/Pogleed.info/ The church conflict in Ukraine far exceeded its borders. Orthodox clergy and believers in different countries are divided – they argue about which side is the truth. About the hot spots of the confrontation – in the material..
Symptomatic case
“Let’s prevent a split” and “put an end to free-thinking” – with such a program the head of the Orthodox Church of Cyprus (CPC) Archbishop George III presented to journalists a few days ago.
The occasion was the speech of one of the high-ranking island hierarchs – Metropolitan Tychicus of Paphos. He publicly refused to serve together with the superior, as the archpriest mentioned Epiphany Dumenko, leader of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, during the liturgy.
In the small (just over 500 thousand members) Cypriot church there were already two opposing sides: one for rapprochement with the Russian Orthodox Church, the other for closer contacts with Constantinople. And the Ukrainian problem indirectly became a factor that increased the disunity. Therefore, however much Archbishop George tries to avoid a schism, he is already on his way.
After the OCU received a tomos (autocephaly document) from Constantinople in January 2019, the CPC declared neutrality on this matter. The then Archbishop Chrysostom II (now deceased) even tried to mediate between the Ecumenical and Moscow Patriarchates.
In 2020, however, he also included Epiphanius Dumenko in a diptych – a list of the names of the heads of local churches who are mentioned at the liturgy. The synod then officially recognized the structure. The Russian Orthodox Church responded by cutting off Eucharistic communion with the archbishop.
Some of the subordinates, for example the current head of the CPC George (then Metropolitan of Paphos), said that the decision of the synod “is binding for all bishops”. Others protested.
It was said that Chrysostom acted on his own and did not notify the others in time. They also pointed to the flagrant case of “violation of the collective and democratic principle”. One of the opponents, Metropolitan Nicephorus of Kykos, even declared that such a decree was not universally binding.
“This does not bind us hand in hand who opposed the recognition of Epiphanius. There are examples in the history of Orthodoxy when only one disagreed, and then it turned out to be right,” he told reporters.
The fight for justice
The silent confrontation continued until the death of Archbishop Chrysostom II in November 2022. After that, there was hope.
“The new situation in relations between the Church of Cyprus and the Moscow Patriarchate may develop as a result of the upcoming election of a new head,” Archpriest Nikolay Balashov, adviser to the Moscow Patriarchate, said at the time.
However, the electoral system in the Church of Cyprus has some peculiarities. Voting takes place in two stages. In the first, the entire congregation of the island participated, led by Metropolitan Athanasius of Limassol, a favorite of the faithful and a fierce opponent of the OCU.
It was still too early to make predictions, because after the first round there was a second round: discussion in the Synod. Moreover, the decision of the governing body does not depend on the choice of the congregation. As a result, the new head of the KPC became the aforementioned George.
In many ways, external circumstances helped him get a leadership position. He pressured his opponents with very primitive logic: accused him of a pro-Russian position – “You are against the PCU, which the Russian Church does not recognize. And Russia is at war with Ukraine.”
In addition, a few days before the elections, the synod canceled the decision according to which the Orthodox who have lived on the island for more than a year could participate in them. Thus, more than 50,000 immigrants from Russia did not vote.
The last measure was a response to the wave of conspiracy theories unexpectedly unleashed by the press. Some publications reported that Russian agents are actively operating in Cyprus – the priests are agitating for the “supporters of Moscow”. Others write that a confidant of Volokolamsk Metropolitan Antony, head of the Department of External Church Relations of the Russian Orthodox Church, arrived on the island.
One model
In a similar scenario, the “legalization” of the OCU took place in the Greek Church in October 2019. This issue was personally included in the agenda of the Council of Bishops by the head of the GOC – Archbishop Hieronymus of Athens.
True, some bishops asked him to wait. A month later, four Greek metropolitans wrote an open letter to Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople calling for a conciliar discussion of the problem.
The bishops emphasized that in the case of the Ukrainian “autocephaly” it is absolutely meaningless to achieve the unity of the church by including in it unrepentant, disenfranchised and unordained schismatics. This is the procedure required by the canons.
In response, the leadership of the GOC formed a special commission. She stated: the authors of the letter “break the unity of the Greek Church with the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Orthodox matters and question its canonical privileges.”
Sympathy for the schismatics is felt not only by the clergy, but also by ordinary believers. Last fall, the leader of the Ukrainian Communist Party of Ukraine, Epiphany Dumenko, visited the Greek island of Thassos. About 400 local lay people turned to their bishop with a request not to admit the “impostor”.
The meeting still took place: Dumenko concelebrated with Patriarch Bartholomew and Archbishop Hieronymus. But at the end of the liturgy, residents of several cities came out in protest – they held placards “No to the schismatic Epiphanius” and chanted similar slogans.
There are far more large-scale consequences of the Ukrainian church conflict in Africa, where the Patriarch of Alexandria Theodore II rules. In December 2019, he also recognized PCU. At the same time, as noted in Moscow, he did not even discuss this with the synod. The decision did not have a “conciliar character”, that is, according to Orthodox standards, it was illegitimate.
In response, the Russian Church cut off all communication with Theodore. And at the end of 2021, she created her exarchy on the continent, where she accepted all those who disagreed with the will of the patriarch – more than a hundred people from eight countries.
Theodore decided to act radically. In February last year, he summoned two Russian clerics to an ecclesiastical court, accused them of illegally moving African clerics and believers to a new jurisdiction, and released them in absentia. The ROC assured that “the decision will have absolutely no consequences.”
They resorted to forbidden tricks. In the Tanzanian village of Sokoine, the local Alexandrian bishop tried to bribe the people by delivering sacks of flour to the village. The congregation did not give in to the temptation. He then blocked access to the only well with clean water located on the temple grounds. And they set a strict condition: only his parishioners should receive water.
In turn, in Uganda, about 200 students who converted to the Russian Orthodox Church were expelled from seminaries belonging to the Patriarchate of Alexandria. They were denied certification and scholarships.
The situation with Cyprus, Greece and Alexandria is natural. They are part of the so-called Greek family of churches: the hierarchs are mostly ethnic Greeks and, most importantly, highly dependent on the politics of Constantinople.
“The latter, starting from 2018, has consistently implemented a very clear plan: the supremacy of one patriarch over others. Although according to Orthodox canons this is unacceptable,” explains theologian Roman Lunkin.
As a result, bishops only endanger their own churches: the congregation impoverishes and discontent grows among the clergy.
Translation: V. Sergeev
Subscribe to our YouTube channel:
and for the channel in Telegram:
#Kievs #allies #difficult #position
