Journey of the Kiev Patriarchate delegation to Phanar: much ado about nothing?

On 15 January an official site of the “Kiev Patriarchate” published a message about a purported trip of the UOC KP delegation to Istanbul, where a meeting was held with the members of the Constantinople Patriarchate Commission on “church autocephaly in Ukraine.” At the same time, there are no photos or video materials in the message to prove it to be real.

It’s hard to believe that spokesmen of the Kiev Patriarchate lost their chance to herald about this meeting to the whole world. If this event were official, then site of the Ecumenical Patriarchate would certainly place some information accompanied by photo reports. However, there is still nothing published about this event, though it is five days now since the meeting took place.

One can wait till the information of KP schismatics has been officially confirmed or refuted, or assume there was no meeting at all. Another assumption is the meeting was informal and, thus, not binding. Let’s underscore that even according to the announcements on the UOC KP site, the hypothetical meeting went without Patriarch Bartholomew.

There are no details as for the reported conversation we might infer from the message, which can also indicate its fake character. If the talks between the UOC KP delegation and Synod members of the Constantinople Patriarchate were truly “long”, as the author writes, it would mean the Phanar counterparts also spoke about something, stated, expressed their agreement or inquired on something. In other words, they would give more footholds to make publicity for this meeting. However, it was apparently confined to just one message: “the issue is complicated, we’ll search for the best avenues to sort out this problem and we’ll tell your proposals to Patriarch Bartholomew.”

Assumedly, if the meeting did take place, it was short-run, and Philaret’s messengers just managed to complain about the Moscow Patriarchate they detest so much and demonstrate boot-licking to flatter the Ecumenical Patriarch, in other words – to grovel him.
One couldn’t help smiling at the utterance that Kiev Patriarchate “unlike the ROC, acceded officially to the decisions of the Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church, held in Crete in June of the last year.” The word “unlike” is a telling example of groveling. If we decode it, we’ll get the following summary: “Moscow Patriarchate does not support you, goes against the Ecumenical Patriarch, while we are ready to serve you faithfully and loyally, if you recognize us.”

True though, there is one moment – the UOC KP could not “officially accede to the Council decisions” anyhow, since it did not take part in its preparing, convening and holding, i.e. the Kiev Patriarchate was not an official participant of the Crete Council, unlike the Russian Orthodox Church, which actively participated in the Council preparation and elaboration of all its documents. Apart from that, the ROC has never made a stand against Constantinople Patriarchate, its diplomatic language always being soft and correct.

In his address to Primates of Local Churches in view of the beginning of the Council works in Crete, Patriarch Kirill wrote that despite dissidence regarding the Council “we remain one Orthodox family and bear a collective responsibility for the destiny of the Holy Orthodoxy.” The Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church has always had the respect for Patriarch Bartholomew, calling “to pray for him together with all brethren… in order to bear witness to our Orthodox unity.” Furthermore, why didn’t the Kiev Patriarchate mention the Churches of Bulgaria, Georgia, and Antioch, whose position with regard to the Council was fairly high profile? Nor did it mention the Holy Kinot of the Holy Mount Athos, which showed its critical attitude to the Council documents.

A comic character of the rhetoric of the KP delegation is enhanced by the fact that Philaret has repeatedly declared that “the Council decisions are not important.” In his opinion, all the issues having been considered at the Council are just “trifle”. By saying so the UOC KP chief devaluates in fact the Crete Council and the decisions taken there. What is the worth of the Ukrainian translation of the Council documents which were handed in as a gift to Patriarch Bartholomew’s representatives by Philaret’s envoys?

Philaret’s sentiments reveal total ignorance of the Kiev Patriarchate of the contemporary Orthodox discourse. Furthermore, schismatics are indifferent about discussions concerning the Truth of Orthodoxy and Orthodox Church. Only the discussion about their own recognition makes a difference to them. While the Orthodox community is engaged in the intense polylogue “On Relations of the Orthodox Church with the rest Christian world” document, the Kiev Patriarchate boils it down solely to itself and the Moscow Patriarchate.

Even now they snatched an opportunity to squawk about “non-canonical and destructive actions of the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine.” The name is perplexing, since the very existence of “Kiev Patriarchate” appears as a grave violation of the Church canons, having led to breaking of the unity in Ukrainian Orthodoxy. Not only in Ukrainian given that UOC KP intrudes intensively into affairs of other Local Churches, supporting dissenters in Poland, Bulgaria, Serbia, Georgia and others. The Constantinople Patriarchate cannot naturally such an activity of this “confession”, including in Ukraine. Patriarch Bartholomew himself has said many times the UOC is the only canonical Church in Ukraine. Therefore, Constantinople cannot accept a schismatic rhetoric without putting itself in an awkward spot.

Hurrying over the declaration of support from the Constantinople Patriarchate, UOC KP spokesmen are likely to “have egg on their face” again, like it was with the statement of Patriarch Irinej of Serbia, when his words about the problem of Ukrainian split being “a pan-orthodox problem” were interpreted by Philaret proponents as buttressing their position. However, they were not able to explain “from their position” the Patriarch’s further statement: “By their fruit you will know them, says Holy Scriptures (Mt. 7:16). Our hearts get sore we see the attempts to separate the Ukrainian parish form their century-long roots – the Moscow Patriarchate. Evil can dress itself up in the clothes of faith, light and truth but its fruits – falsehood, division and hatred of the neighbor – will invariably expose it. Schismatics from the so-called ‘Patriarchate of Kiev’ have long been renounced by Orthodox Churches and refer to Orthodoxy only by name. And their disdain for the norms of Christian morality and readiness to hate, to lie and to spill blood is living proof of it.”

Phanar can definitely receive and listen to everybody; however, its decisions can be taken solely with the account of positions of all Local Orthodox Churches. For this reason it’s necessary to remind the Ukrainian schismatics of the opinions of hierarchs who belong to various Local Orthodox Churches:

Patriarch Irinej of Serbia condemned attempts to separate Ukrainian parish from ROC

Representative of Constantinople Patriarchate: a decision on autocephaly of Ukraine is up to Moscow
.
Intrusion of Ukrainian politicians into church affairs is harmful, – Primate of Polish Church

Schism is a matter of Satan, – Primate of Polish Orthodox Church

Patriarch of Orthodox Church of Serbia: UOC KP has nothing to do with Orthodoxy

Patriarch of Alexandria calls on Ukrainians to keep loyal to the UOC

Read also