.png "English"){kind=small}
St Michael's
Golden-Domed Monastery, Ukraine, a few days from Orthodox Christmas
Photo: Sadak SouiciLe Pictorium/Zuma Press/PA Images
Photo: Sadak SouiciLe Pictorium/Zuma Press/PA Images
The Ukrainian authorities expect to receive from the Patriarchate of Constantinople the tomos of autocephaly
Cardinal Christoph Schönborn of
Vienna has expressed deep regret over current divisions in the Orthodox
Church. The wish for and creation of an independent Ukrainian Orthodox
Church was perfectly understandable and quite in order according to
Orthodox church law, he said in his Christmas interview for "Kathpres",
but it had left deep wounds in the Russian Orthodox Church and in
ecumenical relations between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.
The church conflict in Ukraine was “truly tragic”, said Schönborn. On
the one hand it was understandable that, according to the Orthodox
understanding of Church, if a state became independent politically, its
Orthodox faithful had the right to an independent (autocephalous)
Church. Many of the Orthodox faithful in Ukraine were in favour of an
independent Ukrainian Church. On the other hand, he knew how great a
significance the Ukraine had for the Russian Orthodox Church and how
deeply wounded it had been left by the split.
Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, the honorary primate of the
300 million Orthodox Christians, has authorised the creation of an
independent Ukrainian Orthodox Church, and his decision was given final
approval in a 29 November decree of his Istanbul-based Holy Synod. The
Moscow Patriarchate has dismissed the move as “non-canonical”.
“It’s not that I don’t grant the Ukrainian Orthodox faithful
independence, but in my eyes it (the ensuing rift) is truly tragic as it
has lacerated the historical connections between the Ukraine and
Russia. That is why my first reaction was to weep,” said the cardinal.
Ukraine was not only Russia’s granary but also the “seedbed" of
Russian church life. "By losing Ukraine, the Russian Orthodox Church
loses its heartland,” recalled Schönborn. There were many Russian
Orthodox parishes in the Ukraine and Kiev was the birthplace of many
important Russian Orthodox bishops. That was why from the beginning,
Russia had found it so difficult to accept Ukraine’s political
independence, he said.
Schonbörn was also critical of the West’s policy regarding Ukraine’s
independence. The West had encouraged and supported Ukraine’s struggle
for independence but had at the same time failed to urge Ukraine to
preserve its ties with Russia. The Western concept of “Ukraine as a
bulwark against Russia” was bound to be interpreted by Russia, both
psychologically and politically, as aggression, he pointed out. In his
opinion, Ukraine should function as a bridge between Russia and the
West, he emphasised.
For the Catholic Church, the present situation was very difficult.
“How is the Vatican to interact with the new autocephalous Orthodox
Church in Ukraine? If it recognises it, that means conflict with the
Moscow Patriarchate. If the Vatican does not recognise the new Church,
that means conflict with the Ecumenical Patriarchate.” An inner-Orthodox
conflict was therefore doing great harm to ecumenism, “a harm that
could have been avoided”, concluded Schönborn.
