Friday, September 14, 2018

Russian Church holds emergency session

(ROC-DECR) - On 14 September 2018, at the Patriarchal and Synodal residence in St. Daniel’s Monastery in Moscow, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church held an extraordinary session.

The permanent members of the Holy Synod are Metropolitan Onufry of Kiev and All Ukraine; Metropolitan Juvenaly of Krutitsy and Kolomna; Metropolitan Vladimir of Kishinev and All Moldova; Metropolitan Alexander of Astana and Kazakhstan, head of the Metropolitan area in the Republic of Kazakhstan; Metropolitan Vikenty of Tashkent and Uzbekistan, head of the Metropolitan area of Central Asia; Metropolitan Varsonofy of St. Petersburg and Ladoga, chancellor of the Moscow Patriarchate; Metropolitan Pavel of Minsk and Zaslavsk, Patriarchal Exarch for All Belarus; and Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk, chairman of the Department for External Church Relations.

Summoned for the winter session (September-February) are Metropolitan Luka of Zaporozhye and Melitopol, Metropolitan Sergy of Barnaul and Altai, Bishop Lazar of Narva and Prichudye, Bishop Veniamin of Rybinsk and Danilov, and Bishop Nikolai of Nakhodka and Preobrazheniye.

His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia opened the meeting, saying:

“Today we have on our agenda one item pertaining to the implementation of the decision of the Patriarchate of Constantinople to send the so-called “exarchs” to Ukraine. On 8 September, our Synod made a statement concerning the decision taken by the Synod of the Patriarchate of Constantinople to send these representatives, and we have received reliable information that they arrived in Ukraine and set to work.”

For health reasons His Beatitude Metropolitan Onufry of Kiev and All Ukraine could not attend the session. A video conference was organized, during which Metropolitan Onufry informed the members of the Synod of the situation in Ukraine after the appointment of the two representatives by the Patriarchate of Constantinople.

“It is true that both so-called “exarchs” of the Patriarchate of Constantinople have arrived in Ukraine,” His Beatitude Metropolitan Onufry said, “One was assigned to conduct negotiations with the party of the so-called “patriarch” Philaret, and the other – with the party of “metropolitan” Makary, head of the “Ukrainian autocephalous orthodox church.”

“We have not met with them and have no intention to meet, because they came here without our blessing. As representatives of the canonical Church in Ukraine, we will not communicate with them. We will see how the situation will unfold,” Metropolitan Onufry added.

Based on the information received from Metropolitan Onufry, the members of the Synod will take decisions pertaining to this matter.

Greeting His Beatitude Metropolitan Onufry, His Holiness Patriarch Kirill expressed his hope that the supreme authority of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church would “continue to pursue the only right path of carrying out its ministry in accordance with the canons of the Orthodox Church.”

“The situation caused by the appointment of the so-called “exarchs” is mirroring the situation back in the 1920s, caused by the actions of the Patriarch of Constantinople. At the time our Church, led by His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon, was in the most difficult circumstances,” the Primate of the Russian Church said, “The Patriarch was under the tremendous pressure from the authorities, while the schismatic organization inspired by the authorities – the Renovationist “church” – was gaining strength. Then Patriarch Gregory VII of Constantinople made a decision to send the so-called “commission” to Moscow, allegedly at the request of some Orthodox believers. Of course, the Russian Orthodox Church sent no such requests to Patriarch Gregory VII. Those requests most likely came from the schismatics – Renovationists. And Patriarch Tikhon wrote a very clear, canonically justified letter, in which he protested against sending by another Local Church, in the uncanonical way, some “commission” to the canonical territory of the Russian Orthodox Church which he headed. We know in what difficult situation Patriarch Tikhon was at the time. Although the Patriarch was almost imprisoned, he expressed his position in a courageous and clear way.”

“Since the current situation in Ukraine is, as I have said, mirroring what was going on in the early 20th century, we must pursue the path that was courageously shown to us by His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon in the hardest period for our Church. This path is the only right and canonically justified one,” His Holiness Patriarch Kirill said in conclusion.

15 comments:

  1. Yes, the Moscow Patriarchate is always spotless of wrongdoing...just like when it took over the Church of Georgia for some time...Moscow sure made a stink when they broke off to regain their independence, declaring it "uncanonical"...I am amazed that no one seems to remember history with all of this going on...since the very beginning of the existence of the Moscow Patriarchate, the bishops of the Kievan Metropolia tried to remain free of coming under its control...one of the reasons the Union of Brest took place was to not come under the control of Moscow...this has been going on for centuries, not just with the rise of Ukrainian nationalism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's really beside the point. The issue is the EP's behavior.

      Delete
    2. "That's really beside the point. The issue is the EP's behavior. "

      This statement sort of sums up the curent passionate tide. A thousand years of history and canonical dysfunction brushed aside in the vain effort to find a single fulcrum of time and place and person for which you can point to and say "See! There! It's HIS fault!".

      It's as simplistic as it is wrong...

      Delete
    3. It's a fair point- the MP's track record is far from clean. As far as I know though, even at the height of "Third Rome" fever, Moscow never claimed to be "the beginning of the Orthodox Church" in a clear parallel to the Logos. The justifications coming from the EP for these actions contain a lot of troubling language and, while I don't agree with those who jump to shout "heresy!"- it might just be a case of rhetorical flourish- I think the EP needs to clarify, if not retract, these ill-conceived statements.

      Delete
    4. I have been troubled by the language of the EP ever since I discovered Orthodoxy 25 years ago. None of it is ever clarified, retracted, etc. Remember the "Church divided in time" statement from a few years back? Talk about a seeming denial of the unam sanctam.

      I don't disagree with you by the way, I just don't expect anything to actually change around this...

      Delete
    5. @Jake,

      Funny, you aknowledge the EP statements are troubling but also seem to feel the Russians had it coming. Either the EP is a Pope or he is not. That pales in comparison to bad behavior by the Russians.

      Delete
    6. "seem to feel"?

      The truth of how I "feel" about this is that we ALL "have it coming". Stretching a canonical structure and ecclesiology made for a Empire over a world/body that is no longer an Empire is "dysfunctional" to pick a term. We are all in this boat, no matter who, what, or where we are in the Church.

      These comparisons (good word actually - reveals what you are really doing as you are in fact ignoring the cannons, history, etc.) are just moralistic and simplistic responses. In the end it is scapegoating, even if the EP IS a bad guy for entirely separate reasons...

      Delete
    7. Does anybody think Patriarch Kirill is acting like a pope?

      Delete
  2. I smell CIA.

    https://www.unian.info/politics/10257378-u-s-supports-ukraine-in-struggle-for-right-to-have-independent-church-envoy.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Some mischievous soul should sue the US and/or its agents, based on the "establishment" clause, for supporting one Orthodox faction over the other.

      Delete
  3. I mean, what is going on right now is just the modern history of the Orthodox Church, plain and simple...everyone eventually wants to be autocephalous, independent, "no one else is going to tell me what to do", etc...so, do your own thing, break off, a big mess ensues for decades or a few centuries at most, the autocephaly is later "baptized", and we all become just one big happy Orthodox family again, all TOTALLY equal, never being able to reach any substantial agreement on anything truly important beyond what was decided on 1,000 years ago when we were with Rome (my, what a coincidence)...So much screaming against "papalism" yet, de facto, each autocephalous patriarchate has become it's own "Pope". Another section of the Church wants to be autocephalous now...yawn...what else is new? Why not? We are all equal anyway. Why is Moscow right compared to Constantinople, or vice versa, about how to grant autocephaly? They are all equal, so, one's opinion is no better than the other. There does not seem to be any real principle of authority in Orthodoxy today besides being fully independent, national churches…each one really just does its own thing anyway…very important moral issues, questions of validity of sacraments of heterodox, questions on the nature of authority in the Church, etc…all vary from one national church to the other, even polar opposites.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just to comment on two things:

      1) no, there is not a large or significant diversity between the local (autocephalous) churches on sacramental or moral theology. Even on "authority" by which you really mean the primacy of Rome there is not a diversity - quite the opposite all these local churches uniformly reject it.

      2) Yes, the cannons, and/or their implementation, have proved rather inadequate historically when it comes to the granting of autocephaly - it all has had a rather haphazard and "political" side to it...

      Delete
  4. Hmmm, this sounds familiar...local Orthodox church gets taken over by Moscow, local church breaks off and declares independence, Moscow raises holy heck over it, Patriarch of Constantinople ignores Moscow's complaints and threats and grants autocephaply, Moscow has a tantrum for awhile then gets over it, Moscow eventually gets on good terms with everyone again...happened to the Church of Georgia:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4d8CyHw8Fbs
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THQYmpWNIwM

    ReplyDelete
  5. It's like choosing between the mafia and the KGB.

    ReplyDelete