UKRAINIAN SCHISMATICS BREAK POROSHENKO'S PROMISE ABOUT AN "INDEPENDENT CHURCH"
by Anton Skripunov
Barely had Constantinople recognized the Ukrainian schismatics when they quarreled right away. The uncanonical Ukrainian Apostolic [sic—Autocephalous, tr.] Orthodox Church (UAPTs) accused the head of the schismatic Kiev patriarchate, Filaret, of unwillingness to make compromises. It seems that the project of an "independent church" is threatening to collapse. And there are a number of weighty reasons for this.
"They took the church!"
"Let our enemies know that we both will win and will make one Ukrainian Orthodox church headed by the 'patriarch of Kiev.' After all, there are many who think that, perhaps, not a patriarch, but a metropolitan (will be the head—ed. note). No! . . . NO!," here the leader of the schismatics, Filaret, raised his index finger. And the crowd of 15,000 who had gathered on 14 October with yellow and blue flags on Holy Wisdom Square applauded him.
Behind Filaret stood the head of yet another uncanonical structure, the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church, Metropolitan Makary. His future brother in the "independent church" talked and talked, even longer than President Poroshenko, and the television cameras showed clearly the disgruntled face of the head of the UAPTs.
There even was an unpleasant conversation between the leaders of the schismatics, about which a couple of days later Makary, not tolerating it, told journalists. With the creation of the "united local Ukrainian church" there are great problems. And this became clear there on Holy Wisdom Square.
"When we met (14 October), the patriarch said to me that it is necessary to convene a council immediately. I said to him: 'There is no charter to create a council.' 'But I have a charter.' 'I also have one, but it is necessary to make one charter out of the two charters.' And he replied to me: 'No, it will be my charter.' The year 2015 is being repeated," Makary complained in an interview with the Ukrainian television channel Zik.
Thus he acknowledged, in essence: the project of "Ukrainian autocephaly" is doomed to fail. And here is why.
First, for obtaining the long-awaited tomos (document concerning autocephaly), the Ukrainian schismatics must merge into one structure. It is for this reason that Patriarch Bartholomew legalized all the clergy of both the Kiev patriarchate and the UAPTs. Although originally, according to information of RIA Novosti's sources in Ukrainian church circles, they talked about the creation from scratch of a structure subordinate to Constantinople: it was for this that the exarchs were sent to Kiev. But where can they serve? There is no immovable property belonging to the Constantinople Orthodox Church (COC) in Ukraine. It is possible that this was one of the arguments for "pardoning" the schismatics, although only the Russian Orthodox Church has the right to do this.
Second, at the "unification council" the UAPTs and Kiev patriarchate must come up with a name for the new structure and adopt its charter. This is necessary for official registration by the state.
After this, it will become a part of the Constantinople patriarchate (Bartholomew decided to open a representation in Kiev, although it has not been determined just where) and the state will give to the new church one or several church buildings for their use. Petro Poroshenko has already promised the COC the church of St. Andrew, which is now considered the chief cathedral of the UAPTs. And Makary does not like this.
"I put the question to the president—we are surrendering our only cathedral church and you must give us something in return. Let's see whether it will be so," he declared in a not too friendly way.
Third, this is not the first time the leaders of the schismatics cannot agree among themselves. For good reason Makary recalled 2015: back then the UAPTs and the Kiev patriarchate intended to unify into . . . "a united local Ukrainian church," in order to conduct a "unification council," and elect there a "primate" and then to ask Patriarch Bartholomew for autocephaly. But it did not happen. Makary accused Filaret of disrespect and "unwillingness to make compromises." Exactly the same scenario was played out in both 2005 and in the early 1990s.
"Phantom metropolitan"
The clear desire of Filaret to head to new structure adds fuel to the fire. This was voiced also in his speech on Holy Wisdom Square.
"All of Ukraine participated in the process of granting autocephaly. . . . But we laid the foundation at a council on 1-3 November 1991," the "patriarch" declared.
What is he talking about? Actually, at that time the bishops' council of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UPTs) adopted an appeal to the Russian Orthodox Church requesting that it grant autocephaly to the UPTs, although at that time it had already acquired complete administrative and financial independence from the Moscow patriarchate, while having merely nominal subordination.
However Filaret, who was at the time the metropolitan of Kiev and all-Ukraine but desired a patriarchate itself, decided to go further and by threats and blackmail forced the participants in the council to sign an appeal to Moscow. Just a few months later, at a bishops' council of the RPTs, the Ukrainian bishops rescinded their signatures and Filaret himself repented of his action and swore before the cross and gospel that he would retire. Nevertheless, after returning to Kiev, he violated his oath and summoned the UPTs flock into his own "autocephalous church."
"The parishioners did not expect this from him. After all, before 1991 he showed in every possible way that he opposed autocephaly, and then he sharply changed his mind. For themselves they did not accept him and remained loyal to the canonical church," the UPTs press secretary, Vasily Anisimov, recalls.
In May 1992 a bishops' council of the UPTs removed Filaret from the primate's position and in June the RPTs removed him from clerical rank. And now the simple monk Filaret, without authority, created the Kiev patriarchate. In 1995 he proclaimed himself "patriarch of Kiev and all-Rus-Ukraine." And two years later the RPTs pronounced an anathema on him "for unwillingness to repent" and continuation of schismatic activity. Incidentally, all the other local Orthodox churches, including Constantinople, agreed with his excommunication.
And now, eleven years later, the patriarchate of Constantinople has restored Filaret "to his existing rank," that is, the rank of metropolitan.
"Here I think Constantinople tried to set Filaret aside. They received him actually as a metropolitan at rest (retired—ed. note). The Constantinople metropolitan Job, in one of his interviews, let it slip. In this sense, for Constantinople Filaret is an abstract figure without his Kiev patriarchate," church historian Vladislav Petrushko suggests.
Filaret himself, having just learned about the decision of the Synod of the COC, publicly declared: "I was a patriarch, I am, and I will be!" And then he confirmed his intention in that very conversation with Makary.
"And with what status, what model? When I said, will it be a metropolitinate or a patriarchate, he (Filaret—ed. note) said angrily that it will not be a metropolitanate; it will be a patriarchate," the head of the UAPTs admitted.
The situation is deadlocked. It seems that Constantinople wants to leave Filaret outside the new religious structure in Ukraine, but he stubbornly intends to be among its leaders. And of a rank no less than a patriarch, which is hardly feasible.
"The ancient patriarchal statuses (Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem) were fixed at the ecumenical council of 451 in Chalcedon. In subsequent instances, the granting of the patriarchal dignity was accompanied by actions of councils. In particular, the Moscow patriarchate of Job was confirmed by councils in Constantinople in 1590-1593. Even if the COC grants autocephaly to some newly formed "united local Ukrainian church," this will not mean the automatic conferral upon it of the status of a patriarchate. For this a conciliar decision is necessary, that includes the participation of the Russian church," Petrushko explained.
However, in his opinion, it is not difficult to predict how the conflict will end between the self-proclaimed "patriarch" Filaret and the similar "metropolitan" Makary. Much depends on the will of the "political forces standing behind them," and on Poroshenko, whose favorable rating is catastrophically low. His predecessors Leonid Kravchuk and Viktor Yushenko tried to reconcile the schismatics, but still nobody has been able to do this. (tr. by PDS, posted 18 October 2018)
Editorial disclaimer: RRN does
not intend to certify the accuracy of information
presented in articles. RRN simply intends to certify the
accuracy of the English translation of the contents of the
articles as they appeared in news media of countries of
the former USSR.
If material is quoted, please give credit to the
publication from which it came. It is not necessary to credit
this Web page. If material is transmitted electronically, please
include reference to the URL,
http://www.stetson.edu/~psteeves/relnews/.