Source: Peter Anderson, Seattle USA
UA/GR Meeting with the delegation of the Ecumenical Patriarchate
On August 20, the Ukrainian Rada approved on the second reading Draft Law 8371 without discussion and by a large majority vote. https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-parliament-legislative-ban-ukrainian-orthodox-church-539e0f3a6d657277aa4fa93b8ec53505 The Draft Law is now being prepared for the signature of President Zelensky. https://itd.rada.gov.ua/billInfo/Bills/Card/41219 It appears absolutely certain that the President will sign 8371 as he repeatedly urged its passage in his nightly addresses last week. In the event of an alleged violation of the new law, there are a series of administrative steps that will occur. A very brief summary of these administrative steps is as follows: (1) On the initiative of the Ukrainian State Service for Ethnopolitics and Freedom of Conscience (DESS) or on the initiative of “other persons,” an investigation is begun by DESS; (2) The investigation is performed by DESS with the possible use of experts to determine whether there are “signs” that the religious organization is “affiliated” with the Moscow Patriarchate; (3) If any of the signs is found, DESS issues an order to eliminate the signs of affiliation; (4) Within a period of 30 days (which can be extended to 60 days), the religious organization is required to eliminate the signs of affiliation and to send a report to DESS. The religious organization may also object to the findings of affiliation; (5) DESS then makes a decision as to whether affiliation still exists. This five-step administrative procedure goes into effect and is activated 30 days after the publication of 8371. There is then a sixth step which is the filing of a lawsuit by DESS with a court to terminate the religious organization which has failed to eliminate all of the signs of affiliation. Under the terms of 8371, DESS cannot take this final sixth step and file a lawsuit with the court until nine months after the publication of 8371. However, all of the five administrative steps can be done before the ninth month.
There remains the very important question as to whether 8371 complies with the freedom of religion requirements of the Ukrainian Constitution and of the various international conventions to which Ukraine is a party, such as the Council of Europe’s Convention of Human Rights (involving the European Court of Human Rights and the Venice Commission) and the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (involving the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights). Liz Throssel, press secretary of the Office of the High Commissioner, has informed RIA Novosti: “We are aware of the adoption of this law by the Ukrainian parliament and are in the process of obtaining the law and analyzing its provisions.” https://ria.ru/20240821/ukraina-1967501859.html It is my opinion, as frequently stated in my prior newsletters, a reading of the actual language of 8371 discloses many serious legal problems with respect to freedom of religion. If you are interested in an English translation of 8371, as approved by the Rada, I will email it to you upon request.
As is not surprising, the Holy Synod of the Moscow Patriarchate issued on August 22 a long and harsh condemnation of the passage of Draft Law 8371. http://www.patriarchia.ru/en/db/text/6152926.html (official English translation of the full text)
The passage of 8371 may provide a critical opportunity to reassess the relationship between the UOC, the OCU, and the Ecumenical Patriarchate. At the present time, a delegation of the Ecumenical Patriarchate is in Kyiv to explore the opportunities that may now exist for improving the religious situation in Ukraine. As a first stop, the delegation visited the historic St. Andrew Church (owned by the State but used by the Ecumenical Patriarchate as its stauropegion) in Kyiv. https://fosfanariou.gr/index.php/2024/08/21/antiprosopeia-tou-ecum-thronou-sto-kiev/ On August 22 the delegation met with Metropolitan Epifany and other representatives of the OCU. The OCU’s summary of the meeting is found at https://www.pomisna.info/uk/vsi-novyny/zustrich-z-delegatsiyeyu-vselenskogo-patriarhatu/. It is my understanding that the mission of the delegation is to talk to all parties and to seek to establish a dialogue to help resolve the religious situation in Ukraine. All of the three members of the delegation are ethnic Ukrainians. Metropolitan Ilarion is the Archbishop of Winnipeg and Metropolitan of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada. In September 2018, the Ecumenical Patriarchate appointed Ilarion, then Bishop of Edmonton, Canada, to be one of two exarchs to Ukraine with the responsibility of preparing for the unification Council held in Kyiv at the end of the year. Metropolitan Job (Getcha) of Pisidia was born in Canada and has held various important positions with the Ecumenical Patriarchate. In 2014, Job and Ilarion represented the Ecumenical Patriarchate at the funeral of Metropolitan Volodymyr, the primate of the UOC prior to Onufry. The third member of the delegation is Epiphanios Kamianovych, a Ukrainian patriarchal deacon at the Fanar.
It is significant that Elder Metropolitan Emmanuel of Chalcedon, who has been the Ecumenical Patriarch’s principal representative to Ukraine, is not a member of the delegation. Emmanuel presided at the Council which created the OCU in 2018. He has since traveled to Ukraine on numerous occasions. There are unverified reports that there were tensions between Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and Metropolitan Emmanuel in connection with the meetings with the delegations of the OCU and the Office of the Ukrainian President at the Fanar on August 13, 2024. It appears that Metropolitan Emmanuel is very supportive of the OCU and defends its actions. On the other hand, it is reported that the Ecumenical Patriarch has concerns about some of the actions taken by the OCU. See https://spzh.live/ru/news/81722-hlava-fanara-potreboval-ot-dumenko-objasnit-silovye-zakhvaty-khramov-upts (a very pro-UOC website) It is likely that the Ecumenical Patriarchate’s delegation will take a fresh look at the religious situation now existing in Ukraine and will not view the situation simply through the eyes of the OCU.
One option to be considered is the establishment of a temporary structure of the Ecumenical Patriarchate to receive parishes, and even eparchies, of the UOC seeking to escape the effect of 8371. It appears that both the OCU and Metropolitan Emmanuel are strongly opposed to this option. The argument is that the tomos gives the OCU exclusive jurisdiction over Ukraine. However, the Ecumenical Patriarchate is the creator of the tomos and should have the power to create a structure which is limited in duration and which seeks to provide relief in an unusual and urgent situation. Of course, the OCU will argue that the solution is for the UOC parishes and eparchies to join the OCU, as many UOC parishes have already done. However, the number of transferred parishes is still a fairly small percentage of the total number of UOC parishes. Often these UOC parishes have transferred to the OCU without their priests, and the OCU does not have sufficient priests to staff all of these parishes. No eparchies of the UOC have transferred to the OCU after the 2018 Council.
The animosity between the UOC and the OCU has become so great that many UOC parishes would prefer to be terminated and to continue their existence without their buildings and governmental recognition rather than join the OCU. The reasons for this animosity include, but are not limited to the following: (1) the belief that the OCU does not have apostolic succession and that the orders of the OCU are not valid; (2) the belief that the OCU is responsible for the violence and “seizure” of UOC churches; (3) the fact that the OCU has vigorous campaigned for the elimination of the UOC through Draft Law 8371 and though other means. Although the UOC has severed eucharistic communion with the Ecumenical Patriarchate, the Patriarchate does have apostolic succession, has not been involved in the war over churches, and has not vigorously campaigned for 8371. There are now some indications that parts of the UOC, which would find joining the OCU completely unacceptable, would seriously consider joining a temporary structure under the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Hopefully, the delegation will consider all possible options including this one. The delegation should have serious discussions with representatives of UOC, which would probably be done on a very confidential basis. Archimandrite Cyril Hovorun has given a very interesting interview concerning the situation of the UOC following the passage of 8371. https://euromaidanpress.com/2024/08/21/not-about-banning-theologian-unpacks-ukraines-new-anti-russian-church-law/ He comments on the diversity of views within the UOC. Because the UOC is not united in its views, an option may involve the entire UOC or only a part of it. In my opinion, the delegation should be prepared to “think outside of the box.” Now may be a unique opportunity for improving the religious situation in Ukraine.
In Estonia, a Council of the Estonian Orthodox Church (EOC) of the Moscow Patriarchate was held in Tallinn on August 20, and an important decision was made with respect to the relationship of the EOC to the Moscow Patriarchate. The EOC’s report on the results of the Council can be read at https://ru.orthodox.ee/news/v-talline-sostoyalas-vtoraya-sessiya-sobora-epcz-mp/ From a photograph of the Council posted on this link, one can see that Metropolitan Evgeny of Tallinn and All Estonia presided at the Council via videoconferencing from Russia. The Council was held pursuant to the agreement reached on July 30 between the EOC and the Estonian Ministry of the Interior that the EOC would “submit to the Ministry of the Interior by the end of August” its proposal for amending its charter to delete references to the statutory documents of the Moscow Patriarchate, except for the reference to the tomos of the Moscow Patriarchate giving the EOC “self-governing” status. From the EOC’s report, it appears that these deletions were approved at the August 20 meeting. The July 30 agreement with the Ministry of Interior also involved a commitment by the EOC to begin consultations with the EAOC (Ecumenical Patriarchate) to find ways to unite all of Orthodoxy in Estonia into a single church. In this regard, the report on the Council of August 20 stated: “The Council approved the activities of the Synod in the negotiation process with the state and expressed confidence that the Orthodox in Estonia will be able to find ways and means of healing the schism on the basis of canonicity, mutual respect and equality.”
Peter Anderson, Seattle USA
