To be even more specific Ukraine has 3 orthodox churches- one, Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church- this church declared independence from Russia during the 1917 revolution; second, Ukr. Orthodox Church (Kyiv Patiarchate)- declared independence in 1989; third- the Russians. The first two being separate is ridiculous- they're due to merge any year now.
And yes, Ukraine used to have its own metropolitan, which was subjected only to the Greeks. Novgorod, Moscow etc. were part of the Russian, Kyiv, Ukraine was not. It came to be under Moscow's control in 1686. Up till 1589 Moscow was also subservient to Constantinople, and in effect it was on the same level as Kyiv, but then Russians declared independence from the Greeks. Afterwords, the damn Pereyaslav in 1654, and in 1686 Kyiv Church came to be under Moscow.
When was the baptism of Rusia and when was the baptism of Ukraine?
Territories of modern day Russia and Ukraine were baptized at the same time (988). When Mongols came, Rus was divided. Lithuaniians, Galicia, Moscow created their own churches and all claimed to be the inheritor of Rus.
Was the church of Nowgorod the separate third Church, if so, when she came into being?
I'm not too sure there was one. If there was I'd suspect it came to be when Mongols invaded, and ceased to exist when Moscow conquered Novgorod.
But then in 17th cent. as Russians began destroying institutions of ukrainian independence, they done away with our church.
How could they do it? Ukraine was under POLISH rule at that time!
Come on joker. I meant after the Pereyaslav Treaty (1654) obviously.
"Russian Orthodox Church stayed"? WHat do you mean?
1991=USSR collapse= Ukraine's independence. But something as influential as the church remained in the Russian hands. This doesn't equate with Ukraine being independent.
This is how it actually worked. In USSR there was only ONE church- Moscow's. In 1989, as USSR was about to die off, there was several brave clergymen which were IN this Russian church who declared their independence from Moscow. Hundreds of others joined and Kyiv Patriarchate was created. It was all up to the priests who were in control of the actual church building- they decided who they wanted to join- Moscow or the newly created Kyiv. As more and more parishes converted to Kyiv, Moscow flooded Ukraine with Russian-born priests who would replace the ones in the churches. So it's quite common that a priest of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate), on the TERRITORY OF UKRAINE, is from Tula or some other Russian region.
It's quite exciting- like in an army- mutinies, defections, plus politics.
So the Church of Greece does not recognized "Ukr. Ortho. Church"? Why is that so?
Do you have to ask why? 'Cause Russia controls a fifth of the Earth's surface and Greeks aren't as brave as we'd like them to be.
what were "the talks they had some months ago" about? Who were the sides in these talks?
I'd have to look it up so I promise to get back to you. Something else I found
Of particular concern to the ROC is Constantinople Patriarch Bartholomew I's declaration in June that Ukraine lies within its canonical territory. That claim, which is backed by the Greek, Romanian, Bulgarian, and Georgian Orthodox Churches, is based on Constantinople's non-recognition of the forcible transfer of the Kyiv Orthodox Metropolitanate to Moscow in 1686, making the ROC's control over Ukraine uncanonical in the eyes of Constantinople.Source
I do not understand what you are saying. I looked up some sources and it is what I found:
Before Unia and transfer of eastern Ukraine from Polish into Russian rule, there was ONE metropolitan in the Russian/Ukrainian lands. He was residing in in Kiev and was the leader of the ONE church including today's Ukraine, Belarus, Russia (both Moscow and Novgorod regions).
As a result of Mongol invasions and destruction of Kiev the metropolitan moved to Vladimir - the city in north east (in Moscow region). It was still the ONE church. Later the territories of today's Belarus and Ukraine were conquered by Lithuanians and dominated by the Poles (who united with Lithuanians). Still both parts of the eastern Slavic church were one jurisdiction and not two. Only later when the Moscow grew as the leading power in eastern Rus she gained the independence from the Constantinople (became "auto-cephalous"). The Orthodox church under Polish rule was forcefully integrated into Roman Catholic Church while preserving her Byzantine rites. Is it what you mean by the TWO churches?
It came to be under Moscow's control in 1686. Up till 1589 Moscow was also subservient to Constantinople, and in effect it was on the same level as Kyiv, but then Russians declared independence from the Greeks.
I looked it up too. What happened in 1589 it was that the autocephaly of Moscow church was recognized by all Orthodox including Constantinople and the metropolitan of Moscow became a Patriarch (Patriarchs are the highest ranking bishops in Orthodox church, fully sovereign). But the actual autocephaly of the Russian Church derived from much earlier time - of the fall of Constantinople to the Muslim Turks and temporary sumbission of Patiarch of Constantinople to the Pope of Rome (original Unia of Florence). See some info on History of the Russian Church
Afterwords, the damn Pereyaslav in 1654, and in 1686 Kyiv Church came to be under Moscow
Would you expect that there would two separate jurisdictions kept divided by the future border line drawn by the Bolsheviks in XX century? BTW, this area in the east was the one which voted for Yanukovych and which is Russian speaking.
[A. Pole:]So the Church of Greece does not recognized "Ukr. Ortho. Church"? Why is that so?
[Mazepa:] Do you have to ask why? 'Cause Russia controls a fifth of the Earth's surface and Greeks aren't as brave as we'd like them to be.
I know several Greeks and they are not afraid of Russia, rather they appear to LIKE Russia very much!
"Something else I found "Of particular concern to the ROC is Constantinople Patriarch Bartholomew I's declaration in June that Ukraine lies within its canonical territory."
The source is some Ukrainian nationalist in Canada. Do you have an official source from Constantinople Patriarch Bartholomew about his claim?
[in your next post:]
Let's see- my mother is from Galicia and is a Greek Catholic. I've spent all my summer vacations in the village with my grandma, a Greek Catholic. You decide. :) BTW, my dad is Orthodox.
It is you who has to decide. Are you Catholic or are you Orthodox?
My general outlook on the Union- it was a negative in the 16, 17th, 18th centuries because it split the Ukrainians up, but in the 20th century - a huge positive.
Are the matters of church/faith secondary in relations to national issue? Is it the position of your friends?
You know, it is probable and expected that the 3 churches- UOC (Kyiv), Autocephalous and Greek Catholics would become one church in the future.
If this happen will this "united" church be Catholic or Orthodox? What is your preference? I understand that if the first then your church will not be a independent church - it will be a part of the Church of Rome.