Posted on 12/14/2021 7:03:18 PM PST by marshmallow
A few days ago, the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew had a meeting with Ukrainian journalists in the Phanar, in the presence of the Exarch of the Patriarchate in Kyiv, Bishop Mikhail, and the Chief Secretary of the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, Archimandrite Grigorios.
He referred warmly to his recent visit to Ukraine and his communication with the pious Ukrainian people. He did not fail to talk about the issue of the Autocephaly of the Church of Ukraine, but also about the stance of the Church of Russia.
His All-Holiness paid most attention to the release of the Local Ukrainian Church from Moscow’s influence. According to the Ecumenical Patriarch, the topic of Ukrainian autocephaly had been on the agenda for quite a while. It emerged decades ago and there had always been attempts by the Ukrainian nation to gain their own Local Autocephalous Orthodox Church.
“And now has come the historic moment when the Mother Church of Constantinople has fulfilled this long-held dream of yours,” His All-Holiness said.
The Ecumenical Patriarch could not fail to ignore the obstacles posed by the Russian Church. His All-Holiness reiterated the fact that there is no “schism” in place that the Russians have been talking about.
Also, if they believe there is a ‘schism,’ it’s they who have created it by severing communication with the four Local Churches. As no one else has suspended communication or created a ‘schism’ in the bosom of Orthodoxy,” said Patriarch Bartholomew.
His All-Holiness recalled that this “schism” was formed by the Russian Orthodox Church back in 2016 when the ROC and three other Local Churches under the latter’s influence chose to not attend the Great All-Orthodox Council in Crete. At the last moment, the Russians and three other Local Churches pulled out.
(Excerpt) Read more at orthodoxtimes.com ...
Bart broke the Canons. Philaret Denshenko was an adulterer and KGB operative. He was denied the Moscow patriarchate, and like a spoiled child he went and started his own church (all while holding his mistress by his side), naming himself pope. After excommunication by the MP, the EP chooses to disobey Canon Law and invite Denshenko into the Church. People who know nothing of Canon Law assume this is political.
The EP will go the way of Rome. The ecumenical see has a history of splitting the Church, tempted by ego and heretical beliefs.
Yup. I am happy when I see others are not fooled
Moscow Patriarch Kirill had the KGB code name “Mikhailov”.
The ecumenical see has a history of splitting the Church
Moscow Patriarch Kirill's support of Putin's 7 year war against fellow Orthodox Ukrainians has caused the irreparable schism.
This was revealed during the battle of Ilovaisk in August that year. This was one of the bloodiest battles of the war in Donbas, during which the Russian army appears to have intervened in Ukraine. But, instead of calling for peace – which might have been a useful workaround for him – Kirill issued a statement attacking Ukrainian “Uniates and raskolniks” (schismatics) for engaging in conflict against his flock. He made direct reference to Orthodox and Greek-Orthodox Ukrainians who do not recognise the authority of the Moscow Patriarchate.
Soon afterwards, the Russian patriarch proceeded to publicly extol the virtues of “Russkii mir” – “the Russian world”, a concept that the Russian media and political class have made use of to justify Russian political, military, and ecclesiastical activity in Ukraine. He declared that: “Russia belongs to a civilisation that is wider than the Russian Federation. We call this civilisation the Russian world. This is not the world of the Russian Federation, nor Russian empire. The Russian world starts at the Kievan baptismal font. Russian, Ukrainians, Belarusians belong to it.” During a crucial battle for Donetsk airport in late 2014, Kirill all but broke with whatever ambiguity remained by decorating the heads of Russia’s two leading state-owned television channels with church orders. The official reason was for their services to church and state. But the channels had been instrumental in broadcasting inflammatory propaganda that fuelled the war in Ukraine. Kirill had clearly chosen a side, even if he had initially intended to avoid doing so.
The church’s position was not confined to the high rhetoric of the patriarch, but was also reflected on the ground in eastern Ukraine. There, some representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine rose to prominence in supporting the insurgents. One local priest from Sloviansk became notorious for his mix of religion, poetry, and geopolitical activism. He wrote poems professing his “love for the great Russian soldier, ready to die for his Motherland, and defend her from monsters like NATO and other predatory terrorists!” Another activist, a former sacristan of Kyiv Pechersk Lavra – the Kyiv monastery of caves – organised the war’s first ambush of Ukrainian intelligence operatives, in early April 2014. And, in one episode in Kyiv-controlled eastern Ukraine, two priests belonging to the Russian patriarchate refused to conduct services for a deceased child who had not been baptised in a church recognised by Moscow. While this was not necessarily the case in every location, in a country at war, just a few such incidents polarised society even further and massively undermined the standing of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine. Trust levels in Kirill fell across Ukraine, from around 40 percent in 2013 to 15 percent in 2018. And, in the same period, the number of Ukrainians who declared themselves members of the Moscow Patriarchate church fell from 19 percent to 12 percent. Those who claimed Kyivan Patriarchate membership rose from 18 percent to 28 percent.
https://ecfr.eu/publication/defender_of_the_faith_how_ukraines_orthodox_split_threatens_russia/
No one should be called that or sanction it. I even think "reverend" is a title improper to humility). Only God is all holy. But while being at odds with each others over some substantial issues, Orthodoxy shares too many of the distinctive Catholic teachings that are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels).
Meanwhile, for informational purposes, here is a historical perspective from the Orthodox side:
RUSSIAN ORTHODOX – ROMAN CATHOLIC RELATIONS: A SHORT HISTORY
There you go again.
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.