(ROC) - The Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church expresses its resolute protest against and deep indignation at the communique published on September 7, 2018, by the Chief Secretariat of the Patriarchate of Constantinople Holy Synod announcing the appointment of two hierarchs of this Church – Archbishop Daniel of Pamphilon (USA) and Bishop Hilarion of Edmonton (Canada) as ‘exarchs’ of the Patriarchate of Constantinople for Kiev.
This decision has been adopted without an agreement with Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia and Metropolitan Onufry of Kiev and All Ukraine and has constituted a gross violation of the church canons prohibiting bishops of one Local Church to interfere in the internal life and affairs of another Local Church (Second Ecumenical Council Canon 2; Council of Trullo Canon 20; Council of Antioch Canon 13; and Council of Sardica Canons 3, 11 and 12). It entirely contradicts the up-until-now invariable position of the Patriarchate of Constantinople and personally Patriarch Bartholomew, who has repeatedly stated that he recognizes His Beatitude Metropolitan Onufry as the only canonical head of the Orthodox Church in Ukraine.
The Patriarchate of Constantinople’s decision to admit to examination the issue of granting autocephaly to ‘the Orthodox faithful of Ukraine’ has been made against the will of the episcopate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, who have unanimously spoken for the preservation of her existing status.
To justify its interference in the affairs of another Local Church, the Patriarch of Constantinople has produced false interpretations of historical facts, referring to his alleged exclusive powers, which he actually does not have and has never had.
These actions lead the relations between the Russian Church and the Church of Constantinople to a deadlock and create a real threat to the unity of the whole world Orthodoxy.
The Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church states that the full responsibility for these uncanonical actions falls personally on Patriarch Bartholomew and those persons in the Church of Constantinople who support these actions.
The reaction of the Moscow Patriarchate will follow at the earliest possible date.
Saturday, September 8, 2018
Official Russian statement on Ukrainian situation
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Given the difference that Moscow sees between its own understanding of authority in the Church and Constantinople's, one must wonder what exactly Moscow means by "the unity of the whole world Orthodoxy"?
ReplyDeleteThe hierarchies of Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch, Bulgaria, Serbia, Poland, Greece, Cyprus, ROCOR, and others have all stated definitively that they only recognize one canonical church in Ukraine, under Metropolitan Onufriy. If EPB grants a tomos of autocephaly to a schismatic group in direct opposition of the entire Orthodox world, it will be a massive schism.
ReplyDeleteThe entire Orthodox World dealt with Moscow granting autocephaly to the OCA, which was then in at least a kind of schism.
DeleteNot at all. The Metropolia went to E Athenagoras first asking to be taken under the omorphor of Constantinople. He told them that "they were Russians, they should go to Russia" to resolve their dispute.
DeleteThey did. And Russia resolved it.
Invoking the Canons of Sardica? Canon 3? Ask the Bishop of Rome, that is Francis? And, yes, Rome has traditionally understood this canon to not be personal to St. Julius, but to all Bishops of Rome.It would be funny if this was not so serious.
ReplyDeleteI think I can guess Pope Francis's response: "...who am I to judge..."
DeleteLook for Kyril to get Putin to lean on Erdogan to rein in Bart.
ReplyDeleteBecause Rome is in schism, Canon 3 devolves ongoing who is next in the diptychs.
ReplyDeleteYes, Moscow granted autocephaly to a schismatic group based on at best questionable canonical standing and history, just as they are complaining the EP is doing now.
ReplyDeleteTo compare this situation to that of the OCA is a total mischaracterization of both the seriousness of this current crisis, and the nature of the OCA’s foundation. The OCA was not in open rebellion, it was not taking over churches with physical violence, and it wasn’t offering communion to practitioners of other faiths simply because they had a shared ethnicity and sense of nationalism as is currently happening in the schismatic church of Ukraine. On top of that, you didn’t have the entire Orthodox world telling Moscow that they did not have the canonical authority to act as arbitrator. If you don’t like the OCA fine, if you like EPB, fine, but this situation is the most serious event in modern Orthodox history, and will have drastic consequences if it is not immediately corrected.
DeleteWrong! The OCA was in full reconciliation mode and there was no question of the canonical status of her bishops. No comparison at all.
Delete