The UOC-MP is itself very nervous about the possibility of the two non-canonical Orthodox groups uniting together and with very good reason.
It cannot know what the EP will do in relation to this united Church. But the fact remains that the EP had its observers at the meetings and bishops from the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church-EP in Canada and the USA were there as well (quite the change from the time when the KP was in Toronto and the UOC-EP Metropolitan ordered his priests to not even "be in the same area" as him etc.)
In addition, should this united Ukrainian Orthodox church be recognized as canonical somehow, the fact is that the Ukrainian Orthodox in the diaspora will be in communion with it immediately.
Also, it is a fact that many Ukrainians who are in the UOC-MP are disgruntled with their new Metropolitan for his clearly anti-Ukrainian stance (which he evinced well before he became the UOC Primate).
The "last straw" was really when he and his entourage made a public demonstration "for peace" in the Ukraine parliament by refusing to stand in honour of the military heroes being honoured at that time. Representatives of the Muslim community and other non-Christian faiths were there and stood, but not the Ukrainian Orthodox Primate.
And when he became Metropolitan, the first thing he did was to remove a number of Ukrainians within the Church from their former responsible posts (e.g. Metropolitan Alexander (Drabenko) who was Metropolitan Vladimir's - +memory eternal - assistant/secretary).
In this time of conflict especially, Ukrainian Orthodox in the UOC-MP are not happy. In some of their parishes, they have taken to NOT mentioning the name of the Moscow Patriarch during the Liturgies - one such Liturgy was recently televised on Ukrainian stations.
And the fact that one Eparchy of the UAOC in EASTERN Ukraine has opened unity talks with the . . . Ukrainian Catholic Church - even though there are other mitigating circumstances for this - is another indication that something is rotten in the state of the UOC-MP in general.
The Ukrainian government really does appear to want to have a national Orthodox Church, just as Russia and others have. One frequently sees interviews in Ukrainian government media with the UOC-KP leader to the exclusion of others. There is plenty of government and other pressure from a number of quarters for Orthodox church unity that is both canonical but also independent of Moscow. There can be no doubt that the Ukrainian government is also involved in negotiations with the EP on this matter.
And this is all Moscow's worst nightmare.
IF such a project comes to fruition, one cannot rule out the impact such a united, canonical Orthodox Church will have on the UGCC. There can also be no doubt that there are and will be Eastern Catholics who will then consider leaving the UGCC for the united Orthodox Church.
As I see it, anyway.
Alex
Last edited by Orthodox Catholic; 06/13/1507:04 PM.
IF such a project comes to fruition, one cannot rule out the impact such a united, canonical Orthodox Church will have on the UGCC. There can also be no doubt that there are and will be Eastern Catholics who will then consider leaving the UGCC for the united Orthodox Church.
There are those in the UGCC who want unity with other Ukrainian Orthodox.
The Union of Brest and its aftermath divided our people into warring camps. They anathematized each other for being "heretics" or "schismatics." They spent lots of time writing and spreading literature against each other (i.e. "Trenos" and other works by Archbishop Meletius Smotritsky at whose main instigation St Josaphat was martyred - something that morally destroyed Smotritsky etc.).
Other nations where there are both EC's and Orthodox didn't have that terrible experience - but the Ruthenian Churches were all about that.
Up until recently, there was always an "issue" with Orthodox and EC's in our community. When my mother-in-law speaks about other people, she will name someone and then add, "She's Orthodox" which means, in effect, "You don't want to get too close to that person."
This split affects Ukrainians in Ukraine today, even though the two camps are much closer than they were. I asked a friend there to get me an Orthodox calendar. To do this, he had to go to an Orthodox church and when he introduced himself and said, "I'm Ukrainian Catholic" the priest said, "You are a Ukrainian renegade and traitor!"
There are those members of the UGCC who just see in a united Ukrainian Church many good benefits as a result . . .
If a "national Orthodox Church" based in Kyiv were to come about, they would not hesitate to join it. There are those who see the UGCC as an essentially Orthodox Church that came under Rome out of historic necessity (for example, this was the approach of the Orthodox Kievan Metropolitan Anthony Khrapovitsky at a time when many intelligentsia in Galicia decided to leave their EC Church and become Orthodox - this has happened before, you see).
Once that perceived necessity is no longer there, and it isn't, what would keep the Ukrainian Catholics from joining a united Ukrainian Orthodox Church based on Kyiv? Many would do it out of "patriotic reasons" or for reasons based on unity as such (remember that EC's form only 9% of the population of Ukraine today).
At a recent parish round-table discussion, I met numerous parishioners who have children who have married Orthodox partners and who now attend Orthodox parishes. The differences between us are always played down i.e. "We are all Orthodox! We must put our Ukrainian issues first! (meaning internal unity)" and the like. I hear it all the time.
Ukrainian Catholics, at one time, thought that all of Ukraine would want to be EC after the fall of the Soviets. Well, not even all of Galicia returned to ECism . . .
Of course, the divisions and issues within Ukrainian Orthodoxy today keep members of the UGCC from even considering this as a possibility even indefinitely. They too believe, with the UOC-MP, that such unity will never occur and there never will be a "national Orthodox Church" as a result. Today, people are not so sure any more (including the UOC-MP who were practically smug in their confidence that this would never be a reality). The ground has shifted overnight.
We shall see what happens in the coming months . . .
I understand the history you described but with the recent forty plus years of persecution and martyrdom suffered by the UGCC, with at times the Orthodox support, I just find it hard to believe that a large segment of the Catholics would join the Orthodox Church. Now, if full union was restored with Rome and a united Orthodox Church in Ukraine that would be a different story. Our martyrs died for their fidelity to Roman communion, I am surprised it would be give up so fast.
Actually, I never said the majority of EC's might go over to the proposed united Orthodox Church - there would be those in Ukraine who would.
I would also question the full extent of the view that Ukrainian Catholics were martyred for loyalty to Rome.
Rome figured in that martyrdom yes. But they suffered and died for "our Church" or their Particular Ukrainian Church that happened to be Catholic and whose Catholicity was one of the distinguishing characteristics of that Church.
Actually, I never said the majority of EC's might go over to the proposed united Orthodox Church - there would be those in Ukraine who would.
I would also question the full extent of the view that Ukrainian Catholics were martyred for loyalty to Rome.
Rome figured in that martyrdom yes. But they suffered and died for "our Church" or their Particular Ukrainian Church that happened to be Catholic and whose Catholicity was one of the distinguishing characteristics of that Church.
Alex
My goodness, the term "our church" or "naša cerkov" is incredibly familiar to my sixty one year old ears. That was the "Faith" of my grandparents, the "Ruthenians" (a/k/a Rusyns) south of the Tatras who never adopted the Ukrainian identity of their cousins north and east of them. Alex is spot on. Both those who remained Greek Catholic and those who left to the Orthodox were fighting over loyalty to "naša cerkov"and how to best preserve it rather than allegiance to abstract theological loyalty to Rome or the Orthodox. Who would break fewer promises would win the loyalty of most. And that has plagued both the BCC and ACROD for decades even though today, those things do matter. I suspect that many of my Lemko and Galician friends are as Alex notes. (I would except the period of the forced liquidation of the Greek Catholics under the Communists to be clear.)
And that was why the late Metropolitan Nicholas of thrice blessed memory had no problem on the Sunday he established the Synaxis of the Saints of Karpatska Rus some ten years ago took time to note and pray for two saints of the Rusyns he could not include in the icon he commissioned because we do remain divided. They were of course the Bishop Martyrs Pavel and Teodor....( ironic in that an Orthodox bishop acknowledged their saintliness while Rome still dawdles...)
If this does go ahead, it would be interesting to see how the other sister Churches will react and whose side they will take on. It would be also interesting to see how this could effect the ongoing issues in Macedonia as well.
Yes, you are the one who has so articulately expressed the crux of the matter!
As one former Soviet dissident said, "Our people did not know the difference between a Catholic and an Orthodox Church. They did, however, know the difference between their 'own' Church and what was foreign to them."
This also explains why when the Soviet Union fell, Galicia did not completely go EC. But the indepedent UAOC and UOC-KP maintained their strong sense of being "our Church" and so that is where many went after leaving the MP.
The struggle for church unity there will, as it always has, be based on which Church is more "our Church" in that sense. It could very well be that the UGCC will continue to maintain itself on that basis - again, we shall have to see how this "ecclesial social physics" works itself out.
Alex
Last edited by Orthodox Catholic; 06/15/1509:14 AM.
An overlooked aspect of this issue is the spiritual care of the over 50,000 ethnic Russians in Turkey who have been moving there since in 1990's. If the EP makes a move in Ukraine which the the MP views as its canonical territory, the MP may move their bishop on the ecclesiastical chessboard into Turkey which the EP views as its canonical territory.
Primate Makariy (Maletych) suggests that the announced unification with the Kyiv Patriarchate may fail to occur. The reason is that the UOC-KP, as Metropolitan Makariy claims, does not agree that a combined name of the church shall include the word ‘autocephalous’. The UAOC, in turn, disagrees with the principle of representative delegates to the unification council, whereby their clergymen will have fewer votes.
UAOC Primate Makariy (Maletych) was reported as saying this in an interview with Liga Business Inform.
“Now the UAOC demands are quite moderate: making a combined name of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church-Kyiv Patriarchate and leaving all bishops in their place, and then we’ll see. It would be a real step towards the establishment of a local church, a step to unification. But that is not going to happen,” he said.
“It is not going to happen, as patriarch Filaret has already stated in an interview, there will be no combined name. He wants to retain their name –the Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Kyiv Patriarchate, while we are just to join. Last week a joint commission agreed that the final decision would be madeat the unification council on September14. If the representation at the Council were 50 to 50, there would be no questions. However, if it is the proportion suggested, based on parishes, they will be four hundred and we will be two hundred. What kind of decision will it be?” the hierarch continues.
Metropolitan Makariy says that now, in the follow-up of this Patriarch Filaret’s interview, the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church will hold a new diocesan meeting.
"If the majority of priests and parishioners take part in them and say they are ready to unite even under such Filaret’s conditions, on the basis of quota –be it so... If the diocesan council decide by majority vote not to support such a quota, it may fail to happen,” the clergyman said.
“Negotiations on a combined title will continue. I was ready for this. In Lviv, Rivne, Volyn regions I offered to answer three questions at the meeting. Would you agree to unite with the UOC-KP? Everyone said yes. Do you agree, as it as originally proposed and the government supported that the Kyiv Patriarchate will be the official name and the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church will be the unofficial one? No one supported. Do you agree to combine names? Everyone said yes, both at deanery and diocesan meetings,” UAOC Primate says.
“Now the UAOC demands are quite moderate: making a combined name of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church-Kyiv Patriarchate and leaving all bishops in their place, and then we’ll see. It would be a real step towards the establishment of a local church, a step to unification. But that is not going to happen,” he said.
“It is not going to happen, as patriarch Filaret has already stated in an interview, there will be no combined name. He wants to retain their name –the Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Kyiv Patriarchate, while we are just to join. Last week a joint commission agreed that the final decision would be madeat the unification council on September14. If the representation at the Council were 50 to 50, there would be no questions. However, if it is the proportion suggested, based on parishes, they will be four hundred and we will be two hundred. What kind of decision will it be?” the hierarch continues.
Metropolitan Makariy says that now, in the follow-up of this Patriarch Filaret’s interview, the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church will hold a new diocesan meeting.
"If the majority of priests and parishioners take part in them and say they are ready to unite even under such Filaret’s conditions, on the basis of quota –be it so... If the diocesan council decide by majority vote not to support such a quota, it may fail to happen,” the clergyman said.
Really? No union because they can't agree on a name? The body of Christ will be divided because of a name. My head hurts over this one.
The Byzantine Forum provides
message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though
discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are
those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the
Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the
www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial,
have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as
a source for official information for any Church. All posts become
property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2024 (Forum 1998-2024). All rights
reserved.
Never heard that one before. 
