No punches were pulled in this RISU article. Some of the questions include...
— Father Kyryl, do you really consider the UOC[-MP] to be the only heir of the church of [St. ] Volodymyr’s Baptism [in 988]?
— Venerable father! For a long time I’ve been looking for an OFFICIAL answer on the question: Does the Ukrainian Orthodox Church [UOC-MP] recognize the validity of the holy sacraments of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church [UGCC]? YES or NO? Please, explain the position of the Department for External Church Relations of the Holy Synod of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church [UOC-MP], or at least your own position on this question. Thank you!
- In the question of the autocephaly of the Orthodox church in Ukraine one may often hear the thesis that the schism is the obstruction. However, I will give an example: in 1971 Moscow gave autocephaly to the Orthodox Church in America [OCA], while there didn’t exist one hierarchical structure. In addition, it allowed the parishes to remain in the Moscow Patriarchate and provided “canonical territory” for the OCA. And last year it accepted the ROCA [Russian Orthodox Church Abroad], which functions on the canonical territory of the OCA, as its constituent. Thus it recognize on one “canonical territory” in its structure an autocephalous, as well as actually autonomous, church, which has there approximately 50 of its own parishes. In my opinion, this is a complete canonical mess. But towards Ukraine the Moscow Patriarchate applies canons with all the severity of the “revolutionary times.” Is this fair?
— Venerable father! For a long time I’ve been looking for an OFFICIAL answer on the question: Does the Ukrainian Orthodox Church [UOC-MP] recognize the validity of the holy sacraments of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church [UGCC]? YES or NO? Please, explain the position of the Department for External Church Relations of the Holy Synod of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church [UOC-MP], or at least your own position on this question. Thank you!
- In the question of the autocephaly of the Orthodox church in Ukraine one may often hear the thesis that the schism is the obstruction. However, I will give an example: in 1971 Moscow gave autocephaly to the Orthodox Church in America [OCA], while there didn’t exist one hierarchical structure. In addition, it allowed the parishes to remain in the Moscow Patriarchate and provided “canonical territory” for the OCA. And last year it accepted the ROCA [Russian Orthodox Church Abroad], which functions on the canonical territory of the OCA, as its constituent. Thus it recognize on one “canonical territory” in its structure an autocephalous, as well as actually autonomous, church, which has there approximately 50 of its own parishes. In my opinion, this is a complete canonical mess. But towards Ukraine the Moscow Patriarchate applies canons with all the severity of the “revolutionary times.” Is this fair?
Do go read it for an exposition of the UOC's position on the Churches in Ukraine.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment