home All hormones The Ukrainian Orthodox Church used to be part of. Ukraine is on the verge of a religious war. How temple invaders justify their actions

The Ukrainian Orthodox Church used to be part of. Ukraine is on the verge of a religious war. How temple invaders justify their actions

The President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko asked for the creation of an autocephalous (independent) local church in the country and decided to discuss this issue with the churches of the Orthodox world.

Earlier, on April 17, Poroshenko said that he wrote a letter to Patriarch Bartholomew I (Archodonis) of Constantinople with a request for a tomos (decree) on autocephaly for the so-called Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate.

The editors of TASS-DOSSIER have prepared information about Orthodox church jurisdictions on the territory of Ukraine.

Currently, on the territory of modern Ukraine there are the canonical self-governing Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UOC-MP), as well as two large non-canonical religious organizations: the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate (UOC-KP) and the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (UAOC).

Before the February Revolution of 1917, the only Orthodox Church on the territory of modern Ukraine was the single canonical Orthodox Russian Church of the Russian Empire (since 1943 - the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, ROC MP).

Canonical Orthodox Church in Ukraine

In 1918, the All-Russian Local Council formed an ecclesiastical region “with special advantages on the basis of autonomy” or the Ukrainian Exarchate of the Moscow Patriarchate on the territory of Ukraine. Its head was the Metropolitan of Kiev and Galicia, Patriarchal Exarch of Ukraine. In 1918, this post was taken by Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky). In 1921, by decree of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Tikhon (Belavin), Ukrainian autonomy was liquidated, but the Ukrainian Exarchate continued to exist as a special unit within the Russian Orthodox Church until 1990.

On October 25-27, 1990, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church re-established the self-governing Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, which currently continues to be the only canonical Orthodox Church in Ukraine. In 1990-1992, the head of the UOC-MP was Metropolitan Filaret (Denisenko). On May 27, 1992, the Council of Bishops of the UOC MP removed Filaret for schismatic activities and elected Vladimir (Sabodan), the manager of the affairs of the Moscow Patriarchate, as Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Ukraine.

Since August 2014, Metropolitan of Chernivtsi and Bukovina Onufriy (Berezovsky) became the head of the church.

Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church

With the growth of Ukrainian nationalism in the summer of 1917, some Orthodox priests in Ukraine advocated the creation of an autocephalous church, the Ukrainization of worship, etc. The leader of the movement was Archpriest Vasily Lipkovsky, who was soon deprived of the priesthood for schismatic activities.

On January 1, 1919, the directory of the Ukrainian People's Republic, headed by Vladimir Vinnychenko, adopted the law “On the autocephaly of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and its supreme government.” Through their ambassador to Turkey, the Ukrainian authorities tried to achieve recognition of the UOC by the Patriarchate of Constantinople, but were unsuccessful.

Later, with the support of the Bolsheviks, the first Ukrainian parishes were registered in Ukraine. The Moscow Patriarchate, led by Patriarch Tikhon, considered the actions of supporters of the creation of an autocephalous Ukrainian church as a schism.

On May 5, 1920, representatives of the All-Ukrainian Orthodox Council and activists of the Ukrainian nationalist movement proclaimed the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church. None of the Orthodox bishops took part in making this decision. On October 14, 1921, supporters of the UAOC convened an All-Ukrainian Orthodox Church Council, the participants of which were only 64 priests and 17 deacons.

The representative of the Moscow Patriarchate, Metropolitan Mikhail (Ermakov), refused to attend the council. He rejected the candidates proposed by Rada activists and declared: “I don’t ordain vipers as bishops.” As a result, the so-called Ukrainian bishops were elevated to the rank, bypassing canonical rules; in particular, Lipkovsky himself “consecrated” himself as a bishop. The UAOC was not recognized by any of the canonical Orthodox churches.

Until the mid-1920s, the Soviet authorities supported the development of the UAOC, hoping in this way to weaken the Russian Orthodox Church. However, since 1929, the OGPU began mass arrests of UAOC activists. In 1930, the organization announced its dissolution.

In 1942, on the territory of Ukraine, which was under German occupation, the activities of the UAOC were restored. After the retreat of German troops from Ukraine, representatives of the UAOC emigrated and founded their dioceses in places where the Ukrainian diaspora was densely populated, primarily in the USA and Canada.

In 1989, the restoration of the UAOC was officially proclaimed again in Lviv. In 1990, a local council of the religious organization was held in Kyiv, its charter was adopted, and Metropolitan Mstislav (Skripnik), who returned from emigration to the United States, was proclaimed Patriarch of Kyiv and All Ukraine. Currently, the UAOC is headed by Metropolitan Macarius (Maletich).

Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate

In November 1991, Metropolitan Filaret (Denisenko), who headed the UOC-MP, convened a council of bishops, which addressed the Moscow Patriarchate with a request to grant the UOC “full canonical independence, that is, autocephaly.” However, soon after the council, some of the hierarchs withdrew their signatures on the appeal. In April 1992, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church invited Metropolitan Philaret to leave his post. He agreed, promising to hold elections for a new head of the UOC. However, on April 7, 1992, having returned to Kyiv, Filaret announced his refusal to obey the Moscow Patriarchate.

On May 27, 1992, a council of the UOC of the Moscow Patriarchate met in Kharkov, which removed Filaret from the post of primate of the church, deprived him of the Kyiv see and expelled him from the staff with a ban on serving “pending the decision of the Bishops’ Council of the Mother Church.” On June 11, 1992, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church decided “to expel Metropolitan Philaret (Denisenko) from his existing rank, depriving him of all degrees of the priesthood and all rights associated with being in the clergy<...>for a cruel and arrogant attitude towards the subordinate clergy, dictatorship and blackmail, introducing temptation among believers with his behavior and personal life, perjury, causing a schism in the Church,” etc.

Filaret himself did not recognize this decision. He was supported by the Ukrainian authorities, in particular by the President of Ukraine Leonid Kravchuk. The Kiev police, together with members of the Ukrainian nationalist organization UNA-UNSO (banned in the Russian Federation), did not allow the delegation of the UOC-MP, which came to take over business from the deposed metropolitan, into the metropolitan residence. With the support of Ukrainian nationalists, Denisenko retained control of the Vladimir Cathedral in Kyiv. Kravchuk and the Presidium of the Verkhovna Rada declared the decisions of the Kharkov Council of Bishops of the UOC MP illegal.

To legitimize his own status, Filaret, with the support of the Ukrainian authorities, held an All-Ukrainian Orthodox Council, at which it was announced that his supporters would unite with the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church into the so-called united Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate. Filaret became the deputy head of the new organization, which was announced to be the Patriarch of the UAOC, Mstislav (Skrypnyk), who is in the United States. However, a real de facto unification did not happen: in 1993, after the death of Mstislav, the majority of representatives of the UAOC left the Kiev Patriarchate. On October 20, 1995, Filaret was elected Patriarch of the UOC-KP.

In 1992, during a trip to Istanbul (Turkey), Filaret unsuccessfully tried to negotiate recognition of the UOC-KP by the Patriarchate of Constantinople. However, in July 1993, Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople officially stated that he recognizes only one canonical Metropolitan of Kyiv - Vladimir (Sabodan).

On February 21, 1997, at the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church, Filaret was excommunicated and anathematized because he “did not heed the call to repentance addressed to him on behalf of the Mother Church and continued ... schismatic activities.”

On November 16, 2017, Denisenko addressed a letter to the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Kirill (Gundyaev) and the episcopate of the Russian Orthodox Church. It proposed “putting an end to the existing confrontation” and canceling “as if they had never happened” all “bans and excommunications.” On November 30, 2017, to conduct negotiations with the UOC-KP, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church established a special commission, headed by the chairman of the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate, Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeev). On December 1, 2017, at a press conference in Kyiv, Filaret Denisenko announced that the goal of his negotiations with the Russian Orthodox Church is the autocephaly of the Ukrainian Church.

At the same time, according to Filaret, he continues to negotiate autocephaly with the Patriarchate of Constantinople. In addition, he stated the need to adopt amendments to the already existing law of Ukraine “On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations,” the purpose of which is to limit the rights of the UOC-MP. In particular, one of these amendments gives the Ukrainian authorities the right to ban religious organizations for collaborating with centers located in the “aggressor state.”

Statistical data on confessions in Ukraine

According to a survey conducted in November 2016 by the Ukrainian Sociology Service at the Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 39.4% of citizens consider themselves parishioners of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate. 25.3% of respondents identified themselves with the self-proclaimed Kyiv Patriarchate, and 4.6% with the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church.

According to the UOC-MP, its parishioners are 35 million believers (more than 80% of the population). As of November 2017, the church consists of 53 dioceses and 12 thousand 69 parishes. In the clergy of the UOC MP there are 85 bishops (52 diocesan and 33 vicars), 12 thousand 283 clergy, of which 11 thousand 312 are priests and 971 are deacons. There are 251 monasteries on the territory of Ukraine, where 4 thousand 412 monks serve obedience (1 thousand 685 monks and monks, 2 thousand 727 nuns and nuns). In 17 theological educational institutions of the UOC MP (Kiev Theological Academy, theological seminaries and schools, theological university and the department of theology), 1 thousand 429 students study full-time. The largest monasteries are the Holy Dormition Kiev-Pechersk Lavra and the Holy Dormition Pochaev Lavra.

According to the “Report on the network of religious organizations in Ukraine as of January 1, 2017,” published in June 2017 by the country’s Ministry of Culture, the UOC-MP unites 12 thousand 328 religious communities. The largest number of parishes is in Vinnytsia (1038) and Khmelnitsky (977) regions, the smallest - in Lviv (71) and Ivano-Frankivsk (36). The UOC-MP owns 208 monasteries, 19 religious educational institutions, 3,987 schools, 135 media outlets. The number of clergy is 10 thousand 289 people, monastics - 4 thousand 807. According to the report of the Ministry of Culture of Ukraine, a third of all clergy, two thirds of all Orthodox parishes, three quarters of all students of theological educational institutions and almost all Orthodox monasticism belong to the UOC MP.

The Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate has 5 thousand 114 parishes, 60 monasteries, 18 religious educational institutions, 1 thousand 349 schools, 3 thousand 479 clergy, 219 monastics, 48 media. The largest number of parishes are in the Lvov (496) and Kyiv (423) regions, the least in the Lugansk and Kharkov regions (31 each).

The Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church has 1 thousand 195 parishes, 13 monasteries, eight religious educational institutions, 305 schools, 709 clergy, 21 monks, 12 media outlets. The largest number of parishes operate in the Lviv (388) and Ternopil (202) regions, the smallest - in the Donetsk (3) and Odessa (7).

Oppression of the canonical Orthodox Church in Ukraine

After the change of power in Ukraine in February 2014, the Kiev Patriarchate pursued an extremely aggressive policy towards the parishes of the Moscow Patriarchate, and the seizure of its churches became systemic. According to the UOC-MP, in 2014-2016 it lost 40 churches, which came under the control of the Kyiv Patriarchate. In 2017, 17 churches of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate were attacked by radicals, and since the beginning of 2018 there have already been 10 new attacks.

In 2016, two bills were submitted to the Verkhovna Rada - “On the status of religious organizations” and “On freedom of conscience and religious organizations”, according to which the UOC-MP could be banned, its parishes confiscated, and the activities of the church placed under state control.

The first bill, authored by representatives of the coalition of the Petro Poroshenko Bloc and the Popular Front, proposed appointing metropolitans and bishops only in agreement with the authorities. In addition, one of the articles of the document stated that if representatives of a confession cooperate with religious centers located in Russia, the authorities will have the right to completely ban its activities in Ukraine.

In the second draft, prepared by deputies of the Popular Front, Petro Poroshenko Bloc and Samopomich, parliamentarians proposed to legislatively regulate the membership of persons in a religious community. For example, define the term “self-identification” and clarify the minimum number of representatives of the religious community, by whose decision the subordination of churches to confessions can be changed.

More than 300 thousand citizens of Ukraine signed a demand to prevent the adoption of these documents in the Rada. Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Kirill (Gundyaev) appealed to the leaders of the Normandy Four countries (Russia, Ukraine, Germany and France), UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres and Pope Francis with an appeal to prevent discrimination against Orthodox Christians in Ukraine.

On May 18, 2017, under public pressure, the Rada postponed the discussion of the bills, but there were no official comments on the removal of documents from further consideration.

Attempts to create a local Orthodox Church in Ukraine

Since 1991, the Ukrainian authorities have repeatedly made attempts to create a local Orthodox Church, independent of the Moscow Patriarchate. In 2008, Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko tried to gain the support of Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople. But the Ecumenical Patriarch did not give his blessing to the canonical branch of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

After the coup in Ukraine in February 2014, the new authorities are trying to forcibly unite the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate with the schismatics and legalize this process legislatively. Poroshenko has previously repeatedly stated that he favors the creation of a single local church in Ukraine. On June 16, 2016, the Verkhovna Rada sent an appeal to the Ecumenical Patriarch with a request to grant autocephaly to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. At the beginning of 2018, Patriarch Bartholomew, at a meeting with representatives of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, emphasized that “problems of church unity can only be solved by canonical, and not political, methods.”

In April 2018, Poroshenko wrote a personal letter to Patriarch Bartholomew asking him to grant autocephaly to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. He also noted that his appeal was joined by representatives of the UOC-KP, as well as the UAOC.

On April 18, 2018, a bill in support of Poroshenko’s appeal was introduced by a group of deputies to the Verkhovna Rada.

(Uniates): the process of legalization of the Uniate Church in Western Ukraine took on the character of religious aggression against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and terror against Orthodox Christians in this region; illegal actions of the Uniates are not stopped by local authorities, but on the contrary, the latter, when transferring churches to the Uniates, make discriminatory decisions against Orthodox Christians; in such conditions, the Orthodox, under pressure from the Uniates and local authorities supporting them, not wanting to accept the union, are often forced to move to the so-called Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (UAOC).

In this regard, the episcopate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church adopted an Appeal to His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Rus' and the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church, which contained proposals designed to strengthen the authority of the hierarchy of the UOC for more active opposition to schismatics from the UAOC and the Uniates.

The Ukrainian Orthodox Church is granted independence and autonomy in its governance.

In this regard, the name “Ukrainian Exarchate” is abolished.

The Primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is elected by the Ukrainian episcopate and blessed by His Holiness the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'.

The Primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church bears the title “Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine.”

The Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Ukraine, within the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, is given the title “Most Beatitude.”

The Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine has the right to wear two panagias and present a cross during Divine services.

The Synod of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church elects and appoints ruling and suffragan bishops, establishes and abolishes dioceses within Ukraine.

The Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine, as the Primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, is a permanent member of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church.

This Determination of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church is subject to approval by the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church with the introduction of appropriate changes to the Charter on the governance of the Russian Orthodox Church.

UOC under Filaret (Denisenko)

Soon three bishops - Bishops of Chernivtsi Onufry (Berezovsky), Ternopil Sergius (Gensitsky) and Donetsk Alypiy (Pogrebnyak) - disavowed their signatures under Appeal. The next day, January 23, by decision of the Synod of the UOC they were removed from their departments.

The Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church, held on February 18-19, adopted an appeal to Metropolitan Philaret and the episcopate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church with the demand “ Immediately reconsider the decision of the Ukrainian Synod of January 23 in order to bring peace to the hearts of the brother bishops and to their grieving flock, who are now crying out for justice in the Church. This will preserve church peace and the unity of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church».

Split

In connection with numerous non-canonical interventions of the Moscow Patriarchate in the internal affairs of our Church and on the basis that Ukraine became an independent state on December 1, 1991, we bring to the attention of Your Holiness that the Act of 1686 on the transfer of the Kyiv Metropolis to the Moscow Patriarchate ceases to be valid.

We turn to Your Holiness with hope that you will take this into account and take the necessary actions to canonically streamline the current situation of our Church.

Kharkov Cathedral

Fulfilling the Decree of the Holy Synod of May 21, Metropolitan Nikodim (Rusnak) of Kharkov and Bogodukhov, on May 27 convened and headed the Council of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which, based on its location, went down in the history of the UOC as Kharkov.

On May 14, Metropolitan Nikodim sent Philaret a letter in which he asked him to fulfill his promise and convene a Council of Bishops “for the sake of peace in our Church.” But there was no answer.

17 archpastors arrived at the Bishops' Conference.

The Council made some changes and additions to the Charter of the UOC concerning the procedure for electing and the status of the Primate of the UOC; The composition of the Synod of the UOC was also expanded - to seven people, four of whom are permanent. The name of the state within which the UOC carries out its mission was changed. In their actions, making changes and additions to Charter on the governance of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, the Council of Bishops was guided by Section XIV, paragraph 2 of the previously valid Charter, which stated: “The Council of Bishops has the right to make corrections to this Charter, with subsequent approval by the Council of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.”

The main act of the Kharkov Council was the expression of no confidence in Metropolitan Philaret, his removal from the Kyiv See, from the post of Primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and his inclusion as a staff member in connection with the failure to fulfill the oath promise to resign from the post of Primate of the Ukrainian Church, given by him at the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church on March 31 - 5 April 1992. This act was committed in the absence of Metropolitan Philaret, who refused to attend the Council of Bishops of the UOC and ignored the calls repeatedly sent to him. For committing schismatic actions, the Council, as a pre-trial measure, banned Metropolitan Philaret from serving in the priesthood until the final decision on this issue by the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church.

After this, on the basis of Section V, paragraphs. 12.13 of the Charter, the election of a new primate of the UOC took place. In the second round, Metropolitan Vladimir (Sabodan) received 16 votes and was elected Metropolitan of Kyiv and Primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

Under Metropolitan Vladimir (Sabodan)

Being in canonical unity with the Moscow Patriarchate, we have a real opportunity to influence its church policy, which is in no way possible to do from the outside. At the same time, the UOC, together with the Russian Orthodox Church, represents the largest jurisdiction with an influential and authoritative voice in the Orthodox world. In addition, our canonical unity makes an invaluable contribution to the creation of friendly relations between Ukraine and Russia and is the key to peace and stability - both between states and within them. If the political forces in Ukraine cannot take advantage of the opportunities of the UOC on issues in which our interests coincide, then this happens not through its weakness or connection with Moscow, but through the lack of a constructive dialogue with the Church. Unfortunately, our opponents are not able to think long term, since their thoughts turned out to be locked within the narrow boundaries of the primitive Bolshevik-nationalist worldview or the commercialism of Western ideology.

The Primate of the UOC is elected by the Ukrainian episcopate and blessed by the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'. The Primate of the UOC is a member of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church, and the Ukrainian episcopate participates in the Bishops' and Local Councils of the Russian Orthodox Church, in the elections of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'.

According to the Charter of the UOC, the highest bodies of church power and administration of the UOC are: the Council of the UOC, the Council of Bishops of the UOC (Council of Bishops) and the Holy Synod of the UOC chaired by the Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Ukraine.

With the exception of three regions of Galicia (Lviv, Ivano-Frankivsk and Ternopil), the UOC is the dominant denomination throughout the country.

Discussion around the issue of canonical autocephaly and the boundaries of autonomy

At the end of 2007, a discussion arose due to the fact that assumptions began to be made that the hierarchy of the UOC was seeking to legally obtain autocephaly. The main ideologist of obtaining “canonical autocephaly” of the UOC from the Moscow Patriarchate is usually considered Bishop of Pereyaslav-Khmelnitsky (since December 19, 2007) Alexander (Drabinko), vicar of the Kyiv diocese; he himself rejects such suspicions. Archpriest Maxim Khizhiy (cleric of the Vladimir diocese) believes that “the question of autocephaly of the UOC is a problem of time, and of the immediate future.” On February 4, 2008, the Moscow newspaper “Moskovsky Komsomolets” published an interview with Bishop Alexander (Drabinko), in which he, in particular, said: “Opinions on this matter among believers of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church are different.<...>As for the Bishops' Councils of the UOC, they spoke out on this matter a long time ago. Today this issue is not on the agenda.”

In connection with the approval of the Charter of the Russian Orthodox Church by the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church in January 2009, paragraph 18 of Chapter VIII of which states that “in its life and activities, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is guided by the Tomos of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' of 1990 and the Charter of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which is approved by its Primate and is accepted by the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus',” the Ukrainian newspaper “Segodnya” wrote that this status of the UOC “sets it apart from the list of other self-governing Churches within the Moscow Patriarchate that do not have expanded rights.”

At the end of the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, Metropolitan Vladimir (Sabodan) answered the journalist’s question: “Do you still need autocephalous status or not?”: “This status should crown all our efforts. But first we need to achieve unity. Any status can be approved, acceptable or unacceptable.<…>»

UOC and the Ukrainian state

During the Kharkov Council in May, the administration of President Kravchuk supported Mister Filaret (Denisenko) and, according to Mister Nikodim, put direct pressure on him.

The UOC is in conflicting relations with other Orthodox Churches officially registered in Ukraine - the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate and the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church. From time to time, reports appear about the claims of these churches to the premises and property of the UOC and even about the seizure of parishes.

After Victor Yushchenko's victory in the presidential election, Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Alexy II expressed concerns about maintaining the church status quo in Ukraine.

The UOC has a negative attitude towards the “joint prayers” of representatives of different jurisdictions, which became popular under V. Yushchenko.

The Council of Bishops of the UOC, held at the end of January 2007, expressed bewilderment regarding the proposal of the President of Ukraine to “sit down at the negotiating table with false shepherds.” The bishops of the UOC decided to create a commission that will receive letters of repentance from representatives of the Kyiv Patriarchate “who wish to return to the fold of the canonical Orthodox Church.” For its part, the Synod of the UOC-KP at its meeting on February 28 reacted favorably to V. Yushchenko’s appeal regarding the possibility of dialogue with the UOC.

According to media reports, the brother of Ukrainian President V. Yushchenko, Verkhovna Rada deputy Petr Yushchenko, headed a public organization For local Ukraine, which will deal with the issues of unifying Ukrainian Orthodoxy and creating a single local church.

At the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church held at the end of June 2008, Patriarch Alexy II in his report to the Council on June 24 stated: “<…>The schism of Ukrainian Orthodoxy arose precisely as a result of the invasion of political elements into church life.” And Vsevolod Chaplin, in his expert report, said about the situation in Ukraine: “It is impossible not to recognize the existence of an active and direct church-state dialogue in Ukraine. At the same time, government authorities - both at the central and local levels - provide significant assistance in resolving practical problems of the Church, including the construction and reconstruction of temple buildings, the establishment of the cultural, educational and social mission of the Church. At the same time, alarming news is coming from Ukraine. In particular, numerous appeals are received from clergy and laity who ask His Holiness the Patriarch to protect the unity of the Church, which they value and which they are ready to defend even in the most difficult circumstances. When heard repeatedly, including from the lips of the President of Ukraine V.A. Yushchenko, assurances that the state does not intend to interfere in church life and decide for believers which churches they should go to, there are many cases of pressure from state bodies at the central and regional level on the choice of believers. In these circumstances, the hierarchy of our Church has repeatedly emphasized that the politicization of church problems and attempts to cope with them by secular methods inevitably lead only to even greater difficulties in resolving existing difficulties. The most likely consequence of political interference in the sensitive sphere of church life may be the destabilization of the social situation.” At the same Council, on June 25, Metropolitan Vladimir, in particular, said: “We are pleased that the state in Ukraine is concerned about the problem of church schism and considers overcoming it one of its priorities. At the same time, the active participation of the state in resolving church problems sometimes has negative sides. The state’s intentions may be good, but the ways in which they are implemented can lead to even more serious consequences when old schisms are replaced by new ones. The threat of precisely this development of the situation arises when representatives of state authorities ignore the position of the largest Church in Ukraine and take certain actions aimed at healing the schism, without its knowledge, without consulting its Primate. In such cases, we consider the actions of our government to be unauthorized and beyond the limits provided for by the Constitution of Ukraine in the field of church-state relations.”

Dioceses of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church

Notes

Moscow Patriarchate (UOC-MP), which, as is known, is part of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) with rights of broad autonomy. I understood the situation.

Essence of the question

The Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate is the only canonical church in Ukraine recognized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate. 39 percent, that is, the majority of Ukrainian Orthodox Christians are parishioners of the Moscow Patriarchate. There is another denomination - the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate (UOC-KP), which was denied canonical status. The UOC-KP is considered an alternative Orthodoxy (in religious terminology this is called a schism, that is, a split, a schism of the church).

How do the Churches of the Moscow and Kyiv Patriarchates differ in practice and why is the first recognized as canonical and the second not? A person who enters Ukrainian churches once or twice a year to light a candle will not find any differences, but they exist, and significant ones. The Moscow Patriarchate, for example, does not accept a free interpretation of prayer, or the invention of new icons or frescoes. It is unacceptable for clergy and parishioners of the UOC-MP to pray for the repose of a conditional enemy - more precisely, they do not define enemies in principle, which cannot be said about the UOC-KP. Also, the Moscow Patriarchate conducts services in Church Slavonic, and the Kiev Patriarchate - in Ukrainian, translating the Holy Scriptures in its own way. But the key difference is that the founder of the UOC-MP is considered. The Church is in unity with Ecumenical Orthodoxy, with common sacraments, while the Kiev Patriarchate recognizes only those sacraments that it likes.

It was precisely in order to subjugate the objectionable faith that Ukrainian politicians developed a bill oppressing the UOC-MP. They decided to oblige the Moscow Patriarchate to obtain consent from the state for the appointment of priests and abbots up to the regional level. The Church will also have to receive approval for visits and approve the composition of foreign delegations coming to Ukraine for preaching activities. And the parishes, of which there are, according to various sources, from 12.5 to 14 thousand in the country, after the adoption of the bill, will have to enter into some kind of agreement with the authorities.

Remove Kirill from prayers

What will be the subject of this document is not disclosed. However, it is known that it stipulates conditions that oblige the UOC-MP to “respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity and laws of Ukraine.” What could we be talking about? That the UOC-MP completely loses its independence, and that the name of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Kirill is not mentioned in prayers. - guarantor of the canonicity of the UOC MP. If the name of His Holiness is removed from the prayers, then parishes of many thousands will lose their canonicity, and at the same time their dogmatic provisions, rituals and teachings. According to a source in the UOC-MP, who spoke to Lenta.ru on condition of anonymity, this is exactly what Ukrainian politicians want.

Photo: Anatoly Stepanov / ZUMA Press / Globallookpress.com

“First they will tell us: don’t pray for Patriarch Kirill. Then, I do not exclude this, they will be forced to include words for the health of the servant of God Peter [President Poroshenko] in the prayer service. Then they will be forced to paint the walls of the monasteries with flags (Ukrainian Insurgent Army, banned in Russia). And if this or that bishop refuses, they will push him to the wall and ban the activities of the parish,” our interlocutor believes.

At least the last statement of the Lenta.ru source can be officially confirmed. According to the bill, all parishes of the Moscow Patriarchate will indeed have to undergo the re-registration procedure and obtain the opinion of certain independent experts. If they do not fulfill the conditions of the government experts, they will not be able to function in the future. According to the chairman of the legal department of the Church, Archpriest Alexander Bakhov, this is aimed primarily at interfering in the activities of the UOC. A similar opinion is shared by Oleg Denisov, a human rights activist from the public organization “Orthodox Ukraine”. “Trying to actually legalize the scheme of political pressure on religious organizations, the authors of the bill created an illogical and erroneous cocktail of legal norms, the application of which is impossible in practice,” Denisov believes.

At the same time, we should not forget that in addition to the spiritual aspect and faith, we are also talking about completely material things. According to statistics, the UOC-MP now has 45 dioceses, over 12 thousand parishes, 20 educational institutions, three laurels and 183 monasteries, in which more than 4.5 thousand monks live. These are tens of thousands of buildings, structures and other religious structures with expensive decoration, luxurious utensils, rich iconostasis and unique holy images. If translated into money, these are cosmic amounts. The schismatic UOC-KP, led by Metropolitan Filaret, who once declared himself “the Patriarch of Kyiv and All Rus'-Ukraine,” has long had its eye on all this wealth.

Photo: Yuri Martyanov / Kommersant

Deny cannot be allowed

Experts from the Verkhovna Rada commissions also agree that the bill is unconstitutional. This time they couldn't help but notice the obvious. In particular, their conclusions indicate that “there is reason to believe that the agreement [between UCM MP and the state] may contain an opaque list of obligations.” Experts also point out that at present, the norms of the Criminal Code of Ukraine clearly define the responsibility that comes for encroaching on the territorial integrity and inviolability of Ukraine. And the Law of Ukraine “On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations” already spells out the principles of interaction between religious organizations that conduct their activities in the country.

The commission concludes its conclusions as follows: “The bill restricts the right to freedom of worldview and religion, contains signs of discrimination and divides citizens of Ukraine on religious grounds. The adoption of this project could lead to new conflicts in the country’s social and religious environment, and would also have a negative impact on the international image of Ukraine.”

But if the violations of the bill and its anti-constitutional trail are so obvious, why is the Rada bringing it up for consideration? The second half of May and June promise to become very hot in the Ukrainian parliament and politics in general. The post-Maidan Ukrainian government sometimes receives loans from various authoritative organizations - it topped the rating of the most corrupt states. Now the authorities are preparing for the next controversial step: allowing the sale of agricultural land. The constant increase in tariffs for housing and communal services, the rise in prices for gasoline, medicines, bread and other goods and services add fuel to the fire.

In such a situation, the threat of destruction of the parishes of the main denomination of the country is a reason to divert attention. The political technology is clear: national radicals, hiding behind icons, will demand the closure of “pro-Moscow” churches throughout the country. Ukrainian citizens will stand up for the defense of their parishes, priests, and spiritual mentors. Meanwhile, the authorities will quietly pass a package of laws in parliament, because of which the people will become even more impoverished. There are already enough examples of UOC-MP churches being captured by nationalist groups banned in Russia. In different regions of Ukraine, radicals have religious buildings, beat parishioners and forcibly transfer churches to the Kyiv Patriarchate.

And the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church, which contained proposals designed to strengthen the authority of the hierarchy of the UOC for more active opposition to schismatics from the UAOC and the Uniates.

The Ukrainian Orthodox Church is granted independence and autonomy in its governance.

In this regard, the name “Ukrainian Exarchate” is abolished.

The Primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is elected by the Ukrainian episcopate and blessed by His Holiness the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'.

The Primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church bears the title “Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine.”

The Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Ukraine, within the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, is given the title “Most Beatitude.”

The Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine has the right to wear two panagias and present a cross during Divine services.

The Synod of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church elects and appoints ruling and suffragan bishops, establishes and abolishes dioceses within Ukraine.

The Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine, as the Primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, is a permanent member of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church.

This Determination of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church is subject to approval by the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church with the introduction of appropriate changes to the Charter on the governance of the Russian Orthodox Church.

UOC under Filaret (Denisenko)

Split

In connection with numerous non-canonical interventions of the Moscow Patriarchate in the internal affairs of our Church and on the basis that Ukraine became an independent state on December 1, 1991, we bring to the attention of Your Holiness that the Act of 1686 on the transfer of the Kyiv Metropolis to the Moscow Patriarchate ceases to be valid.

We turn to Your Holiness with hope that you will take this into account and take the necessary actions to canonically streamline the current situation of our Church.

Kharkov Cathedral

17 archpastors arrived at the Bishops' Conference.

Under Metropolitan Vladimir (Sabodan)

Being in canonical unity with the Moscow Patriarchate, we have a real opportunity to influence its church policy, which is in no way possible to do from the outside. At the same time, the UOC, together with the Russian Orthodox Church, represents the largest jurisdiction with an influential and authoritative voice in the Orthodox world. In addition, our canonical unity makes an invaluable contribution to the creation of friendly relations between Ukraine and Russia and is the key to peace and stability - both between states and within them. If the political forces in Ukraine cannot take advantage of the opportunities of the UOC on issues in which our interests coincide, then this happens not through its weakness or connection with Moscow, but through the lack of a constructive dialogue with the Church. Unfortunately, our opponents are not able to think long term, since their thoughts turned out to be locked within the narrow boundaries of the primitive Bolshevik-nationalist worldview or the commercialism of Western ideology.

With the exception of three regions of Galicia (Lviv, Ivano-Frankivsk and Ternopil), the UOC is the dominant denomination throughout the country.

Discussion around the issue of canonical autocephaly and the boundaries of autonomy

UOC and the Ukrainian state

During the Kharkov Council in May, the administration of President Kravchuk supported Mister Filaret (Denisenko) and, according to Mister Nikodim, put direct pressure on him.

After Victor Yushchenko's victory in the presidential election, Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Alexy II expressed concerns about maintaining the church status quo in Ukraine.

The UOC has a negative attitude towards the “joint prayers” of representatives of different jurisdictions, which became popular under V. Yushchenko.

Dioceses of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church

Notes

Verkhovna Rada deputy Dmitry Tymchuk, who initiated a bill on the expulsion of “separatists from Orthodoxy” – the UOC (MP), called the churches of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate “propaganda points against Ukrainian statehood.” At the same time, it is appropriate to call the pro-Kiev schismatics of Metropolitan Philaret (Denisenko) real separatists, who can now grab an unprecedented jackpot, because all the property of the expelled Orthodox “Muscovites” will fall into their hands. The Ukrainian authorities, who are toying with the idea of creating a “single local church” cut off from Moscow, will also receive their dividends. But for Patriarch Kirill, what is happening may end with a sudden “retirement.” And who knows what other consequences the expulsion of the UOC (MP) from Ukraine will entail?

Vadim Novinsky, people's deputy of Ukraine, sponsor of the UOC (MP)
– I consider attempts to push laws No. 4511 and No. 4128 through the Rada as anti-church, anti-state, and anti-Ukrainian. These laws are capable of causing civil war on religious grounds. They allow the authorities to carry out raider seizures of church property and ban objectionable denominations. And, as we know from history, the most merciless and bloody wars arose precisely on religious grounds. Over the past three years, more than 45 churches have been seized and transferred under the jurisdiction of the Kyiv Patriarchate. This is being done illegally, we have seen how priests are beaten and parishes are robbed. But these were isolated conflicts, and now there will be hundreds, thousands of them.

Russian-Ukrainian political scientist Rostislav Ishchenko, who fled from Kyiv, called the attempt to ban the UOC (MP) “evidence of the transition of the conflict in Ukraine into a new, more violent phase of the civil war” and “its transformation into a religious war.” But most likely the expert is puffing out his cheeks, and in reality nothing special will happen. And the ritual on the topic of the fact that parishioners of the UOC (MP) in the country are the majority and they certainly will not tolerate bullying of their church are empty words. By the way, there has never been a single case in which parishioners of the UOC (MP) recaptured a church on their own that had been captured by schismatics or autocephalists. Meek lambs, not parishioners. They run to the slaughter ahead of the slaughterers.

But it’s time to ask the question: how did it happen that the parishioners of the “Moscow Church” in Ukraine are so divided and weak-willed? And whose fault is this – is it not Patriarch Kirill? Who, if not he, called his Ukrainian flock to humility? So now they are wiping themselves off, exposing their cheeks to slaps. Meanwhile, bill No. 4511, introduced to the Rada with the remarkable title “On the special status of religious organizations whose leadership centers are located in a state recognized by the Verkhovna Rada as an aggressor,” makes it possible to begin an unprecedented “derivation” of the church property of the UOC (MP). Three laurels, 183 monasteries, 12 thousand parishes, 20 educational institutions, plus all Crimean church property. Yes, yes, it is still on the balance sheet of the UOC (MP), and not at all the Russian Orthodox Church, as is commonly believed. Truly a tasty morsel! And the schismatics of Filaret (Denisenko) and their fellow travelers from the autocephalous church are already licking their lips at him. One way or another, they will get the lion’s share, because it is on the basis of these two churches in Ukraine that a single local church is being created through the efforts of Petro Poroshenko and his Maidan workers. Poroshenko has far-reaching plans for it - it is she who, apparently, will have to proclaim a “holy war” with Russia. Following the schismatics of Denisenko - they have already called for a “holy war”, but their authority is not the same.

So far, consideration of the bill has been temporarily postponed - there are not enough votes for adoption. But in a week or two they will certainly return to voting: the Speaker of the Rada, a notorious Russophobe, Andrei Parubiy, has this tactic. There weren't enough votes today - enough tomorrow. So the expulsion of the UOC (MP) from Ukraine is almost a done deal. But what will be the consequences of this expulsion?

Version 1

Kyiv will receive its own church, separate from Moscow

The only reason why the Ukrainian authorities did not favor Denisenko’s schismatics (and at the same time the autocephalousists) was their non-recognition by Archbishop Bartholomew of Constantinople. The Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, an integral part of the Russian Orthodox Church, is the only canonical church in Ukraine recognized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate. No matter how intriguing the schismatics were, demanding to cancel the act of 1686 on the transfer of the Kyiv Metropolis to the Moscow Patriarchate, there was no reaction from Constantinople. But a subtle hint followed: create a local church in the country, gather all Orthodox Christians together, and we will recognize you. The schismatic and autocephalous churches instantly agreed to this, but their support group turned out to be too worthless. Now, if you were to take away believers from the UOC (MP), then it would be a different matter! The official ban on the “Muscovite church” is a historic chance for those who dream of a local church in Ukraine. Petro Poroshenko is one of these dreamers. If he achieved a visa-free regime with Europe, he will also achieve a local church, because, in fact, no one opposes his plans.

Version 2

Parishioners of the UOC (MP) face persecution, and churches face pogroms

“Ultimately, there will be no Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine,” the RT channel quotes “a source in the administration of the President of Ukraine.” What will happen? And there will be pogroms, the vicar of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus', Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk, is convinced: “Raider seizures of churches of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, against which a full-scale war is being waged, will actually be legalized. More than 40 temples have already been captured. If previously the canonical community filed a lawsuit and won the trial, now any group of people can declare themselves to belong to one or another schismatic community and seize the temple.” Well, if it still fails to “squeeze” the temple through the courts, it can be easily destroyed, without any risk of ending up in jail. “Temples were captured before, priests were beaten, killed, forced to emigrate,” explains Rostislav Ishchenko, “but these were interpreted as excesses. And voting to ban the UOC (MP) legalizes the pogromists. This is a reason to fight."

Version 3

Patriarch Kirill will leave the post of Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church (MP)

A year and a half ago, Vsevolod Chaplin, who was fired from his post as head of the Synodal Department for Relations between Church and Society, prophesied that Patriarch Kirill would have to leave, including in connection with the Ukrainian events. Last fall, Kirill’s early departure was again discussed - not because of Ukraine, however, but in connection with a scandal involving the church bank Peresvet. But it was then that the patriarch was first reminded of his position on reunification with Crimea - Kirill was absent from the Kremlin’s St. George’s Hall during Vladimir Putin’s famous “Crimean speech.” And now, opponents of rapprochement with the Roman Curia within the Russian Orthodox Church are again demanding the removal of the patriarch - for abandoning the Ukrainian laity to the mercy of fate. The problem is that it’s too late for Kirill to make any sudden moves; he seems to have already given up Kyiv. All that remains is to leave - either now and voluntarily, or a little later, but forcibly.