As we know, the Polish Autokephal Orthodox Church (PAKP) does not recognise the Orthodox Church of Ukraine (PCU). It is worth analyzing the motives of the PAKP, alternatively than pelting it.
To realize the church situation in Ukraine, it is essential to go back to the end times of the USSR. The alleged Ukrainian Patriarch Filaret, in the times of the USSR, the Kiev metropolitan and the KGB agent, who absolutely fought against attempts to introduce liturgy in Ukrainian in the area of the Kiev metropolitan area, hoped that after the death of the Patriarch of the All-Ruse Pimen for his contributions to the USSR he would become a fresh patriarch. There was even a locum tenens in the church (the work of the head of the Church until the election of a fresh patriarch).
However, times in the USSR changed, was 1990 and ruled by Mikhail Gorbachev, and KC KPZR refused to assist Filaret in the fight for the title of Patriarch of the All-Ruses. On the council electing the fresh patriarch, he obtained the least number of votes. After many he made a rask in the church and declared himself a free Ukrainian patriarch. No canonical church in the planet has recognized that. Eventually, the Council of the Church of the Almighty imposed an anathema on it (a curse). Here the crucial thing, according to the canons of the Church of Christ, the sin of the rascolic is simply a mortal sin, which does not wash distant even the martyr's death, and the another crucial thing of the anathema can remove only the body which imposed it, but for this it is essential to show the sinner. Once, by the divided of the Church, which took place in 1054, the bishop could inactive appeal to the Bishop of Rome, but this besides had no right to take the anatamy, he could only put the issue on the General Council. Patriarch Bartholomew taking off an anathema from Filareta and, without showing himself, violated the temple canons.
Second thing, the Kiev metropolis in 1686 passed under the authority of Moscow, as King John III Sobieski besides sought (It is about denying Turkey the influence on the Church in the Republic of Poland – as the Patriarchate of Constantinople since 1453 is in Turkey is powerfully dependent on its authorities). According to the canons of the Church of Christ, if any church unit passes under the jurisdiction of another bishop, specified a decision can only be changed within 30 years, and after that period becomes final.
Patriarch Bartłomiej by removing the Kiev metropolis from power of Moscow broke this canon and another canon saying that no church can make any decision about another autokephal church. In the church, unlike the Roman Catholic Church, there is no 1 earthly superior. The head of the Church is Jesus Christ. Autokephalic churches keep complete autonomy and only combine dogmas and canons. In another words, the patriarch of Constantinople has the same power as our metropolitan of the large Blessed Sawa or Patriarch of Jerusalem Moscow etc.
That is why our church, while keeping close to the canons, makes specified decisions alternatively than another decisions. The establishment of a separate Ukrainian Church is simply a purely political decision, which has no foundation in church doctrine. Let me remind you that unlike the Roman Catholic Church, bishops are appointed by the Council of Bishops of the local Church. In the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, all bishops are appointed by the local Council of this Church and not by Moscow. In the Roman Catholic Church, all bishops are appointed by the Bishop of Rome, who is the head of a abroad state, and this does not disturb anyone. The Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, as well as any another Orthodox Church during the liturgy (and this twice – during the proscommity and during the large entrance during the faithful liturgy) prays for the state, its power and military. Ukrainian church prays for Ukrainian state. The only sign of the subject of this church of Moscow is the fact that during the liturgy Patriarch Moskiewski is mentioned first and only later local bishop. In fact, in the Catholic Church, the bishop of Rome is mentioned in the mass, and this someway does not bother anyone.
In conclusion, it can be concluded that the establishment of a fresh church in Ukraine was incompatible with the canons and that this is simply a political decision. Of course, anyone can support specified a decision, but that does not mean that you can pour a bucket of slop on who stands on canonical ground. Finally, I would besides point out that there is simply a hazard that the fresh church may be affected by the heresy of enthophiletism. The first disturbing signals are here. At the United States Council, president Petro Poroshenko alternatively of talking about God and the Gospel, he spoke about politics. We are besides dealing with a patriotic-nationalist attitude of the parts of the clergy of the PCU, frequently flaunting trizub in liturgical robes, crosses, icons and modifying texts of worship and liturgical symbolism in the nationalist spirit. Our PAKP besides does not accept the expanding PCU glorification of the CNS-UPA.
Jacek Marczyński
photo of wikipedia
Think Poland, No. 9-10 (25.02-3.03.20201)
