.png "English"){kind=small}
Why
does Patriarch Cyril
fight
for the church in Ukraine? Her loss is a blow to the concept of
the “Church of the Empire,” which he developed after the fall of
the USSR. Until recently, it was hard not to agree that the
Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) is the largest and richest, but it
could not be converted into diplomatic victories over the Greeks.
In
2018, the word of the year will be the word "autocephaly,"
which is incomprehensible and difficult to pronounce. Just six
months ago, only specialists in church history and canon law knew
about it. Even ordinary parishioners of Orthodox churches were
not interested in the problems of church organization.
In
the news the word “autocephaly” began to appear frequently after
April 2018, when President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko asked her for
the Orthodox church in his country. And immediately a conflict
arose. It is connected with the fact that Poroshenko appealed
not to the Patriarch Cyril of Moscow and All Russia, to whom the
Church in Ukraine was subordinate, but to the Ecumenical Patriarch
Bartholomew, in whose jurisdiction the Church on these lands was 300
years ago. And Patriarch Bartholomew soon confirmed that he had
the right to return the Ukrainian Church under his administration and
give her autocephaly.
Autocephalous
in Greek means “self-heading,” that is, self-government, the
independence of the local church. There are 14 Autocephalous
Orthodox Churches in the world today. But it is possible that in a
few months the Ukrainian Orthodox Church will receive a tomos, and
the autocephalous Churches will be 15.
The
actions of the Ecumenical Patriarch caused constant criticism and
indignation from the Russian Church, which continues to consider
Ukraine its canonical territory. But Patriarch Bartholomew
completely ignored the position of Moscow and in mid-October made
decisions that make autocephaly irreversible: he abolished the
subordination of the Ukrainian dioceses of the Russian Orthodox
Church and returned from the split two non-canonical groups - the
Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kiev Patriarchate and the “old”
Ukrainian Autocephalous Church.
To
say that Patriarch Cyril was not happy was to say nothing. On
October 15, he held a synod meeting in Minsk, at which an extremely
harsh statement was made: “The current act of the Constantinople
Patriarchate is an attempt to steal something that never belonged to
it.”
But
the problem is that Patriarch Cyril has no leverage to influence the
situation. After the start of the war in the Donbas, Patriarch
Cyril in Ukraine is a persona
non grata,
and he cannot directly turn to Petro Poroshenko. Church law is
on the side of Patriarch Bartholomew. It is extremely difficult
for Patriarch Cyril to appeal to the other Orthodox Churches, since
two years ago, at the last moment, he refused to go to the
Pan-Orthodox Council, in fact, he proved incapable. Now the
situation for the ROC and personally for Patriarch Cyril is rather
reversed.
As
a result, the Moscow Patriarch fulfilled his threats and went to the
most extreme measure in church politics - the breakdown of
Eucharistic communion. This means that the Synod of the Russian
Orthodox Church unilaterally forbade its bishops and priests to serve
in the churches of the Constantinople Patriarchate, and the laity to
take communion there.
On
the territory of Russia and Belarus, this decision will not affect
the life of parishes and monasteries. Problems will arise when
visiting Holy Mount Athos, a favorite pilgrimage site including a
number of top Russian monasteries, as well as in the life of the
parishes of the Russian Orthodox Church in Western Europe and
America, where cooperation between parishes of different
jurisdictions develops. Russian parishes may be isolated.
Strictly
speaking, the decision of the Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church
looks extremely doubtful from a theological point of view, since the
rupture of Eucharistic communion can occur exclusively for doctrinal
reasons, when some part of the church community falls into heresy and
refuses to return to the Orthodox confession of faith. In the
case of Ukraine, it is about breaking the Eucharistic communion for
political reasons. Thus, Patriarch Cyril categorically objects
to the forthcoming redistribution of territories, temples and flocks,
as a result of which the Moscow Patriarchate may lose from a quarter
to a third of the total number of its parishes. However,
political motives are not sufficient grounds for such a radical
decision: worship should not be a bargaining chip in church
politics. Unfortunately,
Why
is Patriarch Cyril fighting so vigorously for the church in
Ukraine? Her loss is a devastating blow to the concept of the
“Church of the Empire,” which he developed after the fall of the
Soviet Union. Until recently, it was hard not to agree that the
Russian Orthodox Church is the largest and richest, but this could
not be converted into diplomatic victories over the Greeks.
If
the Church in Ukraine receives autocephaly, the ROC will lose
thousands of parishes and vast territory, and the Patriarchate of
Constantinople will acquire them. This will lead to the collapse
of the important myth of the "unbreakable and indivisible
Russian Church." For many years, it was not the state but
the church that claimed to be the guardian of the “idea of the
empire”. If the Soviet Union collapsed, and independent states
emerged, the Church was preserved within the borders of the
indivisible empire. She used to feel like a mega-church, ready
to talk with politicians on an equal footing. But after the loss
of Ukraine, the situation will change, and the ROC will have to
behave more modestly. Apparently, she is not ready for this.
Source:
Forbes.ru
