ARCHBISHOP JOB OF
TELMESSOS
They
refuse to find a reasonable solution to cure the schism
The
hierarch points out that the Patriarchate of Moscow rejects any
dialogue and states that it is strange that Orthodox Ukrainians do
not w
ant to be under the jurisdiction of Kiev.
MARINA
ZIOZIOU
Archbishop
Job of Telmessos, Permanent Representative of the Ecumenical
Patriarchate to the World Council of Churches gives his own point of
view on the issue of autocephaly in Ukraine. “Who threatens the
Ecumenical Patriarchate with bloodshed, rebellion and civil war does
not serve the good of the Church and her unity, but encourages
division and schism,” says the hierarch of
Ukrainian
origin, while saying that the granting of autocephaly by the Mother
Church is proposed not as a “weapon” to declare the war or to
divide Orthodoxy, but as a “medicine” to cure a schism that lasts
for thirty years.
The
Orthodox faithful are deeply troubled by the conflict between the
Phanar and Moscow and are wondering how a dispute over the
functioning of a local church can lead to a rupture and a split
within the Orthodox Church?
The
Ecumenical Patriarchate proposes autocephaly in Ukraine not as a
"weapon" to declare war or divide Orthodoxy, but as
"medicine" to cure a schism that has lasted for thirty
years. After the independence of Ukraine in 1991, all the bishops of
the Orthodox Church in Ukraine, under the jurisdiction of the Moscow
Patriarchate, had already asked the Patriarch of Moscow for
autocephaly in 1991 and 1992 to prevent the proliferation schisms.
Unfortunately, the Moscow Patriarchate did not want to grant it, and
this only aggravated the situation. During these thirty years, the
Moscow Patriarchate believes that in order to achieve the unity of
the Church, schismatic communities must return to its jurisdiction.
This policy of return is similar to the ancient policy of the Church
of Rome which gave birth to Uniatism. Today, the reality is that
there are millions of Orthodox Christians in Ukraine who do not want
to be under the jurisdiction of Moscow for understandable reasons.
Therefore, the unity of Orthodoxy must be saved by applying the
canonical economy and through the grace of God.
From
what is known so far, it seems practically difficult to normalise and
set up an Autocephalous Church in Ukraine. There are Russian-speaking
Orthodox populations in Ukraine who may not wish to belong to the new
local Church. What will happen in this case?
Autocephaly
transcends ethnophylism and regionalism by ensuring the unity of the
Church within the local Church as well as between the local Churches.
It does not preclude serving the pastoral needs of Russian-speaking,
Romanian-speaking, Greek-speaking, English-speaking or any other
believers living in Ukraine, and allows for the communion with
Constantinople, Moscow and all other local Orthodox Churches.
We
must not forget that the Orthodox Church is one, because it is the
Body of Christ. Therefore, it is not possible to divide the body of
Christ. The Church belongs to Christ and not to Constantinople,
Moscow, Kiev or anyone else. For me, it is a little strange that an
Orthodox living in Ukraine does not want to be under the jurisdiction
of Kiev but under the jurisdiction of Moscow...
The
Metropolitan of Kiev Onuphriy refused to meet the two exarchs of the
Ecumenical Patriarchate and seems to be solidary with the Moscow
Patriarchate. If he sticks to that, will his position be replaced?
How will the parishes that are now under his jurisdiction be
transferred to the new Autocephalous Church?
The
Ecumenical Patriarchate sent to Ukraine two exarchs to conduct a
constructive dialogue between the different ecclesial entities within
the deeply divided Ukrainian Orthodoxy in order to restore the unity
of the ecclesial body. We deeply regret that the hierarchs of the
Moscow Patriarchate totally reject any dialogue and any meeting with
them. This may indicate their refusal to find a reasonable solution
to the ecclesial schism in Ukraine. Undoubtedly, behind these actions
are political ambitions dictated not in Kiev but in the Kremlin, when
there is a danger not only of increasing the schism in Ukraine, but
also of contributing to the fragmentation of Orthodoxy. It is
therefore the duty of the Ecumenical Patriarchate to look after so as
not to lose this unity. We hope that our brothers from the Moscow
Patriarchate will quickly return to reason and enter into dialogue
with them, as well as with the representatives of the schismatic
Churches, in order to find a solution and restore the ecclesial
canonicity in Ukraine.
Many
argue that the new order of things that will follow will probably be
accompanied by immediate reactions combined with the war in the
eastern provinces of Ukraine. Can the Ecumenical Patriarchate ensure
that everything goes well and peacefully?
It
is unacceptable to keep millions of Orthodox Christians in schism for
more than a generation. Anyone who threatens the Ecumenical
Patriarchate with bloodshed, rebellion and civil war does not serve
the good and the unity of the Church, but encourages division and
schism.
The
schism between the Eastern and Western Churches occurred mainly for
dogmatic reasons. The Moscow Patriarchate refers to it strongly
regarding the Ukrainian question. What does it mean and is it
justified?
You
are right to point out that the main reason for the division between
East and West was purely dogmatic. Because of the addition of the
Filioque to the symbol of faith, the Greeks accused the Latins of
having introduced an innovation into the faith. This is not the case
of Ukraine.
People
can understand that the ecclesial schism in Ukraine is not due to a
theological problem, but a canonical problem. It is not fair to
accuse anyone of heretics and to make threats that the granting of
autocephaly would create a schism even greater than that of 1054.