L'archevêque Job (Getcha) s'est montré courroucé !
C'est d'une manière assez brutale que l’Archevêque Job de Telmessos le représentant du patriarcat de Constantinople a réagi à la déclaration faite par le porte-parole de l'Eglise canonique EOU.

Récemment le Phanar abondait en prises de positions pacifiques en ce qui concerne la situation en Ukraine. Le métropolite Onuphre a prié les deux exarques de Constantinople venus à Kiev sans concertation préalable avec l'Eglise canonique de quitter le pays.

Selon Mgr Job "la méchante Moscou" ne veut pas lâcher l'EOU et s'oppose à l'octroi de l'autocéphalie par Constantinople. L'EOU n'est pas, dans le cadre des relations inter-ecclésiales une entité autonome habilitée à conduire des négociations.

Mgr Job s'est souvenu de l'invitation envoyée il y a dix ans au patriarche Bartholomé de venir à Kiev. A l'époque le patriarche Bartholomé était venu à Kiev sans y être invité par l'Eglise d'Ukraine, sur l'invitation du président Youchtchenko. Alors l'EOU dirigée par Sa Béatitude le métropolite Vladimir avait invité pour la commémoration du baptême de la Rus Sa Sainteté le patriarche Alexis II. Le synode de l'EOU n'avait pas voulu provoquer alors des dissensions à cause de la brutale violation des canons par le Phanar.

Source Traduction pour "PO"

P.S. Rappelons qu'alors Youchtchenko en 2008 avait en public prié le patriarche Bartholomé d'octroyer l'indépendance à l'Eglise d'Ukraine mais le patriarche avait répondu que tant que la scission ne sera pas surmontée il n'était pas question de la faire. Il a rappelé qu'il éprouvait du respect pour Monseigneur Vladimir, responsable de l'EOU Dans sa réponse le président ukrainien a précisé que l'Etat n'a pas à s'ingérer dans les affaires de l'Eglise .
L'archevêque Job (Getcha) s'est montré courroucé !

Rédigé par Parlons D'orthodoxie le 20 Octobre 2018 à 12:19 | 17 commentaires | Permalien


Commentaires

1.Posté par N.B. le 26/09/2018 14:24
"..s'est montré courroucé !" La tristesse, la colère ou l’angoisse sont bien sûr des sentiments qui vont favoriser l’impulsivité. L’impulsivité est généralement corrélée à une difficulté de gestion émotionnelle

2.Posté par Marie Genko le 26/09/2018 14:48
Depuis 2008 le ton du patriarche Bartholomé a bien changé…

Il n'est plus question de s'abstenir d'une ingérence dans les affaires de l'Eglise d'Ukraine.

Qui manipule qui ?

Les Américains ne se cachent plus de leur ingérence, et nous ne devons pas oublier que qu'un des penseurs de la politique étrangère américaine, Sbignew Brezinski a dit que l'Orthodoxie était le pire ennemi des Etats Unis.

Pour nous Orthodoxes, le seul enjeu vital est la survie de l'Orthodoxie traditionnelle, non seulement dans cette partie du sud est du continent européen, peuplée par nos frères, mais dans tous les pays de notre malheureux monde.
Et ma conviction profonde est que justement, c'est cette Orthodoxie qu'il faut absolument diviser pour mieux l'abattre.
Pauvre Patriarche Bartholomée qui ne peut que se soumettre au jeu des diviseurs, il nous faut prier pour lui.

3.Posté par Guillaume le 26/09/2018 16:25
Je vais le plaindre le pauvre. Vu le comportement qu'il avait lorsqu'il était exarque du patriarcat à Paris, il devrait apprendre l'humilité.

4.Posté par père Joachim le 26/09/2018 18:02
De la part de personnage très autorisés de notre hiérarchie j'ai pu lire à propos de primauté, " comment faisait on avant qu'elle soit instituée par Constantin avant le IVs.".
Un autre à pu dire qu'il y a place chez nous à une primauté sans collégialité.
Quand à la "dernière", il y a 5 jours, j'ai entendu à Yaroslav dans sa cathédrale, le recteur dire : "en premier lieu souviens Toi de notre Patriarche de Moscou et de Kiev !" alors qu’ailleurs dans les paroisses des Métropoles Grecque on ne commémore à la Divine Liturgie que l'évêque local.

De telles affirmations révèlent un manque total de connaissances de bases. Et une disparité trop grande dans trop d'"idées reçues et fausses" Elles tendent à mettre des distances trop grandes entre les Patriarcats, qui peuvent pour finir créer le schisme.

Dans la démarche œcuménique on peut accepter, rencontres et dialogues, entre les Confessions. Mais est il possible de faire quo-exister hors anglicanisme "la compréhension du grand écart" ?

Il faut souligner que dans le schisme une seule position est celle de l'orthodoxie. Mais ce qui est à craindre dans le cas qui préoccupe à présent c'est que dans les bonnes idées (et les moins honorables)qui s'opposent on voit encore MAL SE DESSINER les contours de la foi droite qui serait portée par la partie orthodoxe en matière d'ecclésiologie.

5.Posté par Опровержение слов вл.Иова митрополитом УПЦ le 26/09/2018 19:00
Глава синодального отдела УПЦ митрополит Митрофан ответил Арх. Иову (Гейча).

Он опроверг тезис экзарха о том, что десять лет назад, а именно в 2008 году, Константинопольский патриарх приезжал в Киев якобы без приглашения УПЦ, и это не вызвало тогда никакого сопротивления с ее стороны.

"Это тоже неправда. Приглашение от нашей Церкви тогда было", - сказал митрополит, напомнив, что в адрес патриарха Варфоломея в тот год поступило два приглашения - от Церкви и государства. При этом церковное приглашение для него имеет основной приоритет, поскольку он мог бы приехать в Украину и без приглашения со стороны президента, но без церковного приглашения такой приезд был бы невозможен" .
Текст ответа полностью читать по ссылке

6.Posté par Laurent le 26/09/2018 20:52
Nous étions heureux de l’affectation de Mgr Job à la cathédrale Daru. Cela d'autant plus qu'il y avait eu auparavant de longues années de confrontation avec l'Eglise russe. Ce site "PARLONS D'ORTHODOXIE" a applaudi Mgr Job.

Quelle est la raison de ces étranges déclarations?

Est-ce que l'Etat, fut-il personnifié par Youchtchenko et/ou Porochenko est en droit d'arbitrer des dissensions ecclésiales?

7.Posté par Théophile le 26/09/2018 21:35
@Laurent
Certains ont applaudi l'autoritarisme de Mgr Job, en espérant que cela serait positif pour Daru, qui était perçu comme anarchique, ingérable et anti-moscovite. Mais Mgr Job a fait bcp de dégâts dans l'Exarchat, où il a semé une zizanie funeste (enfin c'est mon opinion).

A présent, l'affaire ukrainienne montre que Mgr Job loin d'en avoir retiré un dommage pour son épiscopat n'en est que plus apprécié du Patriarcat de Constantinople, ce qui est très inquiétant
Désormais, il sème la zizanie au niveau mondial simplement.

S'il continue à ce rythme, il sera bientôt patriarche auto-proclamé d'Ukraine.

8.Posté par Affeninsel le 26/09/2018 22:59
@Marie Genko : n'êtes-vous pas fatiguée de toujours rabâcher les mêmes accusations contre un ennemi extérieur ?

J'en ai assez de cette manière de se glorifier de l'état merveilleux de l'Orthodoxie actuelle, et de considérer que ses problèmes viennent nécessairement des méchants du dehors. Si l'église était solide spirituellement, si ses hiérarques obéissaient à la volonté de Dieu au lieu de se comporter en boutiquiers, croyez-vous que les manœuvres des ennemis de l'Eglise l'atteindraient ?

Comment ne pas voir que l'Eglise est déjà divisée depuis longtemps ? Que le modèle actuel est essentiellement celui que saint Paul interdit, où les yeux disent aux mains "nous n'avons pas besoin de vous" ?

Nous récoltons les fruits pourris de ces attitudes lamentables. Et l'on voudrait nous faire croire que cette crise se règlera en maintenant le statu quo.

9.Posté par Tchetnik: le 27/09/2018 08:08
@Affeninsel

Il est probable que Marie et vous ayez raison tous les deux.
Les deux aspects existent, doivent être constatés et combattus avec lucidité.

10.Posté par Tchetnik: le 27/09/2018 08:09
Mgr Job est d'origine "ukrainienne". Et très acquis à la papauté constantinopolitaine. C'est donc l'allumette et le baril de poudre.

11.Posté par Vladimir.G: UNE MANŒUVRE MALIGNE, ANTI-CANONIQUE, INAMICALE ... le 27/09/2018 12:46
UNE MANŒUVRE MALIGNE, ANTI-CANONIQUE, INAMICALE ...

La manœuvre de Constantinople apparaît très astucieuse : soumis à une très forte pression nord-américaine pour, selon eux, "libérer l’Église ukrainienne de la main mise russe", il n’accorde pas l’autocéphalie aux juridictions schismatique (pseudo-patriarcat de Kiev/PK et Église orthodoxe autocéphale ukrainienne/EOAU aussi appelée ‘Église ukrainienne autocéphale’ (1)), mais va susciter la formation d’une nouvelle entité sous son obédience directe. Il évite ainsi le mauvais exemple de la légalisation de schismatiques, qui serait certainement très mal vu des autres Églises soumises à des mouvements sécessionnistes, mais reste anti-canonique en venant brutalement interférer dans la juridiction d’une autre Église autocéphale, comme le montre la rupture "provisoire" de la communion et des commémoration par l’Église russe.

La désignation de ces deux exarques montre que le Phanar est parti dans une fuite en avant qui correspondrait bien à la volonté occidentale, et surtout Nord américaine, de casser l'Orthodoxie. Ce suivisme de Constantinople est bien illustré par la nomination comme exarques de 2 évêques des Églises orthodoxes ukrainiennes des USA et du Canada; il n’a rien de surprenant puisque l'essentiel de son troupeau actuel, et de ses ressources, se trouvent dans ces pays, et cela illustre bien ce conflit géopolitique que j'appelle le nouveau "Grand Jeu" par référence à la lutte d’influence que se livrèrent les Grandes Puissances, dont la Russie, autour de la Perse et de l’empire ottoman au milieu du XIXe siècle : comme alors, il s’agir d’encercler la Russie ("containment" depuis 1947)! Ces deux exarques complètent ainsi le dispositif anti-russe mis en place en Ukraine par les "conseillers militaires" US et Canadiens déjà en place, et la manœuvre vise à casser, voire retourner, l’arme idéologique que la religion orthodoxe pouvait constituer pour la Russie.

À suivre...

(1) https://www.egliserusse.eu/blogdiscussion/A-PROPOS-DE-LA-RENCONTRE-A-ISTANBUL-LE-31-AOUT-ET-MAINTENANT_a5481.html

12.Posté par Marie Genko le 05/10/2018 00:33
J'ai lu un assez long article qui donne l'historique de l'Eglise orthodoxe ukrainienne aux USA et au Canada.

Comme cet article est en Anglais, je vais essayer d'en donner les lignes principales.

L'Orthodoxie est présente aux USA grâce aux efforts des moines de Valaam.
Son centre est à San Francisco en 1872
L'archevêque Tikhon (Beliaev) futur Saint Patriarche de toutes les Russies transfère ce centre à la cathédrale Saint Nicolas à New York. Ce diocèse de l'Eglise russe aux USA compte alors environ 100 paroisses et plusieurs milliers de fidèles.
Suite à la guerre civile en Russie et à la brève création d'une république d'Ukraine, une vague de nationalisme s'empare des Orthodoxes originaires de ces anciennes provinces de l'empire russe.
En août 1918 création d'une Eglise ukrainienne au Canada.
En 1919 le métropolite Germanos, responsable du diocèse américain de l'Eglise d'Antioche, préside illégalement une assemblée de cette Eglise d'Ukraine et accepte de la prendre en charge.
En 1924 le métropolite Germanos transfère son autorité à un prélat auto proclamé :Ivan Téodorovich!
Ce ne sera qu'en 1990 que cette entité schismatique sera accueillie dans la juridiction du Patriarcat de Constantinople.
Et ceci sans qu'ils se soient repentis de leur péché de schisme.

Une autre communauté schismatique aux USA sera accueillie par le patriarcat de Constantinople en 1995.

Je vais vérifier la source de cet article et vous le donner dans un message postérieur.

13.Posté par Marie Genko le 05/10/2018 00:40
L'article dont j'ai donné les lignes essentielles sont une interview de l'évêque Job Smakouz par Sergueï Geruk. Elle est parue en Russe sur le site Pravoslavie.ru

Je donne pour ceux que cela intéresse le texte intégral en Anglais.


Born of Schism
On the historical circumstances of the emergence of the “Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Canada”
Sergei Geruk, Bishop Job (Smakouz)

The Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew delegated Archbishop Daniel and Bishop Hilarion to Ukraine, “for the healing of the schism”, and to provide a tomos for a “Single Orthodox Church of Ukraine” which is as yet not recognized by anyone. Both of these hierarchs represent two formerly schismatic Ukrainian groups in the US and Canada, which were [summarily] received under the omorphorion of the Patriarchate of Constantinople in 1990, and 1995.

On the subject of the historical circumstances of the Ukrainian churches born from schism across the ocean, we spoke with Bishop Job (Smakouz), who for 13 years bore the responsibility of Administrator of the Patriarchal parishes of the Russian Orthodox Church in Canada, and temporarily administered the Patriarchal Parishes in the US (2009-2010), and in September of this year, arrived in Ukraine for further archpastoral service.


Schismatics’ council. October 14, 1921, Kiev Schismatics’ council. October 14, 1921, Kiev

Your Eminence, as history shows, Orthodox immigrants [to North America.—Trans.] from the Western Russian lands—now part of Ukraine—remained under the omorphorion of the Russian Orthodox Church. This diocese, which arose due to the labors of monks from Valaam Monastery, had its center in San-Francisco since 1872. In 1905, this center was moved to the new Saint Nicholas Cathedral in New York City, by Archbishop Tikhon (Belavin)—the future Saint and Patriarch of all Rus’. Where did the “Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Canada” come from?

Indeed, since 1907, the only Orthodox diocese of the American continent was called the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic[1] Church in North America, under the jurisdiction of ecclesiastical rule of the Russian Church. It covered the entire territory of the United States and Canada, and had about one hundred parishes and tens of thousands of believers.

Regrettably, after the 1917 coup in Petrograd[2], and the brief emergence of the Ukrainian People’s Republic, the spirit of nationalism and revolutionary radicalism gradually began to penetrate into the environment of Orthodox Ukrainians in Canada.

In August of 1918, a conference of Orthodox Ukrainians in the Canadian provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta was held, the majority of whom had been forced to visit Uniate parishes. From this, the Ukrainian Orthodox Brotherhood was created for the sake of the organization [creation] of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Canada.

—How did it act?

—This brotherhood, understanding that a Church cannot exist without a Bishop, turned to a bishop of the Russian Orthodox Church Alexander (Nemolovsky)[3], born in Volhynia, with a petition to become the head of the “Ukrainian Greek-Orthodox Church in Canada” (as they decided to name their church organization). Bishop Alexander first agreed to help with the organization of the church life of these Orthodox Ukrainians, and preside over the proposed council, but then, thanks to the staunchness of the administrator and leader of the Canadian mission, the rector of the Holy Trinity Church in Winnipeg, Archimandrite Adam (Filipovsky), a native of Galicia, a “strict Rusin[4]” [Carpatho-Russian], and a stalwart champion of the unity of the Russian Orthodox Church and Carpathian Rus’ with the entire Russian nation,[5] refused.

Regardless of all the slander against him, and the lack of support of his own bishop, Father Adam, a firm supporter of the unity of “Canadian Rus” with Great Rus’[6], managed to succeed in that Bishop Alexander did not attend the 1918 congress of Ukrainian separatists, and did not support them.. Father Adam referred to nationalism, and the violation of church canons and oaths in the ecclesiastical life of Galicia, and Canadian Galicians, as “the Austro-Galician Swamp”.

—But did such a council take place?

Without the blessing of a bishop, it was not a [true] council, but rather a self-organized gathering, which took place on December 28, 1918. Since there was not a single hierarch in it, there were no decisions made on the canonical education of the ecclesiastical life of Ukrainians. But decisions were adopted on organizing a spiritual seminary in the city of Saskatoon. And soon, the second “council”, took place, on November 27, 1919, at which the Antiochian [Syrian-Lebanese] Metropolitan Germanos[7] (Shehadi) was present, illegally taking under his care the Ukrainian parishes in Canada, as he had done in the United States earlier.

The next gathering was when the so-called “Council of the Ukrainian Greek Orthodox Church of Canada” (UGOCC) on July 16-17 of 1924, as well as another gathering of Ukrainians in the United States, which decided to invite Ivan Teodorovich[8] to lead their church, and he accepted.

According to the information of the “self-sanctifiers”[9] themselves, their temporary head, Metropolitan Germanos who lead the Antiochian Orthodox Church[10], transferred his rights to the self-sanctifier Ivan Teodorovich. What right he had to lead them, and subsequently transfer them to the non-canonical fugitive “theater artist” in hierarchal vestments is uncertain.

—How was this “church” represented in numbers?

—Self sanctifier[МS1] Teodorovich visited Canadian parishes only in the winter, and in the summer, he was replaced by the head of the Consistory Semyon Savchuk. According to the dubious data of the Ukrainians themselves, by the end of 1928, the non-canonical Ukrainian Greek Orthodox Church of Canada had 64 thousand members, united 152 parishes, in which twenty-one “Milord[11] Fathers” served in the Ukrainian language. In 1940, there were already 189 parishes. Besides a small number of former Uniates, they consisted of “sincere[12]” Bukovinians and Volhynians from a new wave of emigration from Poland in the 1930s. In Canada, however, after some time, protests began against the non-canonical “ordination” of the Kievan Self-Sanctifier Teodorovich.


Met. Hilarion (Ohienko) Met. Hilarion (Ohienko) —Did the situation change after the Second World War?

—In 1951, the Canadian schismatic-autocephalites invited the former metropolitan of the Polish Orthodox Church Hilarion (Ohienko, 1882-1972), who fled with the retreating fascists[13] to the West. He was the “First Hierarch” of the so-called Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Canada from 1951 to 1972, with the title of “Metropolitan of Winnipeg”. According to the memoirs of Metropolitan Evlogii (Georgievsky), “Though Orthodox by religious confession, Ohienko believed, however, that it is possible to commune with the Uniates.”

Thanks to the labors of Hilarion (Ohienko)—a historian of Ukrainian nationalist bent, political actor, philologist, and translator of the Bible into Ukrainian—the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada reached its apogee.

He was ordained by the Metropolitan of Warsaw and All Poland Dionizy (Waledyński) to the dignity of Bishop of Kholm during the years of the Second World War—in 1940; but this was not for the German occupied Ukraine, but rather for the so called “General Government”, which was then a part of Poland under the control of the Third Reich.

—Was Metropolitan Hilarion (Ohienko) a canonical hierarch before coming to Canada?

Hilarion could be recognized as a quite canonical hierarch, if not for a number of circumstances. Of note, that in 1944, he was in Warsaw together with the autocephalites of Sikorsky; having headed the Canadian Ukrainian “church”, Hilarion, like his predecessor Mstislav (Skrypnyk), was obliged to recognize the same self-sanctifying principles of the “church’s” creation based on the “canons” of 1921. No reordination of it’s graceless “priests” happened this time either.[14]

Some say, however, that Hilarion disguised the reordination of the self-sanctifiers in the guise of awarding them with the elevation to the dignity of “Archpriest”: i.e. they knelt before the throne, he recited the prayers for laying of hands (ordination to priesthood)[15], proclaimed axios, and presented some form of award.[16] But can such a thing be considered a grace-filled action?

As we see, there is every reason to consider the American and Canadian Ukrainian “Churches” to be equally effected by the metastases of self-sanctification, and therefore, without grace.

—And yet they were still received by the Patriarchate of Constantinople?

On April 1, 1990, the Ukrainian Greek Orthodox Church of Canada was accepted into the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.. Having lost its schismatic independence, it took on a canonical status of a somewhat dubious character. It is difficult to speak of [them possessing] the fullness of grace, since they did not bring forth repentance for the sin of schism.


2. Consecration of Pascha breads in St. Andrew’s UOC Cathedral in Canada. A portrait of Petliura hangs in the church hall. 2. Consecration of Pascha breads in St. Andrew’s UOC Cathedral in Canada. A portrait of Petliura hangs in the church hall.

—Then the attention turned to the U.S. Ukrainians?

—Four years and eleven months later, on March 12, 1995, the Patriarchate of Constantinople accepted another North American group—the “Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA”, whose hierarchy was previously considered schismatic within the Orthodox world.

In 1996, parishes of the Ukrainian diaspora of Western Europe and other continents were joined in. And so, two non-canonical Ukrainian émigré groups were recruited [and summarily legitimized—Trans.] by Constantinople. We’ve come full circle as we see today, with the case of the “tomos of autocephaly” coming up to Kiev, and all relations with Constantinople have been suspended.

The Patriarchate of Constantinople, hastily receiving into it’s fold the former schismatics, did not require them to sign an Act, in which they unequivocally condemned the self-sanctifying “autocephaly” of Vasyl (Lypkivsky) in 1921, or that of Polycarp (Sikorskyi) in 1942, as well as all the contemporary schisms in Ukraine, with an indication that in Ukraine, they will recognize only the one canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church.


100th anniversary of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in the USA. Image from uocofusa.org. 100th anniversary of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in the USA. Image from uocofusa.org.

Today we can see what this results in for the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church, and for all of world Orthodoxy.

—Your Eminence, what was the reaction of the Local Churches to those actions by Constantinople?

—Much time has passed… It’s not so easy to quickly recall those events. From the Orthodox Churches, at first, there was no reaction. They considered these acts of the Phanar to be an internal affair of Constantinople, and also of the Russian Church. I don’t know how the Patriarch of Constantinople informed the Primates of the Local Churches about these assemblies of his.

It seems that we learned about these events after some time, from news reports of North American Ukrainians. Later in Canada, a small chronology of these events was made known. Our Church entered into correspondence with the Phanar, trying to clarify all the circumstances and details of this foggy matter.

It is very similar to how a child vexes his parents and then runs crying to his grandmother so that she will feel sorry for him and shield him from all the consequences of his misconduct and naughtiness.

This culminated in the fact that the Russian Orthodox Church did not officially join into eucharistic communion with the formerly Ukrainian Church schismatic structures that became a part of the Patriarchate of Constantinople.

Soon followed the worst Estonian Crisis, when the Constantinople synod created with impunity its own parallel structures on the canonical territory of the Russian Church in violation of the canons. Then followed a cessation of Eucharistic communion with the Phanarites, with the aspiration of our hierarchy to heal not only our church but the entire universal (ecumenical) Orthodox Church, as the suffering of one member effects the condition of the entire body.[17]

Further in 1995, the Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew gave in writing a promise that the adopted communities would not “cooperate or have any contact with any other Ukrainian schismatic groups.” As we see today, this promise was a lie.


Fake Patriarch Philaret’s reception of a delegation of the UOC of Canada, headed by Metropolitan Yuri (Kalischuk) in February 2015. Apparently, plans for receiving the long-awaited tomos were already born then. Fake Patriarch Philaret’s reception of a delegation of the UOC of Canada, headed by Metropolitan Yuri (Kalischuk) in February 2015. Apparently, plans for receiving the long-awaited tomos were already born then.

—Your Eminence, the self-declared Ukrainian “orthodox churches” of the “Kiev Patriarchate” and the “Ukrainian Autocephalic Orthodox Church” [in Ukraine—Trans.] are supported exclusively by political, and often radical forces. What about in Canada?

In the life and actions of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada, a major role is played not by the bishops, but by a consistory, nearly half of which is comprised of laity, as well as secular nationalist organizations such as the “Ukrainian Canadian Union[18]” and the “Ukrainian Canadian Congress”,[19] upon whom the “bishops” and “parishes” are largely financially dependent.

It’s true that with the passing away of the old emigration, parishioners of the Ukrainian churches in the Americas are becoming more English-speaking and apolitical towards affairs in Ukraine. Their children, especially those who are in mixed marriages, who consider themselves one hundred percent Canadian and speak only English, are far from Ukraine, and they know almost nothing of the church life therein. True, they may know a few Ukrainian words relating mainly to the old Ukrainian cuisine and holidays (congratulatory greetings on “Ukrainian Christmas and Pascha”).

Unfortunately in Canada, Ukraine is most often remembered in connection with various political scandals, fights in parliament, reelections, corruption, Chernobyl; resurgent interest in Ukraine was caused by the previous Maidan revolution [2014].

—And how should one regard today the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada and the USA, since they are formally considered canonical?

—As we see, they received a strange kind of canonicity: “canonicity obtained in an uncanonical way”: Canonicity without love, canonicity without truth, and canonicity carrying with it the legalization of the sin of schism without repentance! It’s pandering to schism! And the anathematized father of the main schism in Ukraine is very much hoping for the same condoning and pandering to these precedents, which will bring many problems to the Greek Patriarchate in many corners of the world.

Many of them are already experiencing these problems planted by the Patriarchate of Constantinople—not only Greeks, but all the Orthodox people of North America… And, well, we must remember that the prodigal son from the Gospel parable returned to his natural father, and not to some “kindly” good neighbor trying to appropriate what belongs to someone else. This is a kind of analogy to the robbery of children under a “children’s rights” system from the home of the Church, the family of Christ.

These church [schismatic] structures should be regarded as the synod of our Church resolved to regard them in its last emergency session. In the same way as we regarded these structures before. Now in this same way, this regard extends over the entire Constantinople Patriarchate. And not our church, but rather the politicking Phanarites is to blame for this.

—Your Eminence, what should an Orthodox believer of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) do if he is abroad and there won’t be any churches other than those of the Phanar?

These days, the prayerful commemoration of the Primate [of Constantinople] and [his] Hierarchs—guilty of anti-canonical actions—the concelebration of hierarchs and participation in common events was suspended. But in cases of extreme necessity[20], the laity and simple clergy—I think—can receive communion[21] and pray in the Ukrainian churches of Canada and the USA[22] during trips, pilgrimages, or family events (there are mixed families). But in such cases, it is best to take the blessing of your bishop or spiritual father. And remain faithful to our Mother Church, which spiritually gave birth to us in the mysteries, with maternal care for our spiritual growth! And also to pray for those who are against us to be brought to reason—those who are against the love of Christ, who think they were doing the right thing by forcefully capturing our churches in the early 1990s.

Our church calls upon us to do this! But to agree with schism, with lawlessness, means to become partners in the sin and crime.

From all these dangers, may the Lord save us by His grace!


Bishop Job (Smakouz) Bishop Job (Smakouz) —But still, Your Eminence, in your opinion--how should the faithful of the canonical Orthodox Church of Ukraine relate to what is happening?

—I will only recall the words spoken by our Primate—His Beatitude Metropolitan Onuphry

“If a man is bound hand and foot by sins, then no such tomos can help him. Because such a person is saved through repentance, through a personal podvig, and no one can do this for him.”

We should all do as our First Hierarch urges—focus on personal salvation, to pray and keep the purity of faith. This is our sacred task. Without condemning anyone, we must follow the path that leads a person directly to God. His Beatitude also said:

“The Holy Orthodox Church together with its people lived through the stormy years of wars and hardships, persecution and starvation. Orthodox Ukrainians witnessed the firmness of the Christian spirit. The example of our countrymen, our predecessors, who endured these trials with dignity inspires us to be courageous at this very hour.”

And there is nothing more to add.

Sergei Geruk
spoke with Bishop Job (Smakouz)
Translation by Matfey Shaheen

Pravoslavie.ru


14.Posté par 海林(蒙得维的亚)Hai Lin Montevideo le 05/10/2018 07:55
I would like to add some comments to the series of commentaries published by our esteemed colleagues, Mme Marie Genko and Господин Владимир Голованов.

I do not wish to wade into the right of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in its quest for autocephaly or the lack of right of same. That has been sufficiently debated and re-debated on these pages almost ad nauseam. I additionally do not wish to comment on this site of the theological process or lack of theological process involved in such a claim.

I do wish to address, however, several matters which seem to have either been ignored by, or escaped from, the purview of my previously aforementioned two colleagues.

It has been mentioned somewhere on this site that Patriarch Bartholomew has so acted in response to pressure from the United States.

This may indeed be true but it is not political pressure, as you all are inclined to believe, but rather financial pressure.

To wit :

The Russian emigration to the United States over the last one hundred years assimilated into the American mainstream but economically speaking, it remained, and still remains for the most part, a rather blue collar working class emigration. In other words, few but not many of its members, did not, for whatever reason ascend the economic ladder or make the American dream. Thus, how they arrived is how they remained and have remained.

This is borne out by census figures published by the Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census of the Government of the United States of America. It is legal in the United States, as opposed to in France, for example, to ask questions about one's religion, one's ethnic background, etc., etc.

Secondly, the Ukrainian emigration to the United States, or those who claim Ukrainian ethnicity or national background, was far more numerous than the Russian emigration. If the Russians fled to France in 1917 and thereafter, the Ukrainians arrived, steerage class, on dangerously creaking immigrant ships, to the United States. Every major city in the United States has an official Ukrainian district, be it in Chicago, for example, the so-called Ukrainian Village, or New York, the Lower East Side, or Boston, the Back Bay Area, etc. This also holds true for Canada. For example, Toronto has more inhabitants who claim Ukrainian ethnicity than the inhabitants of the city of Lvov. And in the Western Provinces of Canada, the Ukrainian ethnicities can sometimes reach as high as 60% of the local populations.

And as opposed to the Russians who have tended to climb the economic ladder rather slowly, if at all, the Ukrainians were quite distinct. The first immigrants arrived as illiterate peasants. They worked in the coal mines, in the steel factories, on the railroads. They opened shops as cobblers and bakers.

However, the near majority of these peasants worked hard and pushed their own children up the ladder. The second and third and fourth generation Ukrainian Americans, many of whom still can speak and write the language, have become high earning professionals, i.e., nurses, doctors, lawyers, accountants, IT persons, engineers, civil servants. From the United States Census, we can learn that the purchasing power of Ukrainian Americans is 4x that of Russian Americans, and is often on a par with American Jews and American Asians.

And the same holds true for Canadian Ukrainians although such information is not directly available from Canadian census reports.

In other words, autocephaly is all about money. Purely about money. The Ecumenical Patriarchate would be destitute without the Greek Americans, of both North and South America. The finances of the Ecumenical Patriarchate will greatly improve once the different flavors of Ukrainian Orthodoxy in the United States are brought under His Omorphorion.

Economically speaking, the Ukraine proper is a wash, meaning it is poor and corrupt and will likely remain poor and corrupt for the near future. It can add little financially to the Ecumenical Patriarchate, just as all of the parishes of the rue Daru add little or nothing to the coffers of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

But the Ukrainian diasporas are NOT poor by any means and many are situated in countries where there is rule of law and thus serious financial stability.

Additionally, you all need in France to understand, as much as it may displease many and all, that unfortunately at present in most of the Western Hemisphere there is a great deal of animus against Russia, for whatever reason.

In other words, this is a proxy battle between the Western Powers and Russia. The Church of Ukraine is simply another proxy ground of battle, but not only on a political and religious level, but also, much more seriously, on a financial level.

Pertinent ad victor spolia securi.

Hommages à touts.

海林
蒙得维的亚

15.Posté par Marie Genko le 05/10/2018 10:19
@Hai Lin,

Merci beaucoup pour votre éclairage.

Il montre que nous sommes face à une terrible tentation !

Il convient aujourd'hui aux différents patriarches orthodoxes de choisir entre d'une part la fidélité à la Tradition orthodoxe, qui est celle du respect du territoire de chaque patriarcat.
Cette approche nous a été enseignée par les Pères de notre Eglise.

Et d'autre part le monde moderne voudrait contraindre nos patriarches à se soumettre à des contraintes matérielles et politiques.

Cela est très clairement défini dans l'article publié ces jours ci par l'OLTR dans les colonnes de Parlons d'Orthodoxie.

En définitive c'est une question de Fidélité et de Foi.

Croyons nous fermement que le Seigneur pourvoira si nous restons fidèles ?
Ou bien voulons nous nous nous soumettre aux règles que nous rappelle notre pauvre raison humaine?

Nous devrions relire dans l'Ancien Testament l'histoire du roi Saül. Elle est d'un grand enseignement.

Merci encore pour votre message. Marie

16.Posté par Silvain le 06/10/2018 20:42
Une pure question d'argent ?
Si le manque d'argent est devenu tellement cruel, au point de faire perdre à une hiérarchie orthodoxe toute conscience de l'unité, se vautrant dans la mauvaise foi et l'inversion accusatoire (et n'est-ce pas finalement ce que nous serions tentés de penser?), serait-il possible que personne parmi les frères orthodoxes (donc nous tous autant que nous sommes) n'ait vu la chose d'un œil prévenant et proposé de l'aide, avant que les ennemis de l'Église (les schismatiques) ne s'en chargent.
En d'autres mots : (et cela reste une question) n'aurions-nous pas quelque part été négligents vis-à-vis de nos frères, les laissant dans le dénuement et l'angoisse du lendemain?
Est-ce que leur perte de foi ne serait pas alors le symptôme d'un mal commun, qui nous ronge tous, entre manque de confiance en Dieu et avarice ?
Est-ce que le manque d'argent oblige à remarier des prêtres ?

17.Posté par Mischa: ОТВЕТ НА НЕКОМПЕТЕНТНЫЕ ВЫСКАЗЫВАНИЯ ЕПИСКОПА ТЕЛЬМЕССКОГО ИОВА (ГЕЧИ) le 07/10/2018 13:03
17 сентября 2018 года представитель Константинопольской Православной Церкви при Всемирном совете церквей епископ Тельмесский Иов (Геча) дал интервью[1] украинским СМИ, из которого явствует, что Украина якобы всегда была канонической территорией Константинопольского Патриархата. Напомним, что епископ Тельмесский Иов в 2015 году был отстранен от управления Западноевропейской Архиепископии по многочисленным просьбам православных верующих и профессорско-преподавательского состава Свято-Сергиевского института в связи с его авторитарными замашками и неумением выстроить диалог с паствой. Теперь он призывает руководство УПЦ (МП) вступить в диалог любви с раскольниками.

Епископ Иов всячески стремится убедить своих читателей, что Украина всегда оставалась епархией Константинопольского Патриархата, начиная от Крещения Руси и даже... после формальной передачи Константинопольским патриархом Дионисием всех прав на Киевскую митрополию патриарху Московскому Иоакиму. ДАЛЬШЕ читать здесь по ссылке http://pravoslavie.ru/116276.html

18.Posté par Уже во вторник в Константинополе (Стамбуле) начнется Синод Вселенского патриархата le 08/10/2018 20:54

Ночь Варфоломея. Дадут ли завтра Томос и что после этого будет
Уже во вторник в Константинополе (Стамбуле) начнется Синод Вселенского патриархата, на котором, как уверяют украинские власти и представители Киевского патриархата, может быть принято решение о предоставлении Украине Томоса об автокефалии. Ряд православных церквей мира призвали Константинопольского патриарха не идти на такой шаг, заявляя о том, что он может спровоцировать всеправославный раскол.

19.Posté par Silvain le 08/10/2018 22:30
Ils chercheront des feuilles pour se couvrir.
Il est évident qu'il n'existe pas de matière suffisante pour publier un quelconque tomos d'autocéphalie.
Le terrain des schismatiques est tellement miné que tout ce qui sera fait d'illégitime en matière ecclésiale se retournera très vite, et violemment, contre les fauteurs de trouble. Les arrogants et les ambitieux qui se profilent sans vergogne au milieu du chaos espérant en tirer profit se retrouveront nus comme au jardin d'Eden. Prions pour qu'ils s'en rendent compte avant qu'il ne soit définitivement trop tard pour l'unité de l'orthodoxie.

Nouveau commentaire :



Recherche



Derniers commentaires


RSS ATOM RSS comment PODCAST Mobile