At the session of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox church (RPTs), held this week at the Saint Sergius Holy Trinity lavra, one of the most important reports was made by Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad. He analysed the results of the April and July meetings of the RPTs delegation and the Constantinople patriarchate, at which were discussed questions associated with the current church situation in Ukraine. We recall that there leaders of the so-called "Ukrainian Orthodox church of the Kievan patriarchate" (UPTsKP) and the "Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox church" (UAPTs), both of which are uncanonical and therefore not recognized by a single Orthodox church in the world, are promoting the idea of the creation of some "united local church," appealing in this regard to the Constantinople patriarchate.
The RPTs Holy Synod, according to a report from the Communications Service of the Department of External Church Relations of the Moscow patriarchate (OVTsSMP) "expressed regret with regard to the unilateral contacts of the Constantinople patriarchate with representatives of the uncanonical groups in Ukraine apart from the agreed-upon program of joint actions of the Moscow and Constantinople patriarchates." This restrained formulation conceals the profound concern of the RPTs hierarchy over events occurring recently.
His Holiness Patriarch Alexis II considered it necessary to speak openly about this: "We were very surprised when we learned from press reports about the recent visit of Ukrainian schismatics to Constantinople and the participation of Constantinople hierarchs in their creation of a joint commission. . . . They not only did not seek advice on this from us or from representatives of canonical Orthodoxy in Ukraine; they did not even inform us about it. This is unfraternal. This way of acting is not accepted in the family of Orthodox churches. Such actions will not only not bring about the restoration of unity in Ukraine; it can provoke a profound crisis and division within the world Orthodox community." (tr. by PDS, posted 1 August 2001)
MOSCOW PATRIARCHATE PROTESTS UNIFICATION OF UKRAINIAN CHURCHES
by Kirill Vasilenko
Vremia novostei, 13 July 2001
The position of the Moscow patriarchate in Ukraine has become weaker. Two uncanonical churches, the Ukrainian Orthodox church of the Kievan patriarchate and Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox church, have begun the process of unification. Next Saturday negotiations will begin in Zurich, where episcopal delegations of these churches will meet with representatives of the Constantinople patriarchate and finally formulate their unity. This will be a blow perhaps stronger than the recent visit to Ukraine by the pope of Rome, against which, as is known, Alexis II spoke out. It has become clear that uncanonical Orthodoxy in Ukraine represents a more serious threat for Moscow than Catholic missionaries. The unification of the Ukrainian Orthodox church of the Kievan patriarchate and the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox church is supported by the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew I. And this means official recognition of the new Ukrainian united local church in the Orthodox and secular worlds.
In conversation with a "Vremia novostei" newspaper reporter, the secretary of the Moscow patriarchate for relations between church and society, Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin, reported that if the unification of churches in Ukraine is not used by politicians and nationalists, then the situation in the parishes will remain unchanged. But there is no basis for supposing that President Leonid Kuchma will not make use of the possibility of getting his own "full-fledged" patriarch. He has already approved negotiations for the unification of the two churches, beginning in the past year. Besides, after the recent visit of John Paul II, which without doubt gave a supplemental push to unification, the problem of interconfessional relations within the republic has taken on not so much a religious significance as a geopolitical one, as the division of spheres of influence between the West and Russia. Thanks to the pontiff's proclamations, the words "RPTs," "Orthodoxy" and "Moscow" have been merged into a single whole in the understanding of a majority of Ukrainians.
The recent strategy of the Vatican is being more often compared with
the policy of the expansion of NATO to the east. And the unification of
the Kievan patriarchate and the autocephalous church substantially strengthens
the position of the Greek and Roman Catholics in Ukraine. On one hand,
the Vatican has a loyal sister church (which does not have relations with
Moscow), which will not put up impediments to the expansion of Catholicism.
On the other hand, a union of Ukrainian Orthodox with Greek Catholics is
theoretically possible. After all, last year a special theological
commission began to review the possibility of dual subordination of a united
local church, to the ecumenical patriarch and the pope of Rome.
Naturally, unification of the churches evoked a stormy reaction from RPTs. The more so since in Ukraine the Moscow patriarchate has even more parishes than it has in Russia, 9200 against 7900. Moscow has entered into conflict with the ecumenical patriarchate. It is accusing Bartholomew I of close links with the American administration and of striving for hegemony within the Orthodox world and the creation of his own kind of eastern analogue of papacy. Recently in Kiev there was a extraordinary session of the council of the Ukrainian Orthodox church of the Moscow patriarchate under the leadership of Metropolitan Vladimir. Pro-Moscow bishops sharply condemned the "crude interference of Bartholomew I in the affairs of the Orthodox church in Ukraine," as an official letter sent Tuesday to Constantinople put it. RPTs declared that it will refuse to recognize the canonicity of the new Ukrainian Orthodox church, even if it is recognized by the ecumenical patriarchate. (tr. by PDS, posted 1 August 2001)
Russia Religion News Current News Items
On Monday in Kiev an international applied academic conference devoted to problems of Orthodox and social life in Ukraine began its work. Its participants included not only church hierarchs but also prominent Ukrainian politicians--parliamentary elections are approaching. The occasion for the conversation was the translation of the "Bases of the Social Doctrine of the Russian Orthodox Church" into the Ukrainian language. But the primary topic of discussion was the schism within the Orthodox church in Ukraine. Regarding the laws by which events are developing within the cradle of Russian Orthodoxy a direct participant in the latest negotiations, Archpriest Nikolai Balashov, talked with Izvestiia correspondent Svetlana Popova.
--Is the problem of schism in Ukraine worth the continuous mention?
--On 9 July I was in Kiev at the bishops' council of the Ukrainian Orthodox church. I can say that the situation is quite serious. After all there are in Ukraine more Orthodox parishes than in Russia--9,000, compared to 8,000 in Russia and other former soviet republics. Thus the future of world Orthodoxy as a whole depends on how events will unfold for the Orthodox in Ukraine who are divided into three parts.
--Remind us what the schism involves.
--Besides UPTs [Ukrainian Orthodox church] of the Moscow patriarchate there exist in Ukraine two uncanonical Orthodox churches. One of them is headed by the former metropolitan of Kiev, Filaret Denisenko; he once was an influential member of the Holy Synod and now calls himself the patriarch of Kiev and all-Rus-Ukraine.
--There exists a notion that the Ukrainian Orthodox church is the "hand of Moscow." Is this really so?
--Actually it is really autonomous. In Ukraine there exists its own Holy Synod; they appoint their own bishops and can create their own dioceses, and they elect their metropolitan independently. But UPTs is a part of the Moscow patriarchate and its head is a member of the Holy Synod, and he occupies second place in honor behind the patriarch.
--Could the Moscow patriarchate present autocephaly to UPTs?
--There are various attitudes regarding the future of UPTs among believers in Ukraine. Some want it to become autocephalous while others think that the Ukrainian church does not need even the independence of the present variety. A third group considers that the past was better--the dependence of the Ukrainian church on Moscow gave it a high degree of independence from Ukrainian political forces. If the clearly expressed will of the majority were for autocephaly, then it would be granted by the Moscow patriarchate today.
--The Constantinople patriarch is called the patriarch without a flock. It turns out that he is independently expanding his jurisdiction.
--The former vice premier of Ukraine, Nikolai Zhulinsky, and former premier Viktor Yushchenko began sending letters of appeal to Constantinople and then president Leonid Kuchma sent a letter. Talk became more intense that the patriarch of Constantinople--who holds the first place of honor in the Orthodox world--should bring order to Ukraine. Many consider that pro-American forces are behind all of this, seeking the further disintegration of the postsoviet space. This at least seems plausible.
--It is known that there are continuous relations among patriarchs and that they write long letters . . .
--The patriarch of Constantinople maintains that he is ready to help Ukraine, but in conjunction with the Moscow patriarchate. We do not have any objections. There have been frequent discussions; the last time, representatives of the sides met in Zurich on 13-14 July. This time representatives of the uncanonical churches were invited, and they managed to establish a dialogue among them, but this was broken off.
But not everything happened as we thought it should. For example, recently there was created in Constantinople a commission for unification of two parts of the Ukrainian autocephalous church, the one that is in America and the other that is in Ukraine. This was arranged without the participation of RPTs. And if such a unification happens, Ukraine will repeat the fate of Estonia. With this difference, that it will involve not just dozens of parishes, but thousands.
--What is the role of Ukrainian politicians in the religious conflict?
--People who are now in power do not want to lose the support of the majority. At the same time there is an active lobby for Filaret's interests. In the end, Kuchma's policy on questions of religion is more balanced than Kravchuk's.
* * * * *
Commentary from Konstantin Zatulin, director of the Institute of CIS Countries
--The religious question in Ukraine has been a political question since the sixteenth century. The current schism was begun at the instigation of newly fledged Ukrainian nationalists who were former officials of the central committee of the communist party of Ukraine. There also was Filaret's wish to get independence. Today Metropolitan Filaret does not enjoy serious authority among believers, although he does have parishes. In order to "augment his strength" he was granted a number of famous Orthodox shrines, for example the Golden-domed New Michael's cathedral in Kiev.
The internal schism was complicated by the existence in Ukraine of the foreign Ukrainian Orthodox church and the Uniates, who have historically been subject to the pope of Rome. We were witnesses of the way the pope's visit to Kiev was not as grandiose and ceremonial as planned. Lvov was a different matter, where a great height was reached. It wasn't even noticed how Kuchma converted to Uniatism by receiving communion from the pope's hand.
The intensification of talk about the need for creating a single local church has exacerbated the struggle for parishes and continuation of the schism. But it is possible to see good in all of this. The pressure that has been exerted on the "Moscow" Orthodox church by politicians, who have compromised themselves in the eyes of the people, has given it the image of a persecuted church and its adherents have acquired the aura of martyrs in the struggle for the faith and unity.
* * * *
Those Ukrainians who last month were enthusiastic about the pope's visit now are protesting against the possible visit to Ukraine by Moscow Patriarch Alexis II. At issue is the upcoming celebration of the 950th anniversary of the founding of the Kievan caves lavra, the cradle of all of Russian monasticism. It would be strange if Patriarch Alexis II were not present for an event that is so significant for all Orthodox believers. But he still has not received an official invitation to participate in the festivities, which are scheduled for 28 August.
The patriarch's upcoming trip to Ukraine was announced recently by Russian Ambassador Viktor Chernomyrdin. However Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad, who was in Kiev to participate in the international Orthodox conference, claimed that he was hearing about the possibility of such a visit for the first time. Thus he did not know about the patriarch's reaction on this matter. The issue of the invitation was clarified by Kiev mayor Alexander Omelchenko; according to his information Alexis II was to be invited to the celebration by the head of UPTsMP, Vladimir Sabodan.
Anger over the hypothetical visit by the head of RPTs was expressed by the "United Church for Ukraine" association. The organization, which seeks reconciliation of all participants in the schism, from autocephalists to adherents of the illegal Kievan patriachate, thinks that the arrival of Alexis II would be "gross interference that is offensive to all of Ukraine."
They remind the patriarch of his "hostile position" to the pope's visit and they warn that his visit "will aggravate the interconfessional situation in Ukraine that is complicated even without it." Perhaps the Ukrainian opposition fears that support from the Moscow patriarch would finally strengthen the position of Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma. Until now around 60 percent of residents of Ukraine have associated themselves with the Moscow patriarchate. But the Russian church "has surrendered its position," especially in Transcarpathia. For example, to the west of Lvov there remain only two parishes affiliated with UPTsMP.
If the patriarch's visit happens it obviously will be accompanied with protest demonstrations that would be even more serious than those at the time of the pope's visit. (tr. by PDS, posted 1 August 2001)
Russia Religion News Current News Items
The Moscow branch of the British religious organization the Salvation Army intends to ask the Constitutional Court to verify whether the requirement for re- registration of religious organizations complies with the constitution.
Salvation Army lawyer Vladimir Ryakhovsky told Interfax on Monday that queries have arisen over Article 27 (Paragraph 4) of the Law on the Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations, under which religious organization were to undergo re-registration before December 31, 2000.
"Such a provision may lead to the liquidation of many religious organizations for formal reasons, and not for violations of the law," he said.
He also said that the Justice Ministry's lawsuit seeking the liquidation of the Salvation Army as an organization that has not undergone re-registration with the Ministry agencies will be heard in court in September.
The Moscow branch of the Salvation Army was registered by the Justice Ministry's Moscow Department in 1992. In accordance with the Law on the Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations, it was to undergo re-registration.
But an examination of Salvation Army documents revealed discrepancies between the goals stipulated in its Charter and its actual work, as a result of which it was denied registration until all violations of the law are eliminated.
In view of this, the Moscow branch of the Salvation Army appealed to the court, seeking the overturning of this decision. However, the courts of first and second instance rejected the suit on the grounds that the Salvation Army is not a religious, but a paramilitary organization.
The Justice Ministry is currently making steps to liquidate the Moscow branch of the Salvation Army. (posted 31 July 2001)
Russia Religion News Current News Items
Prime minister of the Estonian republic Mart Laar sent a suggestion to Metropolitan Kornily of Tallin and all-Estonia to register the church he leads on the basis of a charter that was prepared in the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD). Earlier the Estonian MVD had refused registration of the charter of the Estonian Orthodox church of the Moscow patriarchate (EPTsMP). This document provides for depriving EPTsMP of the status of an autonomous church and transforming it into a diocese of the Russian Orthodox church, the RIA Oreanda agency reports.
The Moscow patriarchate reported that the draft of the charter excludes mention of the succession of EPTsMP from historic Orthodoxy in Estonia and also includes restrictions that are not derived from Estonian legislation. In particular it is said that the current church structure can be headed by a bishop or archbishop, that is, indication that the church could be headed by a metropolitan is removed from the charter proposed for registration.
An appeal to the prime minister of the country was adopted at a session of the synod of the Estonian Orthodox church of the Moscow patriarchate in which the bishops state their dissent from the current document. "We cannot decline from registering a charter specifically as a church, not as a diocese," the letter says. Members of the EPTsMP synod expressed regret over the position of the Estonian leadership which says that EPTsMP does not have the right to the status of a church and they consider that in this case unilateral interference of the secular state in the internal problems of canonical procedure is being shown. (tr. by PDS, posted 31 July 2001)
LETTER OF METROPOLITAN KORNILY OF TALLIN AND ALL-ESTONIA TO ESTONIAN PRIME MINISTER M. LAAR
Esteemed Mr. Prime Minister
Unfortunately we cannot accept the charter and name proposed in your letter of 5 July 2001 for the following reasons.
1. By resolution of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox church of 10 May 1920 the Estonian Orthodox church was granted autonomy and this was confirmed by a tomos of Patriarch Alexis II of Moscow and all-Rus of 26 April 1993. Thus we cannot decline from registering a charter specifically as a church, not as a diocese. Every religious organization has the right to be identified in accordance with its own self-perception. We consider that the name of our church is sufficiently precisely distinguished from the name of a religious organization that is already registered. The difference in the designations consists of three unrepeated words. At the same time, in the state register of churches of Estonia there are examples of much more closely corresponding designations, which however has not served as an impediment for registration.
2. We also find it necessary to indicate in the charter the historical roots of the church, which we consider to be our right and not a violation of the law.
3. We are surprised at the attempt by a state body to restrict the varieties of ecclesiastical office that the ruling bishop of our church may have, which are designated in our charter. This question lies entirely within the competence of the church hierarchy.
4. Besides, in our opinion, the existing "Law on churches and parishes" does not provide for the possibility of creating foreign dioceses on the territory of Estonia.
We regret your position, according to which EPTsMP does not have the right to the status of a church. It seems to us that we have in this case a matter of the unilateral interference of the secular government in internal church problems of canonical procedure, which require the resolution of specialists in the area of church law and not government bureaucrats. We claim that in this case there is a violation of the rights of Orthodox believers to freedom of religious confession and association, which are protected by articles 40, 48, 19, part 1, and article 9, part 2 of the constitution of Estonia, as well as articles 9 and 11 of the European Convention on Protection of Human Rights and Basic Freedoms.
With respect,
Kornily, Metropolitan of Tallin and all-Estonia,
president of the synod of the Estonian Orthodox church of the Moscow
patriarchate
(from Sluzhba kommunikatsii, OVTsS
MP, tr. by PDS, posted 31 July 2001)
Russia
Religion News Current News Items
The "Blagovest-info" agency reports that opponents of globalization already have collected 1464 signatures on an appeal to the bishops of the Russian Orthodox church (RPTs). "Today it is evident to everybody," the appeal claims, "that under cover of pseudo-patriotic rhetoric Russia is actively being drawn into the worldwide globalization process, whose goal is the creation of a new world order, which is the seat of the antichrist who is to come." The document's authors call special attention to such "specific signs" of Russia's participation in the process of globalization as the "formation of a social system of a new type--the electronic concentration camp," which is being achieved by the "voluntary compulsory assignment of identification numbers" and the "sale of 98% of the land of Russia, which effectively deprives its people of the material basis of their national existence."
The appeal also mentions that "Russia's participation in the process of globalization will inevitably lead to a loss of national sovereignty over the maintenance of its appearance and can become the last stage in state degradation." In its turn, if RPTs does not condemn globalization, it risks turning out to be in subordination not to the "secular nationalism of the state" but to the "supranational authority of a world government," in the opinion of the authors of the appeal.
Acknowledging RPTs as the "most significant public institution of Russia," the authors of the document note that it has refrained from a decisive response to the "challenge of globalization." Moreover, in the authors' opinion, "the leadership of RPTs actually supports dragging Russia into the system of the new world order," and "traditional ecumenical contacts of RPTs along the lines of the World Council of Churches and Congress of European Churches are openly being transformed into participation in the work of global inter-religious unification operating under the aegis of a world government."
The appeal expresses "serious doubt that genuine national and church regeneration is taking place in Russia." The authors of the document "humbly call" the bishops of RPTs, asking them "to convene immediately a full-church local council, which is the only canonically infallible means for the resolution of the growing problems." (tr. by PDS, posted 31 July 2001)
Russia Religion News Current News Items
The head of the Ukrainian Orthodox church of the Kievan patriarchate (UPTsKP), Filaret, does not oppose a visit to Ukraine by Patriarch Alexis II of Moscow and all-Rus provided that the latter supports the idea of autocephaly (independence) for Ukrainian Orthodoxy, MIGnews reports. The head of UPTsKP supported establishing fraternal relations between the Ukrainian and Russian churches as equals. Filaret sees in the future a Ukrainian church "united and independent, like other Orthodox churches of the world."
He said that the visit to Ukraine by Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew will be connected with the recognition of UPTs' autocephaly. Filaret maintains that the patriarch "was invited by the president of Ukraine, the Supreme Soviet, and the church." The head of UPTsKP noted that the precise date of the visit by Bartholomew is not known since "such an event requires serious planning." According to Kiev Mayor Alexander Omelchenko, the head of the Ukrainian Orthodox church of the Moscow patriarchate, Metropolitan Vladimir, intends to invite Alexis II for the festive events devoted to the 950th anniversary of the Kievan caves lavra, which will be conducted on 28 August. However, according to a representative of the Moscow patriarchate, Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk, the head of RPTs has not gotten an official invitation. (tr. by PDS, posted 31 July 2001)
LEADER OF UKRAINIAN COMMUNISTS SUPPORTS MOSCOW PATRIARCHATE
Mir
religii, 24 July 2001
Adherents of the Ukrainian Orthodox church of the Moscow patriarchate (UPTsMP) share the point of view of the Communist party of Ukraine (KPU) that "the processes of the destruction of morals and ethics and the traditions of a multinational state are taking place." This was stated by the leader of Ukrainian communists, Peter Simonenko, who visited Odessa in the middle of July, according to a Blagovest-info report. In the course of his visit Peter Simonenko met with the head of the Odessa diocese of UPTsMP, Metropolitan Agafangel. The head of KPU told how in the course of the conversation with the metropolitan he "expressed his position on the consequences of the visit to Ukraine by the pope of Rome. I said that in the future we will insist that the law on freedom of conscience, which is being discussed in the Supreme Soviet, will not infringe upon the rights of believers in any way."
At the present time, Peter Simonenko reported, he is defending in court the rights of one of the parishes of UPTsMP in Khmelnitsky province, "which are being trampled by local authorities."
The KPU, its leader noted, shares completely the concern of UPTsMP that the ecumenical patriarchate is prepared to recognize officially the "schismatic churches," the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kievan Patriarchate. Communist deputies in the Ukrainian Supreme Soviet already have collected more than 120 deputies' signatures on an appeal to Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholemew expressing a protest against his actions that are hostile to UPTsMP. (tr. by PDS, posted 31 July 2001)
METROPOLITAN AGAFANGEL: CLOSE CONTACTS BETWEEN CONSTANTINOPLE AND UKRAINIAN
SCHISMATICS DEVELOPED LONG AGO
strana.ru,
20 July 2001
Metropolitan Agafangel of Odessa and Izmailsk is disturbed by behind-the-scenes actions of the Constantinople patriarchate. After his return from Zurich, where Metropolitan Agafangel represented the Ukrainian Orthodox church, the metropolitan met with the public of the city.
In particular, in conversation with representative of the "United Fatherland" movement he declared that in negotiations the joint delegation of the Moscow patriarchate and Ukrainian Orthodox church maintained a strictly canonical position in relations with the schismatic representatives of UAPTs and UPTsKP. There were no negotiations with them on a basis of equality. The work was conducted in accordance with the "May scenario" in Kiev; i.e. the delegations of the Constantinople and Moscow patriarchates met separately with the "Filaretites" and "autocephalists." In so doing the delegation from the Moscow patriarchate and Master Agafangel himself did not give to the schismatics a church greeting pertinent to such circumstances and thereby they did not violate the sacred inviolable canons. It is impossible to say the same thing about the delegates from the Phanar. The metropolitan drew the conclusion that close contacts among them had been developed long ago and Constantinople is not observing church rules regarding relations with schismatics. Metropolitan Agafangel expressed to all those attending the negotiations his amazement and regret about this and he declared that the authorized commissioner of the UPTs episcopacy rigidly observed the canonical standard at the negotiations in Zurich.
The metropolitan confirmed that the joint delegation of the Moscow patriarchate and Ukrainian Orthodox church will not depart from the sacred patristic teaching and will not make any compromises with schismatics until they repent. He expressed his concern about provocational conversations that were held behind the back of the Moscow patriarchate by Patriarch Bartholomew with schismatic leaders at the Phanar on 13 June and about his patronage of all subsequent conversations among schismatic groupings and the agreements on merging their structures that were concluded. Metropolitan Agafangel considers such actions to be violations of World Orthodoxy that propel Ukraine onto the road of social conflict on religious bases. He delivered to the delegation of the Constantinople patriarchate a letter from deputies of the Supreme Soviet of Ukraine with 120 signatures requesting that Patriarch Bartholomew cease his interference in the affairs of the Russian Orthodox church and its integral part, the Ukrainian Orthodox church. The metropolitan also delivered to us for publication texts of documents about separate conversations of UPTsKP and UAPTs under the supervision of the Phanar, and he said: "Let the people of God know the truth about the perfidious actions of the Constantinople and what they could lead us to." (tr. by PDS, posted 31 July 2001)
METROPOLITAN KIRILL: NO RECOGNITION OF THE EPISCOPACY OF UAPTs
AND UPTsKP OCCURRED IN ZURICH
strana.ru,
30 July 2001 (excerpts)
In the course of the work of an international conference "Orthodoxy and public life: recovery of the traditions of the church's social service" in Kiev on 23 July, Metropolitan Kirill gave a press conference. . . .
--Metropolitan Kirill, describe the results of your meeting in Geneva [sic]. What did you achieve? . . . .
--I cannot say anything more than what was said in the communique regarding the meeting in Geneva. I would like to stress only the following circumstances: it was a bilateral meeting of the Moscow and Constantinople patriarchates. It was not a so-called six-party meeting with the participation of representatives of schismatic groupings. It was an official bilateral meeting of the two patriarchates. So far as talk of Ukraine, Metropolitan Agafangel of Odessa and Izmailsk was invited to be a part of the delegation of the Moscow patriarchate in order to represent adequately the situation existing in Ukraine. It was this circumstance what was fully expressed in the communique regarding the results of the meeting. Representatives of the uncanonical Orthodox formations were also invited to this meeting and their view of the situation was heard. It was interesting for us to hear their view because this was the first possibility to see and hear the people directly. But I would like to stress that they were invited in the capacity of witnesses. They were not participants in the negotiation process. But with all these procedural qualifications the very fact of their presence at the official negotiations of the two patriarchates represents a significant phenomenon. Both patriarchates did this in order to try genuinely to understand fully the situation in Ukraine and to do all possible in order to overcome the existing divisions. . . .
You know, it was important to hear representatives of the uncanonical groups and to see them face to face. For me personally it was important to feel whether people sincerely want to resolve the problem or want to use the Zurich meeting for creating a certain appearance of general Orthodox recognition. Well this was very important for me, to be able to answer this question for myself. You know, in Zurich I got the impression that people sincerely wish to resolve the problem, because there was a rather rational, calm dialogue and there was a conversation about the fate of Orthodoxy. Positions were expressed which, of course, differed from one another, but nevertheless it was a normal conversation. But what I have read in the Ukrainian press on the results of the Zurich meeting grieved me very much. I do not know who is guilty, whether the editors of the papers or those who granted interviews, but a completely distorted picture of what happened in Zurich was given. I don't like to quote others' interviews, but since you asked me, a strange impression was created that simply because of this meeting we were sitting with them on an equal basis and that we embraced and kissed, although that did not happen, and so it means that they were recognized. I would like to say: the fact of the invitation to Zurich of the uncanonical groupings does not entail any kind of recognition, neither on Moscow's part nor on Constantinople's part; that is very important to understand. There is a persistent myth being spread to the effect that Constantinople has recognized the uncanonical groupings and that Constantinople is ready to take the uncanonical groupings into its jurisdiction. Here is what representatives of Constantinople openly and directly told us at Zurich: they recognize as canonical only the Ukrainian Orthodox church of the Moscow patriarchate. They have not received and they will not receive into their jurisdiction a single uncanonical grouping. That somebody here commemorates the Constantinople patriarch is their personal affair. But the patriarch has not blessed this commemoration nor given consent to such commemoration. . . . (tr. by PDS, posted 31 July 2001)
COMMUNIQUE ABOUT MEETING OF OFFICIAL DELEGATIONS OF
CONSTANTINOPLE AND MOSCOW PATRIARCHATES
Communications
Service of Moscow patriarchate, 14 July 2001
On 13-14 July 2001 in Zurich a meeting of official delegations of the Constantinople and Moscow patriarchs was held with the goal of finding a means for overcoming church schisms existing in Ukraine.
The delegation of the Constantinople patriarchate comprised Metropolitan Ioann of Pergamum and Metropolitan Meliton of Philadelphia, general secretary of the Holy Synod, as well as Archimandrite Athanagoras Pekstadt and Hieromonk Ilarion Rudnik (translator). The Moscow patriarchate was represented by Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad, chairman of the Department of External Church Relations of the Moscow patriarchate, Metropolitan Agafangel of Odessa and Izmailsk, a permanent member of the Holy Synod of the Ukrainian Orthodox church, as well as Archpriest Nikolai Balashov, acting secretary of the Department of External Church Relations for inter-Orthodox relations and foreign institutions of the Russian Orthodox church.
Also invited were representatives of the so-called Ukrainian Orthodox church of the Kievan patriarchate and the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox church, who expressed their view of the situation in Ukraine.
Both delegations agreed to continue joint efforts to the end of healing
the church schism. In this regard the participation of Orthodox representatives
from Ukraine for further study of canonical questions that arise and of
the question of the future status of the Ukrainian church was recognized
as important. (tr. by PDS, posted 31 July 2001)
Russia Religion News Current News Items
An enormous uproar has broken out in Yaroslavl province over a small church in the village of Vedeniie. The local priest erected new crosses on the church on which swastikas are represented. The rector of the church does not even make a secret of his adherence to the Russian National Unity (RNE) or, simply speaking, the Barkashovites.
At first glance this Orthodox church is not distinguishable from others in any way. Same white walls; same onion domes. However if one looks more carefully one can notice that the church's cross is decorated with a swastika. A newcomer could find such a composition absurd. Local residents are already used to it. If they are asked about it they point to the rector of the church and say, "Father Sergius put them up."
Father Sergius is a well known personality in Yaroslavl diocese and not just for the swastika. Because of his tireless labors the church of the Appearance of the Mother of God was reborn, the number of parishioners has multiplied, and sponsors have appeared. Properly, it was on the money of these sponsors that the crosses were erected. So rumors have spread in the area that the priest is a Russian nationalist.
The priest does not tire of explaining to reporters that the swastika "is an ancient Orthodox symbol and it has nothing to do with fascism." Actually such symbols were used in antiquity as decorations on church furnishings and in church construction. The main difference is that such swastika turned toward the left. Hitler's swastika, as is known, had a rightward rotation. So in speaking thus Father Sergius does not violate his conscience very much; if one looks at the cross from one side, to be sure.
The church's rector has often had occasion to maintain his convictions not only before ecclesiastical but also civil authorities. Last year the local division for preservation of monuments of the history of culture expressed to the diocese its concern that the fascist symbol was being displayed above the church. The notice seemed reasonable to the diocesan administration and it issued an order to cover the dubious crosses.
Father Sergius is a former submarine officer and he sees nothing bad in a national idea nor does he hide that he was a member of the "Pamiat" society at one time. He is especially proud of his acquaintance with Alexander Barkashov. He often shows guests a photograph of him with Barkashov. The padre is especially proud of the Orthodox children's camp located alongside the grounds of the church. "It is necessary to work with children," he says, "since they are our future." (tr. by PDS, posted 31 July 2001)
"PROTOCOLS OF ELDERS OF ZION" DISTRIBUTED IN EKATERINBURG DIOCESE
Mir
religii, 29 July 2001
The Orthodox church is distributing the antisemitic "Protocols of the Elders of Zion." This was reported by the president of the Jewish National Culture Authority of Sverdlovsk province, Mikhail Oshtrakh, according to a report from Regions.ru.
According to Oshtrakh's information, in one of the diocesan icon stands in Ekaterinburg the book by Sergei Nilus, "It is near, even at the doors," is being sold. It was first published shortly before the revolution, and it includes the "Protocols." Nilus' book was intended to ignite hatred toward Jews and Judaism; it slanders the Jewish nation and its religion and represents Jews as enemies of Christians; it also contains sharply negative statements with respect to Islam, according to Oshtrakh.
The Jewish National Cultural Authority of Sverdlovsk province sent a statement to the Sverdlovsk province prosecutor's office requesting the opening of a criminal case on article 282 of the criminal code of the Russian federation, "Incitement of national, racial, or religious enmity." Besides this, the Jewish National Cultural Authority appealed to Prefect Peter Latyshev, provincial Governor Eduard Rossel, and Ekaterinburg Mayor Arkady Chernetsky requesting an end to the distribution by the Orthodox church of materials that incite national and religious hostility. (tr. by PDS, posted 31 July 2001)
Russia Religion News Current News Items
If material is quoted, please give credit to the publication
from which it came.
It is not necessary to credit this Web page. If material
is transmitted electronically, please include reference to the URL, http://www.stetson.edu/~psteeves/relnews/.