Posted on 10/15/2018 12:16:18 PM PDT by NRx
Breaking- Minsk- Belarus: A statement published by the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church stated that it is impossible for the Russian Church to continue in Eucharistic Communion with the Patriarchate of Constantinople, reports Patriarchia.ru.
(Excerpt) Read more at theorthodoxchurch.info ...
Well, that’s historical.
Obama/McCain/Brennan/Nuland’s meddling in Ukraine actually triggered a religious schism.
Indeed. And it is still continuing with the State Department openly promoting schismatic churches. After we helped overthrow Ukraine’s democratically elected government because they were pro-Russian, the meddling has been non-stop.
Im clueless here - are there actual canonical issues or is this a geo-political schism?
Please elucidate more. This is a big area of ignorance on my part.
Both. Ukraine has been under the canonical authority of Moscow without challenge since 1686. Effectively it was much longer than that. There has never been an independent Ukraine in the history of the world before 1918. Since the end of the cold war, western governments and their intelligence services having been trying to pull Ukraine out of Russia’s generally recognized sphere of influence. They helped to orchestrate the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Ukraine that favored closer ties with Russia based on their shared history and culture. They have also been encouraging Ukrainian nationalists in their efforts to divide the Orthodox Church in Ukraine. The Russian Church long ago granted the right of autonomy, within the broader framework of the Russian Orthodox Church to the local church in Ukraine. But a series of schismatic churches were founded by disaffected nationalist clergy. None of these were ever recognized by any canonical Orthodox Church... until last week.
The Ecumenical patriarchate and Moscow have a long history of chilly relations. And to be fair there is some blame to go around.
Most recently Patriarch Bartholomew was incensed by Moscow’s refusal to play along with his very controversial “Ecumenical Council” in Crete. Several other churches also boycotted because of its modernist and ecumenist tendencies.
Bart has since claimed that the settlement of 1686 was only temporary and that he was now reclaiming jurisdiction over Ukraine from Russia and he established full communion with the largest of the schismatic bodies last week in defiance not only of Moscow but virtually the whole of the Orthodox Church. His announced intention to create an autocephalous Ukrainian Church is clearly intended to split the Russian Church which Bart has long seen as too large and powerful. This is being done with the enthusiastic support of the western press and governments.
However, it is looking like Bart has miscalculated, possibly very badly. The reaction to all of this has been extremely negative from the other local churches who are, rightly IMO, accusing the EP of behaving like an Orthodox pope and ignoring church canons. The late Patriarch Athenagoros of blessed memory even issued a formal letter expressly stating that no single church could grant autocephaly unilaterally, but that such a thing required the consent of the universal church.
We shall see where the goes but already the Serbians have flatly stated that the EP has overstepped his authority.
Thank you for that explanation. Praying you shall have unity in truth.
It is worth taking note of this humble St. Petersburg Russia-based commentator's take on the matter. His name is Ilya Zabezhinsky. Here are excerpts from his post:
By Serving Kremlin rather than Christ, Moscow Patriarchate Now a Small National Church
No one in the Moscow Patriarchate should be surprised that all are running away from it, the Christian churches in the former Soviet space, the Russian believers who put Christ ahead of Putin, and all those who care about the rights and freedoms they should have as citizens of a modern country.
Our church, he says, has spent the last 20 years promoting things that have nothing to do with Christianity and not promoting the things that are at the core of the faith. Its members should not be surprised that others are running away from us, as the Ukrainian Orthodox now are, and that unless we change, others will do the same.
The latest developments...
Three Bulgarian bishops on the recent crisis in Ukraine...
https://mospat.ru/en/2018/10/12/news165075/
A frank statement from the Patriarch of the Serbian Orthodox Church...
https://youtu.be/oue0gsJ6C8c
Patriarch John X of Antioch calls for an urgent pan-Orthodox Synod to resolve the crisis.
http://orthochristian.com/116498.html
Thanks - is the Russian Orthodox Church here the “Eastern Orthodox” Church or is that a larger superset?
And one more. A Greek Orthodox believer writing for “Breitbart” breaks down the history of the politicization of the Russian Orthodox Church under Stalin, Putin, and the KGB. If interested, link below. God bless.
Hmm.. looks like China is copying them.
It's not something I am ever going to be competent (or called) to make a judgment on. There's too much history there.
But it's dreadful to see the rancor on either side. Perhspa some saint can work this out...
The Russian Orthodox Church is part of communion of 14 (some say 15) local churches connected by a shared faith and sacraments. That larger Church is the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church spoken of in the Nicene Creed. Today it is more commonly known in the west as the Eastern Orthodox Church.
(Note: Roman Catholics don’t agree with the Orthodox Church’s self understanding.)
It’s sort of like Brexit. The process of Britain leaving the European Union will be tense for a time, but better for everyone (including Europe at large) in the end...
Same goes for Ukraine’s autocephaly...Eastern Orthodoxy and Christendom will be better off in the end. On top of that I believe: once Putin’s government finally dissolve and/or a new Patriarch replaces Kirill, the Moscow patriarchate will seek to resume communion with Constantinople.
“Both. Ukraine has been under the canonical authority of Moscow without challenge since 1686.”
Without challenge? Well, except by Ukrainians. It has long been known that Ukrainians have wanted their own Church (again) for quite some time.
“There has never been an independent Ukraine in the history of the world before 1918.”
And Moscow used to belong to the principality of Vladimir. And?
Right - I know of the original “schism” around 1000AD that caused the formation of the Eastern Orthodox Church as a break away from the RCC over differences in ideologies.
O heavenly King, O Comforter, the Spirit of Truth
who are in all places and fillest all things:
Treasury of good things and Giver of life:
Come and dwell in us and cleanse us from every stain,
and save our souls, O good One.
The Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) has been, since its reconstitution during WWII, an instrument of the state
Let us take a look at a statement made by Stalin to Ambassador Averell Harriman. This is what Harriman told the State Department that Stalin said to him: “About two-thirds of all the large industrial enterprises in the Soviet Union had been built with United States help or technical assistance.”
Saving this. Thanks.
Darn it all!
Titles and headlines should be enough!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.