ARCHBISHOP EFSTRATIOS (ZORYA) of the UOC-KP: I EMPHASIZE THAT ONLY THOSE BISHOPS WHO ASKED ABOUT TOMOS WILL PARTICIPATE IN THE YNIFYING COUNCIL

ARCHBISHOP EFSTRATIOS (ZORYA) of the UOC-KP: I EMPHASIZE THAT ONLY THOSE BISHOPS WHO ASKED ABOUT TOMOS WILL PARTICIPATE IN THE YNIFYING COUNCIL

Michael Glukhovsky 30.10.2018, 17:40

"Approval of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Church is the end of the Russian neo-imperial project"

The Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate is called the majority of independent experts as the foundation upon which a new local Ukrainian church will emerge. Patriarch Filaret does not hide his intention to become the head of the autocephalous church, he will nominate his candidacy to the Unity Council. But the main issue today is the date of this meeting. At the end of last week, Patriarch Filaret during a press conference unexpectedly declared to many that the time of the Council should be announced not by Ukrainian churches, but by the Ecumenical Patriarch. It will, of course, do it after it becomes known about the coordination of all positions by the participants of the fateful Ukrainian Orthodox meeting. However, it is not reported how the three Ukrainian Orthodox churches should agree and what issues they are now agreeing on. The largest opponent of the Council is the UOC-MP. This church is part of the Russian Orthodox Church, which does not recognize the decision of Constantinople to give Tomas an autocephaly to Ukraine. But only protest applications are not limited. Recently, the "Glavkom" learned that the citizen of Russia, the viceroy of the so-called "Desyatinny Monastery" of the UOC MP in Kiev, Father Gideon (in the world Yuriy Charon) sued. He is trying to challenge the decision of the Verkhovna Rada of April 19 to support the president's appeal to Patriarch Bartholomew to give Tomas to Ukraine. At the same time, such a suit from the servants of the UOC-MP is not the first. In the Kyivan Patriarchate these actions are called provocations. It is said that such actions on the part of the Moscow Patriarchate will only gain momentum with the approach of the Council.

Archbishop of Chernigov and Nizhyn Efstratios (Zorya) from the UOC-KP, called the right hand of Patriarch Filaret and the main speaker of the church. In an interview with the Glavkom, the archbishop told why the Ecumenical Patriarch had to name the date of the Unification Synod, explained why not all willing bishops can take part in it, and who and in what way will try to disrupt the holding of this event.

How is the preparation for the Unity Synod organized, how is it organized?

With your permission, I will not make any details in principle. This is not an issue that is solved through the media. It is a subject of dialogue and a multilateral process. Therefore, first: it is not in my competence to comment only on one side. Secondly, I do not see how this could contribute to the process if such comments were provided.

Is the organizing committee created?

I can not report any details. In addition to the fact that this Synod should take place and those bishops who initially announced their intention should take part in it, they must fix it, asking the Ecumenical Patriarch to provide Tomos. This process must include both hierarchs and the corresponding representation of the Ecumenical Patriarch. On his part must be attested to belonging to this process.

Patriarch Filaret at a press conference said that the date of the united Synod should be announced by Patriarch Bartholomew, explaining this with the participation of exarchs of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, who must be present at the meeting. What does the date depend on?

The Ukrainian situation is unique. The explanation is very simple: the decision on Tomos is the decision of the Ecumenical Patriarch. Accordingly, the holding of the Unity Council and all of these events associated with it are related to the decision of Tomos. The Ecumenical Patriarchate sees and supports this path, he must put the final print in this process, the final word depends on him. Conditionally, tomorrow we will convene the Synod. And the Patriarchate of Constantinople will say that it is necessary to wait. Because perhaps somebody wants to join this Synod or some conditions are not yet ready to answer. And what then?

What are the criteria on which the "goodness" of the Ecumenical Patriarch depends on?

This is a multilateral process. If all parties had a single opinion and a single vision, then nobody would talk about the process. Imagine a certain object around which people are. They all can not simultaneously see the entire object, especially if it is large. But everyone sees his part. Thus, sharing information and thoughts, they see a coherent picture, although each of them sees separately only part of the object.

The head of the UAOC, Metropolitan Macarius, told the Glavkom that the UAOC sent a proposal to the UOC-KP to set up a commission to prepare the Council. What are these suggestions?

I do not know anything about sending any suggestions. In principle, Metropolitan Macarius, and those who work with him, know all our contact details. On Monday (October 22) there was a meeting of the All-Ukrainian Council of Churches, in which Father Vitaly Danchak, the secretary of his office, participated. I saw him, he did not tell me anything.

President Petro Poroshenko is an active participant in the process. How can the head of state now be useful to the church?

Here, his role as head of state is very important, he can contact directly with all parties involved in this process. It seems to me that it is difficult to overestimate the role of the president, one can only wish God's help, wisdom, inspiration and success. In fact, the issue that is being solved is very high in terms of European and world security. Ukrainian Church Independence from Moscow, the approval of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Church is the completion of the Russian neo-imperial project. Whether they want it or not, but without Kiev, the Russian neo-imperial project is impossible to implement. Because then the history of Muscovy begins with the beginning of the XIV century, with Ivan Kalita and the Khan's label. With the provision of the Tartar Khan to the Moscow Prince of the title of the Grand Duke and to entrust him, from the khan's name, to rule the principality of Russia, subject to the Golden Horde.

... It is not too soon, after the decision of the Synod in Constantinople, Putin has assembled the Security Council. We are convinced that all possible resources, individuals and mechanisms are involved in order to prevent autocephaly. It will be presented as a struggle in the middle of Ukraine. Just as now, Russian aggression is covered with words about civil war.

The head of state is responsible for national security. He has mechanisms to prevent provocations, to reveal the schemes of Russian special services' influence on the situation, to engage Ukrainian diplomacy, which has so far been working hard, informed foreign countries and local Orthodox churches about the real situation in Ukraine.

Imagine the situation: a new church is being created, and a bill that will determine the mechanism of the transition of religious communities has not yet been approved. Is this legal vacuum dangerous?

There is no legislative vacuum now too. There is Article 8 of the Law "On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations". It states that each religious community has the right to choose the center of its religious subordination and to change this center. That is, the legislative base in Ukraine is. So far, using this legal base, religious communities have moved from one denomination to another. The problem is that the mechanism of this transition has not been issued, and this creates an opportunity for conflicts. But the bill is (No. 4128). He is waiting for the first reading. The fact that the state, in particular the parliament, can act quickly on these issues showed the transfer of the Andreev Church to the stauropegional representation of the Ecumenical Patriarch in Kiev. During the time that will take place between the Unity Council and the receipt of Tomos, when he is brought to Kiev, I think the Verkhovna Rada will have time to foresee all the necessary procedures in order to resolve this issue. If it does not even have time, there is still a legislative base, as well as an understanding that this process should be voluntary, with respect to the beliefs of believers, taking into account their will, without any provocations.

Let's look at the situation in practice. Parishes in the outback. How do local people join the Single Local Church?

In the bill (No. 4128), this mechanism is foreseen. There must be a general meeting of the religious community - all those who identify themselves with this community, participate in her life. In order to prevent the possibility of interfering in this process with outsiders and impersonating members of the community without being them, it is envisaged (in the draft law) that the decision is signed by all members of the meeting, with the indication of the passport data and the data of the place of registration.

The state authority, whether the Department of the Ministry of Religious Affairs, the Regional State Administration or the Kyiv State Administration, has the right to register decisions of the meeting. Authorities will study all documents. Have the right to investigate whether these people really are real members of a religious community, or documents are not falsified. The second mechanism is that the authority of this meeting is certified by the statutory body. We have parishes in the same way as in parishes of the UOC-MP or UAOC there is a body called the parish council. This body is elected by the parish council, consisting of several members, which, in essence, are the executive body of the respective religious community. This statutory body is empowered to certify that the persons who participated in the meeting are indeed members of the respective religious community. There are, therefore, two mechanisms that, in aggregate, provide an opportunity to protect themselves from interference by outsiders and verify the authenticity of the data that is being submitted for registration.

In an interview with Glavkom, Archimandrite Kirill Govorun said that at the Synod each of its members will represent not the church, but itself and their flock, that is, people. It is so?

Churches can legally change only within the framework of the Ukrainian legislative field. They do not disappear with the decision of any church, Ukrainian or foreign, or because someone believes that someone who commented on this process. The bishop will take part in the Cathedral, which will take place. As a result of the meeting, they must proclaim that they are the bishops of a single church.

This does not mean that before the Synod begins, the previous churches have already disappeared. As a bishop I will take part in this Synod when the decision of the church I belong to. Our church is ready and willing to take part in the Synod. That is, I will take part in the Council not as an individual. The fact that I am the head of the diocese, that I am an archbishop, is all given to me by the church to which I belong. In isolation from the church to which one or another bishop belongs, this case can not be considered.

Archimandrite Cyril (Govorun) speaks of voluntary participation in the Synod for priests and even for the laity.

It is about the Synod of the Bishops. Priest and laity cannot take part in it.

Where exactly will the Cathedral take, what options are being considered today?

It seems to us that the most logical and unique place ever heard of is the St. Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv. This is a historic temple, a department of Kiev bishops with a thousand-year history. This seems to be the only logical and appropriate place for such an event. Especially since the Cathedral of St. Sophia is a national museum-reserve, which does not belong to any of the Orthodox jurisdictions. From this point of view, this is also a neutral place for such an event.

On October 11, Patriarch Filaret, during a briefing after the announcement of the decision of the Synod in Constantinople, said that the bishops of the UOC-KP, the UAOC and the "bishops of the Moscow Patriarchate who want" will take part in the Uniting Bishops' Council. At the same time, the official document of the UOC-KP suggests that only those who have appealed to the Ecumenical Patriarch asking Tomos to give an autocephaly will have the right to participate in the Council. What is the position of the UOC-KP in reality?

He said that it was those who appealed to the Ecumenical Patriarch. In recent months, the patriarch has already given fifty interviews. If 30 or 40 interviews are said to be so, and at a briefing he did not specify again (only those who appeal to the Ecumenical Patriarch will have the right to take part), this does not mean that from this moment one can draw any conclusions. What is the reason for the bishops of the Moscow Patriarchate to come to the Cathedral, if they are against autocephaly. Imagine Metropolitan Onuphury or Metropolitan Anthony, who are against autocephaly and claim to do so, will come to the Synod. They will say they want to take part. Are they the bishops? Exactly. From Ukraine? So. So, they say, we are members of the Council and we are against the union, against autocephaly. They will not come, but will lead 90 bishops of the Moscow Patriarchate. That is why we emphasize that the Synod is attended by those bishops who appealed to the Ecumenical Patriarch with the request to give Tomos of autocephaly, and not all the bishops who are Orthodox and placed on the territory of Ukraine.

How likely is it that the bishops of the Moscow Patriarchate in large numbers still decide to take part in the Cathedral?

In order not to turn the Synod into something that is the opposite of what is being contemplated, there is a mechanism. Participation in the meeting will be taken by those who appealed to the Ecumenical Patriarch, as well as representatives of the Ecumenical Patriarch.

Does the bill No 4128 please the church or have any other suggestions?

When the first version of this document appeared, in many denominations, we also had comments to him. There were meetings, meetings of the profile committee of the Verkhovna Rada, representatives of churches and religious organizations. The bill, which has already been recommended for consideration by parliament in the first reading, compared to the one that was submitted, has improved considerably. We believe that 2/3 of the religious community should decide on certain issues. In parliament, this is called the decision of the constitutional majority. This will be a guarantee of the complication of the situation when the religious community changes its subordination. For if they were 2/3 or more, it obviously indicates that the decision is firm and conscious. That is, in this particular case, there will be no soil to fuel the conflict. And if the decision is not firm, if there was a manipulation or someone did not come and almost one voice is solved, then this is the path to the conflict.

Are there cases of provocations from the Moscow Patriarchate? What are they?

The most striking thing about this is the involvement of pro-Russian media in Ukraine for the spread of various kinds of rumors, various ratings, the involvement of some pseudo-experts, when they want the real one, they make an elephant from the flies, and obviously they try to silence. It's enough to see how it was happening so far, as was mentioned in the address of the Patriarchate of Constantinople and the decision on autocephaly. That is, there were attempts to persuade and offer some kind of financial support. One very rich deputy traveled there (to Constantinople), taking with him an entourage from the Metropolitan of the Moscow Patriarchate.

After such trips there were statements that we all decided, there would be no Tomos, autocephaly will not be. It was then necessary for the Ecumenical Patriarch to personally say his true position, which did not change. I think that in this direction Moscow will continue to act.

Obviously, speaking of the "rich MP" you mean the former Russian citizen, and now the Ukrainian parliamentarian Vadim Novinsky. But after the decision of the synod of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, he no longer makes public statements. He led the "Party of Peace". I am not judging by what he personally claims or does not declare. I judge by what statements come from the Moscow Patriarchate, the main sponsor of which is in Ukraine. Judging by what statements come from the information structures serving the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine. And there you can see what grades are given to the Constantinople, the Ecumenical Patriarch. His (Patriarch Bartholomew) personally almost blamed on heresy, calling almost anathema to subjugate. Moreover, this is done by the official representative of the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine, Archbishop Clement (Supper). Sometimes the statements made by the Russian Church on this matter are literally repeated. Therefore, in fact, nothing has changed. Perhaps he, as a party to the future election process, was advised by political technologists to not personally make any statements, wait. But the whole network, which exists, including through its sponsorship, successfully implements the same policy as it has been to date. Rhetoric worsened. All the same as they talked about the Kiev Patriarchate, now they are talking about the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

Michael Glukhovsky, "Glavkom"

Source: glavcom.ua