent church in Ukraine as potentially disastrous for the entire Orthodox world.

Patriarchs Kirill and Bartholomew I of Constantinople went on to organize a meeting in early September. Before the meeting, the Russian patriarch reminded his counterpart about their mutual responsibility to the entire Orthodox Church and to preserving the unity of the Orthodox world.

Afterward, Kirill said that the two patriarchs had discussed "all the issues that are of concern to us."

"This was a talk between brothers ... There was nothing that would have caused one's mind to explode ... nothing of the kind. It was a good talk," Kirill told reporters.

Nevertheless, that conversation did not stop Constantinople from proceeding with the autocephaly for Ukraine.

In the first decisive step toward the potential establishment of an independent church in Ukraine, Patriarch Bartholomew appointed Bishop Daniel of Pamphilon from the United States and Bishop Ilarion of Edmonton from Canada as his exarchs (envoys) to Ukraine.

The Moscow Patriarchate condemned the decision, calling it a gross violation of church canons.

"In his explanation of his meddling in the affairs of another local church, the Constantinople Patriarch cites false interpretations of historic facts, and refers to the exclusive powers that he claims he has, but he, in fact, does not and has never had [these powers]," the ROC Holy Synod said.

Despite the obvious opposition on part of the Moscow Patriarchate, the Ecumenical Patriarch said in September that Ukraine had the right to autocephaly, and that he had the right to grant it.

The Synod of the Constantinople Patriarchate confirmed in October that it had started the process of recognizing the independence of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and had reversed the 1686 decision that transferred the Kiev Metropolis to the Moscow Patriarchate.

The Constantinople Synod has also lifted the anathema from Ukrainian schismatics: the head of the UOC-KP, Filaret Denisenko, and Archbishop Makariy Maletich, who leads the UAOC. The Russian Orthodox Church has remarked that only the church that imposed the anathema the ROC in this case can lift it.

The Synod of the ROC pointed out in October that Bartholomew had accepted Moscow's decision about anathema on Filaret back in 1997.

"Now, more than two decades later the Constantinople Patriarchate changed its stance for political reasons," the Synod said.

Priest Alexander Volkov, the spokesman for Patriarch Kirill, explained that the anathema imposed on Filaret in 1997 was the result of his "dreadful anti-church actions" aimed at setting up an independent non-canonical church.

"And now the Constantinople Patriarchate is apparently summoning him back from the schism ... but the absurdity of such actions is obvious to any person, even someone who is not well-versed in the church's activities," Volkov said.

The patriarch's spokesman called Constantinople's decisions "catastrophic", describing them as "the legalization of schism."

"Something terrible is about to begin," he said.

On December 15, the representatives of all Orthodox churches in Ukraine will gather in Kiev for a unifying council, where the establishment of an autocephalous church is expected to be announced. The attendees may also approve rules for the new church as well as its head. The draft rules were backed by the Synod of the Constantinople Patriarchate in late November.

According to an extract from the draft regulations for the new church, as published by the Greek Romfea news agency, the new church will have somewhat limited rights it will not be able to independently canonize new saints, produce its own anointing oil or decide on certain important issues. Meanwhile, the UOC-MP is fully autonomous.

Arkady Maler, an expert on philosophy and Orthodox Christianity, believed that Constantinople was setting up a new branch for itself rather than a new independent church.

"Considering the history of Phanar [the area in Istanbul where the seat of the Ecumenical Patriarchate is located] and its religious and political ideology, its ambition to rule the entire Orthodox community, one could imagine that there will not be any independence for the Ukrainian church. Phanar will just subjugate the Ukrainian church ... This setting up yet another branch was predictable considering the policy of the Constantinople Patriarchate," the expert told Sputnik.

Kiev and non-canonical churches in Ukraine are hoping to be granted independence by the end of the year, but the official decree can be handed only to the head of the "unified" church, who would have to be elected at a special council. Meanwhile, the UOC-MP has refused to take part in any such gathering.

The First Hierarch of Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) Metropolitan Hilarion (Kapral) has described the Ecumenical Patriarchate's wish to grant independence to a non-canonical church as an attack on orthodoxy.

"It is a political attack from the enemy of our salvation against unity of Orthodox people of the same origins - Russians, Ukrainians, Belorussians who have always been united in the church," Hilarion told Sputnik.

The DECR of the Moscow Patriarchate has underlined that Patriarchate of Constantinople can no longer consider itself as a coordinating center for all Orthodox Christians.

On October 13, Patriarch Kirill promised an "adequate and tough" response to Constantinople's decisions. Two days later, ROC Holy Synod decided to completely break the Eucharistic communion with Constantinople. The Synod also qualified the Istanbul-based patriarchate's move to revoke the 1686 decision as canonically void.

One of the key outward signs of the split was the fact that Bartholomew's name would no longer be mentioned in prayers of the ROC during liturgy.

For churchgoers, breach of communion means that they can no longer participate in the sacraments including the Eucharistic service in the churches that belong to the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.

However, the church has no way of "regulating the piousness of any single believer and restricting their behavior," the deputy head of the department of the History of Church and Canonical Law of the Saint Tikhon's Orthodox University, Dmitry Pashkov, explained to Sputnik.

"So in this case, they would be participating in the Eucharistic service at their own peril," Pashkov said.

ROC congregation can still pray and venerate relics in the churches of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, according to the expert.

Most of the churches under the jurisdiction of Constantinople are in the United States or Europe, but there is one place that deserves a special mention: Mount Athos in Greece. Often referred to as the Holy Mountain, Mount Athos is one of the most important monastic centers of Eastern Orthodoxy. Thousands of believers belonging to the ROC, including prominent businessmen and politicians, have been flocking there annually. However, the ROC is now advising its congregation against making a pilgrimage to the Holy Mountain, stopping short of full prohibition.

STATE PUTTING PRESSURE ON CHURCH

The Ukrainian authorities have been unequivocal in their sympathies Poroshenko has openly called on the representatives of the ROC to leave Ukraine.

The establishment of a new church and the potential forcible renaming of the UOC-MP to the "Russian Church in Ukraine" could set the stage for new conflicts in a country that has already been ravaged by internal disputes.

Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk believes that a new name for the UOC-MP would be "similar to making Jews wear a six-pointed yellow star in Nazi Germany."

In addition, Ukrainian law enforcement has recently been searching the churches and homes of some UOC-MP priests with the reported aim of looking for literature instructing the clergy on how it should view the situation in the southeast of Ukraine, where two self-proclaimed republics stand in opposition to Kiev.

The Ukrainian Security Service has questioned several UOC-MP priests as part of a probe into possible offenses such as high treason and inciting hatred based on religion.

The UOC-MP has stressed that allegations of treason among priests are groundless.

"They are trying to make it seem as if we were not patriots, they say we do not love Ukraine, that we have to go somewhere. In fact, we love our country and stand up for its interests. But at the same time, we have a strong Orthodox position," the UOC-MP said in a statement.

The Synod of the UOC-MP has expressed its concern over the pressure that Kiev is putting on the canonical church bishops, trying to convince them to take part in the unifying council. It also pointed out that "the state authorities in Ukraine continue to meddle bluntly in the church life."

A similar situation has been seen in Estonia, where the Orthodox Christian community remains divided between the Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church (EOAC) recognized by Constantinople and the semi-autonomous Estonian Orthodox Church of Moscow Patriarchate (EOC-MP) � the latter had been deprived of most part of its properties. Despite lengthy talks, no unification agreement between the two congregations has been produced.

However, in Ukraine, the situation is exacerbated by ongoing hostilities in the southeast. Ukrainian authorities have already turned against minority languages with a new law and are now taking aim at the church in an attempt to define Ukraine's independence, without considering what a significant portion of its people may want.