Many in the Ukrainian community are aware of
what is happening in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada (UOCC) and
many
are not. More specifically, there is a serious division amongst the
faithful as
to the future direction of our church.
There are two sides to the dilemma. There are
those who support the UOCC’s decision to work towards the unity of all
Orthodox
faithful in North America, under the Ecumenical Patriarch of
Constantinople
(EP). This is a virtuous ideal but leads to the other side of the
dilemma: many
Ukrainian Orthodox faithful are deeply disturbed by the intent of
pan-Orthodoxy
to blur, if not eliminate, the ethnic component of our church. This is
disturbing, as this intent was not disclosed as part of the 1990
agreement with
the Ecumenical Patriarch. In addition, as the Ecumenical Patriarch
regards the
Moscow Patriarchate (MP) as the only legitimate Orthodox church in
Ukraine, any
sort of affiliation with the Ecumenical Patriarch provokes deep
concerns. And,
to the profound astonishment of many, it appears that the UOCC supports
this
position as evidenced by the events surrounding His Holiness Patriarch
Filaret’s visit to Canada.
As the common people argue amongst themselves,
our hierarchy continues to remain silent on these issues, with the
exception of
a published rebuttal to the hundreds of letters and emails sent to the
consistory regarding the visit of His Holiness Patriarch Filaret,
Kyivan
Patriarchate (KP). The scandal is out in the open and the hierarchy is
only
hurting itself by keeping silent.
In 1990, at the Sobor of the Ukrainian Orthodox
Church in Canada, delegates voted to enter the union with the EP.
However, we
need to address the questions that persist today -- what exactly does
the union
with the EP mean for our church moving forward and has our hierarchy
been clear
and transparent all along with its members? And with its clergy, as
well?
If the “elimination” of the “Ukrainian” in our
church was part of the original agreement between the UOCC and the EP
and if
the delegates were fully aware of this and the vote was still in
favour, then
why are there so many parishioners completely unaware of this? Has
there been
anything in any of the publications released by the Consistory
clarifying this
for the people? Have the concept and implications of pan-Orthodoxy been
shared
with parishioners and with all of our clergy? Obviously not, since
there are so
many people that have been taken aback by this revelation and the
UOCC’s
current position on the matter. Most, particularly in eastern Canada,
are not
aware that they are on the road to being members of the Orthodox Church
of
Canada, without the “Ukrainian” in it.
On the other hand, if the delegates were led to
believe that the union would allow the faithful to continue as they
were, to
retain their Ukrainian culture and heritage, and full sobornopravnist’,
then
the recent events that have taken place with the visit of His Holiness
Patriarch Filaret to Canada have proven this to be false and that the
terms
have been broken. If the delegates were mislead, then we can cry foul
and we
should be demanding our hierarchy take responsibility for this deceit
and/or
ultimately demand their removal from the positions they hold. The
faithful have
been denied and continue to be denied access to the actual Articles of
Agreement as agreed upon between the UOCC and the EP.
One cannot truly believe that their soul will
be “saved” by those that deliberately have lied to further their own
personal
agendas. If pan-Orthodoxy has been the intended path all along, then
action is
required by the people. Without the people, there is no parish. Without
parishes, there is no money. Without the faithful, our hierarchy and
clergy
would have their place in monasteries and not amongst us. The UOCC must
be
accountable to its paying members and should be acting on their
concerns with
the EP; we should be pressuring them to do so. And if they cannot, then
we
should be demanding to know why. And we do deserve some explanations.
Educate
us, if you deem that we do not understand the complicated nature of
your
negotiations.
On the matter of canonical or not -- these laws
were made by man and there is no reason that they should not be
challenged if
they are contrary to our faith; the greatest commandment that Jesus
Christ put
forth “Love thy neighbour as thyself” overrides all canonical laws,
therefore,
the people should have been allowed to meet and greet His Holiness
Patriarch
Filaret on that principle alone. If this mandate came down as stated in
the
letter from the Ecumenical Patriarch, then he himself, with all due
respect, is
not following God’s commandments and therefore, there is warranted
suspicion
that he, too, has a hidden agenda -- one that serves his own personal
plan.
Giving the UOCC hierarchy the benefit of the
doubt, the pan-Orthodox plan may have only become known after the union
with
the EP in 1990 and has been evolving over the years. But if so, once
again, why
did our hierarchy not share this vision with all the members of the
UOCC? Were
there ongoing concerns that letting parishioners know exactly what was
happening would be like opening Pandora’s Box and they chose not to
have to
deal with it? If this is the case, the head of our hierarchy, has not
only
betrayed his flock, but Ukraine and his own Ukrainian ancestors and
heritage.
Especially so, if he was aware of the road he was taking us down, all
along.
The amalgamation of all Orthodox churches,
without ethnicity regarded as a priority, will slowly erode and
eliminate the
Ukrainian aspect of our parishes. Those wanting to retain their
Ukrainian heritage
and the Ukrainian Orthodox church in both Canada and the USA are having
a very
difficult time accepting this reality. As a result, some have chosen
collectively to remain Ukrainian Orthodox by turning to the Kyivan
Patriarchate
because the Ecumenical Patriarch’s vision of a unified Orthodox faith
does not
embrace the ethnic lines of division.
The
EP’s vision is moving steadily forward in
North America and it will only be a matter of time before it directly
affects
each and every one of us. For those in the Eastern Eparchy, it already
has -–
the title of Bishop of Toronto, which has been in place for over 50
years, has
been revoked because there is already a Bishop of Toronto, albeit
Greek. As
well, parishioners are being told whom they can and cannot welcome into
their
churches as evidenced by His Holiness Patriarch Filaret’s visit to
Canada.
Most
of us have grown up in churches that are
both Orthodox and Ukrainian. Our religion and ethnicity are one. Our
communities revolve around this fact. If it did not matter, one could
join the
closest Orthodox church in the vicinity. If the Ukrainian part of it is
no
longer important for some, then it is completely understandable that
the
amalgamation is a wonderful thing. However, for many, both religion and
ethnicity are inseparable. Many are at a loss as to why our
Metropolitan did
not have the courage to stand up to the Ecumenical Patriarch,
particularly for
what he knows defines us as a people. The issue here is what we don’t
know --
the reluctance on the part of our hierarchy to be honest with us, and
their
failure to accept the consequences of their actions and/or inactions.
If you consider yourself Ukrainian and
Orthodox, it is a given that you believe the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
in
Ukraine needs to be free of the Moscow Patriarchate (MP). Currently,
the
Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Ukraine that stands independently of
Moscow is
under the Kyivan Patriarchate and we should be supporting the KP, not
just with
words but also by actions. This does not necessarily mean by joining
the KP but
by preserving our church in the Diaspora, by rallying to see the Moscow
Patriarchate leave Ukraine, to see the return of all Ukrainian property
back to
the Ukrainian people and to see a truly independent church, free of
foreign
intervention in order to support a truly independent Ukraine. And,
ultimately
pressuring the EP to recognize the KP in Ukraine on their terms, not on
Moscow’s. Now that Ukraine is free, there is no reason for the MP to
continue
its reign in Ukraine, except one of monetary greed. As good Christians,
they
should return what they have taken from Ukraine, what is rightfully
belonging
to the Ukrainian people –- the churches, the monasteries, the power...
Our hierarchy must listen to the words being
spoken. It is their responsibility as role models to make peace amongst
the
people – not allow them to continue arguing. They should be striving to
help those
parishes that are failing financially to find solutions -- not closing
them
down without compromise, as recently has been happening. Their
obligation
should be finding a way to keep the people in our churches -- whether
it is
amalgamating our Ukrainian parishes, sharing priests and/or rotating
priests…
but shutting down parishes in which parishioners have bounced back with
the
will to continue? To not find amicable solutions? That the only way is
to sell
the property?
The people in New Westminster, BC, who are
suing the UOCC for the return of the deed to their church, looked for a
solution -- they had only two choices, it was either join the Kyivan
Patriarchate as a member church or shut its doors and have the
Consistory
assume title and sell their property. They chose to join the KP rather
than be
without a church. Ask yourself the question -- what would you do if you
were
told you had to close down your church and that the Consistory would
sell the
land and keep the proceeds? Would you fight to save it? Without
personally
knowing anyone in this parish, one can still sympathize with them. It
is very
disillusioning in that a compromise was not found. One would think that
if a
group of people came back wanting to save their church that our
hierarchy would
have worked with them to find a solution. From the rhetoric seen in
recent
chains of emails amongst the faithful, it does not sound like that was
the
case. Therefore, it should not be held against them in that they wanted
to save
their parish -- they did not flip to the KP on a whim. We now are
waiting to
see what will happen with St. Anne’s in Scarborough, Ontario. Once
again, it
has been reported that the UOCC is not willing to entertain viable
solutions
that would keep the parish viable and active.
If
the current concerns of his followers were
truly important to His Eminence, then he would listen and value their
opinions
rather than waving them off. The Sobors have lost credibility in the
eyes of
many as the outcomes have been often compromised. So where does that
leave the
people?
The parishes will need to decide what the
future holds for them. Moreover, they should be let go freely if that
is what
they choose. However, that would only happen if this were not about
money. It
is not about doing what is right by the people and staying true to the
commandments. Sadly, these words are all moot because everything points
to the
fact that this is about politics, power and money.
Christian?
No.
Orthodox?
Apparently so.
Submitted
on behalf of The Brotherhood for the Revitalization of Ukrainian
Orthodoxy in
Canada, a group of private individuals concerned about the future of
the Ukrainian
Orthodox Church in Canada -- "Preserving, Protecting and Revitalizing
our
Faith and Ukrainian heritage for our generation and those to follow."
Find
out more at http://www.BRUOC.ca