New Ukrainian Orthodox Leader Gives First Liturgy, Urging Unity

KYIV – In his first liturgy as leader of the new Ukrainian national Orthodox Church, Metropolitan Epifaniy has urged Ukrainians to unite and pray for peace in the country.

rferl.org/a/new-ukrainian-orthodox-leader-gives-first-liturgy-urging-unity/29659372.html

"We must complete the unification of Ukrainian Orthodoxy…pray for an end to the war [in eastern Ukraine], and for a just peace in Ukraine," Epifaniy said as he led a Sunday Mass at St. Michael's Golden-Domed Monastery in Kyiv on December 16.

Ukrainian Orthodox leaders on December 15 agreed on the creation of a new national Orthodox Church and elected the 39-year-old Epifaniy to head that church.

Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople is expected to hand over a "tomos" – a decree granting autocephaly, or independence – to Epifaniy on January 6.

Ukraine's leaders said the move was vital to the country's security and independence, but it could raise tensions further with Moscow, which has opposed Kyiv's efforts to secure an independent church.

After leading the Sunday Mass at St. Michael's Golden-Domed Monastery, Metropolitan Epifaniy told RFE/RL that the Ukrainian church needed to "complete full-fledged unification."

"That is, when we receive the tomos, we will establish all the responsible managing institutions of this church," he said.

In the future, the cleric added, the church will implement reforms "in a calm, wise, and balanced way, because it is needed to work in a way that unites rather than divides."

Epifaniy also voiced confidence that the clerics who have not joined the Ukrainian national Orthodox Church will "gradually reach the understanding that there is no other outcome than being part of this united Ukrainian church and building our future together."

Relations between Russia and Ukraine have deteriorated dramatically since Moscow’s seizure of Crimea in March 2014 and its subsequent support for separatists battling Ukrainian forces in eastern Ukraine. The conflict there has killed more than 10,300 people since April 2014.

"We have the occupied Crimea. We need to get it back. There [also] is the partially occupied Donbas. We believe that the Lord will hear our prayers and will send us that long-awaited peace, a just peace in a united Ukrainian state in which we will have our united Ukrainian Orthodox Church," Epifaniy told RFE/RL.

Other urls found in this thread:

orthodoxsynaxis.org/2018/10/24/the-ecclesiology-of-the-ecumenical-patriarchate-in-2018-speech-by-patriarch-bartholomew/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phanariotes
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonian_Struggle
ukrinform.ru/rubric-society/2603016-epifanij-zaveril-cto-zahvata-hramov-rpc-v-ukraine-ne-budet.html?fbclid=IwAR3vMAISW7DavKbS-Y6kXUxJTz311l7cKOxn4CXzOxye1CQu1WWXqyA7d2g
orthochristian.com/116903.html
stmaximus.org/ukrainianchurchcontroversy.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Sounds like lines written by the CIA.

Axios! This is the first step for Ukrainians.
Wise words, this is what Ukraine needs right now and not hatemongering.

Ukraine rightful Russian clay >:(

You are blind to the entirety of Christian history if you think that "reforms" to the church are going to be anything disastrous for the Orthodox.

Attached: SIP BOYS.JPG (658x481, 35.9K)

anything BUT* disastrous

Holy sh!t, the Russians were right.

Obviously, he was talking about those kind of reforms. Not power rangers eucharist or something.

Yep, all the way back in 1652.

What are you guys referring to?

I give 30 years until the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom is not performed by most parishes and we have a clapping 15 minutes service.
You have no idea the hatred these effeminate priests have for it, and anything traditional for that sense. They lie to themselves that Tradition is of this world, somehow.

Also, it's to make the Liturgy more palatable to most wordly people (themselves included).
There is no act more disgusting and apostasy inducing than desacralization for acceptance. Because the Laity see through them clearly, with their hearts, and always are repulsed by it. The Laity might not be able to put it in words, but they feel it in their heart.

Basically, Orthodoxy is going to die like Roman Catholicism did after new Mass.

as long as the moscow patriarchate and ROCOR exist, we have no need to fear

Can’t wait for the Komboskini of Modern Sorrows tied with a black lesbian refugee’s hair and the Jesus Prayer replaced by “Jesus Christ, child of God, forgive me for my privilege”

The winnie the pooh are the Christaons above sperging out about?
He is saying that ecclesiastical and moral reforms will be needed to integrate the theologically Orthodox churches of Ukraine under this new autocephalous church with their sensitivities and objections in mind.
Do you guys see the word "reform" and immediately jump to Vatican II? Do you spend too much time on this site?
For what it's worth, such reforms are greatly needed right now. Many of the (pre?) schismatic churches' parishes have an extremely nationalist, ideological approach to the faith, down to having ridiculous sham iconography. That is obviously not how the Moscovite Ukrainian church sees these things. Unity will not happen by forcing these two very different groups of people sit together at the same table at gunpoint. The state of the Ukrainian churches right now is a broken mess - how can you be angry at the idea that reforms are needed? What is wrong with you?

obedience is needed. obedience to their rightful patriarch. hint: it's not bartholomew

How’s your job at the CIA? Must be annoying at night when you start glowing.

What do you mean by "rightful patriarch"? The Church isn't centralized, so what defines what a "rightful" patriarch is? If a Christian is under his bishop, and this bishop is Orthodox, then this bishop is his "rightful patriarch".
Unless you mean that the rightful patriarch of the Ukrainians is Patriarch Kyrill because of his jurisdiction, in which case 1) tons of people in America and Western Europe are not under their rightful patriach and 2) the divine mystery of the episcopacy is apparently defined by national borders, something the scriptures should've been more precise about.
Or are you saying that the reform needed for the new Ukrainian church is to place itself under Moscow? Because that's necessarily a reform. I'm not sure it would necessarily help but if it does, that would be great, just as long as Ukrainian Orthodoxy gets to be united.


That's not an argument.
Neither is your whining above, so I welcome you to answer my question of "The winnie the pooh are the Christaons above sperging out about?"

Nothing schismatic, kid.


Christ is the rightful Patriarch.
Go away, you glow in the dark tigger. I'm tired of you pushing your trash here. Go back to the thread on ecumenism you created.

All I'm seeing in this thread is seething Russians and Serbians.

Reminder that Bulgarian, Greek, Armenian, Romanian etc. churches supported this. The Russo-Serbian mafia masquerading as a church is cancer. All they're doing is shitposting.

Attached: 580b585b2edbce24c47b29f6.png (384x313, 38.61K)

We abstained from commenting or taking a position.

Imagine being this much of a phyletist. Go back to Zig Forums.

Look at this, you're all falling apart. If you simply had one central authority, like the Pope, this wouldn't be happening. Come home to the Catholic Church brothers. Begome Greek Gadolig!!!! :DDDDD

We like it like this. We're not joining your fruity club.

It would, and it happened before.
See Chalcedon and everything else that happened about a century before and after

Peak papal will to power, funnily enough also in the Ukraine with the Uniates. The solution to idiots who worship politics is not papocesarism. That's just retarded, and you know it.

With all the political pressure the Russian church is exercising, abstaining in this context means a compromise when too many important people are too afraid to do it.

We have no reason to take one side or another.
Better to let it calm down.

Repent, and don't project. I'm sure the Romanian Patriarch has other priorities than power, unlike you.

Not exactly. Orthodox churches are by definition politically active institutions, in some cases spreading phyletist propaganda for over a century now. When such a church works in a country which is locked with its home state in war, big problems arise.

Do I believe every national group should have a church? Absolutely not.

… No. Most churches have not taken a position yet, other than praying for peace and begging for a council to happen to sort this out. I don't know what world you live in where this issue is clear cut and we need to shut up about it.

Are you accusing the Russian and Serbian churches of being schismatic?

wars come and go, the church is forever

Your mannerisms are very gay, stop working for politics and start working for God. Serving men like Eve was made for is making you effeminate.

The rivalry between Kiev and Novgorod and Moscov is as old as their Christian faith.

Some Churches (? the Romanian and the Georgian) said something like "we do not want to meddle in things that are not ours, this is between Moscow and Constantinople". The Serbian Church seems to be the most supportive for the idea of a council and the position of the Bulgarian Church seems to be "we support a council but are not going to say" (the Bulgarian Patriarch publishes on the official web site of the Church opinions in support for a council, but when confronted with a direct question he always answers "our Church hasn't decided yet").

Huh. I haven't seen it but I don't think they'll be able to hold this kind of language for much longer once either Moscow or Constantinople (or both) starts saying that anyone who remains in communion with the other church will be acknowledged as schismatic, which I feel is going to happen sooner or later.

It would be pretty funny if no council ends up happening simply because no one is bothered to deal with one. Honestly, with the things EP Bartholomw has said about primacy a couple of months back, I think a council should be needed if only because that got a bunch of people to accuse him as a neo-papist of sort. Clearly the Ukrainian issue is not unrelated to the Constantinopolitan bishops' view on primacy.

This is interesting. Any references? My (possibly wrong) impression is that since the start of the Ukrainian crisis, Bartholomew was careful not to stress the primacy thing as much as before.

orthodoxsynaxis.org/2018/10/24/the-ecclesiology-of-the-ecumenical-patriarchate-in-2018-speech-by-patriarch-bartholomew/
This was right before he announced Ukraine would get autocephaly, and some of the things in his speech are evidently threats to Moscow to not break communion with Constantinople (spoiler: Moscow did not listen). While his approach toward the whole Ukrainian issue has not been purely about what his primacy allows, it is one of the angles he has taken.
Tangentially related, there is also what the bishops of the Phanar have done to Rue Daru recently - just hold a meeting in Constantinople and declare the archdiocese to be dissolved, without Mgr Jean of Charioupolis's involvement at all, which is an attack on synodality and the authority of the archbishop IMO.
While I'm actually one of the few people I know who doesn't disagree with the EP's seemingly bizarre statements about his primacy, I do think that a council to clarify what primacy means would be well needed today.

This is what happens when 12 year olds take an interest in Orthodoxy through Zig Forums memes

No, Serbs didn't take take any sides like most of the others. The truth is that they don't have a say in who will be autocephalus or not, cause that's 100% the job of the EP to decide. Like every autocephalus church who was granded autocephaly from from Constantinople, including Russia (Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece etc). There could be a counsil of course but when Bartholomew called for one, Russia sabotaged it exactly for that reason. The didn't want to discuss Ukraine's autocephaly. Every local church knows that stuff but we are just trying to keep Moscow calm for now that's why we try not to interfere.

No, this is absurd statement. I know that EP claims that this is his job, but nevertheless historically this is absurd and unsupported by any canon or old precedent.

Autocephalous Church = Church whose head bishop is not subordinated to another bishop.

There are 3 types of autocephalous Churches:

1. in schism (like the Ochrid Archbishopric)
2. mostly unrecognized but not in schism (OCA)
3. recognized

Obviously any Church can self-proclaim itself as a type 1 Autocephalous Church.

In order for a Church to become a type 2 Autocephalous Church it suffices when it is acknowledged as such by its mother Church.

In order for a type 2 Church to become a type 3 Autocephalous Church, it has to be recognized as such by the other Churches. In many cases this can be a gradual process, the Church being recognized by half of the Autocephalous Churches and unrecognized by the other half. The role of the EP in this process is no different than the role of the other Autocephalous Churches.

Just look at all the autocephalus churches there are today. Except for the old Patriarchates (Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria), every one else, including Russia, was granded autocephaly by Constantinople. There's no really anything to argue about, it's in the canons and that's how things worked till now.
Without the canons we'll become just protestants. Moscow is ignoring the canons for too long (see OCA), but now the EP decided that enough is enough.

And again, they COULD go to the council 2 years ago to discuss about it. They COULD take part in Ukraine's unification council and take the lead. But noooo they prefered to ignore the issue and just yell "UKRAINE IS NOT A COUNTRY"
Well, now Ukraine's a country and they have their own church.

The Jews want to weaken Christianity and make the world into a liberal hellhole. That’s what I’m on bout

And how is that relevant to anything in the OP?

...

They started all of this to cause discord in Ukraine and turn the tide against Russia. You can guess why

What the comments above mine were complaining about wasn't that the new autocephalous Ukrainian church is set up to destabilize Orthodoxy and turn the tide against Russia for political intent, but about modernism and clown liturgy and whatever, I can't tell well enough.
If what you have to say is that the new Ukrainian church is a setup by the CIA and the Jews to minimize the power of Russia, just say it, don't be cryptic.

this

Well the "jews and the CIA created Ukrainian church to stop Putin from saving the white race" argument doesn't show any ecclesiological or theological knowledge IMO.
And the only one i see STRUGGLING to keep Orthodoxy united is Bartholomew here. Taking so much shit from Moscow and not replying at all but calling his accusers "our brothers" when they are always using the worst words for him. Argue only using the canons and not screeching autisticaly. That's why he earned my respect and trust in this.
Just imagine if he acted the same way
Those incidents made me realise how important the role of Ecumenical Patriarch is.

Autocephaly was granted by Constantinople only to Churches that were part of the Patriarchate of Constantonople. Georgia was not part of this Patriarchate, and correspondingly this Church hasn't received its autocephaly by Constantinople. The same is true for the Church of the Czech and Slovak Lands. The Polish Church is the only exception to this rule because at the time Constantinople gave them autocephality, the Russian Church was suppressed by the communists so Poland (and the Churches of the Russian emigrants) were alone and de facto outside of any jurisdiction.

Non-existent canons. Canon=formal rule decided by an Orthodox council (or in some cases by an authoritative Saint).

Truly a speech of peace
Look, I blamed Kyrill for being a puppet of the Kremlin in all previous threads. I said it was normal for ukrainians to want to be free from the Patriarchate dominated by their russian enemy.
But this is in no way different, this Patriarch seems to be Poroshenko puppet. Now we have two opposed bitches of the politicians.
Politicized church is shit, no matter which side.

Attached: mfw.jpg (632x522, 378.06K)

Ukraine was under Constantinople's jurisdiction until the 17th century, seized uncanonicaly by Moscow. So, if anything, canonic order was restored.

I agree, but bear in mind that this mess was created by both sides, people might still be mad. But this is the first step to clean it. Ukraine's situation couldn't keep going on forever. Many people was feeling betrayed and forgoten by the Orthodox church, now they have their chance.

I was writing about the general rules, not specifically about Ukraine. The theory about the prerogatives of Constantinople with respect to the autocephality was invented at the beginning of the 20th century when we had no useful precedents. But now we have several such precedents that show that any Church can separate part of itself as type 2 (unrecognized) autocephalous church and the role of Constantinople is mostly the coordination of the process of the transition from type 2 (unrecognized or only partially recognized) to type 3 (fully recognized) autocephality.

And duh, of course ukr. nationalists support this.

What you are describing is not something good for the church neither something we must promote. The need for autocephaly was forced to the church by socio-political reasons and by forces outside of the church. To Greece by the Bavarians, to Bulgaria by the Ottomans, to Russia by their Tzar. You know that because of this mess Greeks and Bulgarians started ethnic cleansing each other in the Ottoman era? Constantinople then again stepped up and condemned ethnophyletism to stop the massacre. This is the role of that Patriarchate according to the canons of the 4th Ecumenical Cousil, to solve inner ecclesiological disputes between Orthodox. Otherwise we wouldn't be one church today but a bunch of national churches at war with each other.
That's also why we need the canons and the Ecumenical Patriarch. His role is not decorative, as some people say for their own reasons, he is here to solve issues like Ukraine's. He tried talking, he tried begging Moscow to do something themselves, he tried ignoring the issue (condemning many souls who were leaving the church because of this) and in the end there wasn't anything else that he could do but take matters in his hands.

Nevertheless, this is what has happened which means this is what God wanted to happen in his Church. We are only humans and any smart procedure we invent is going to be outsmarted by God.

There are many Orthodox canons, seemingly absurd from human point of view. I mean canons that would be literally self-destructive for any human organization (for example canon 15 of the council in Constantinople, year 861). And yet, here we stand. Why? Because we don't rely on human means for our unity but on the uniting force of the Holy Spirit. It is not an accident that the schismatics who leave the Orthodox Church (such as the Old Calendarists and so called True Orthodox) are fragmented into who knows how many mutually unrecognized "churches" and continue to multiply all the time.

Let us remember the words of our Lord "This is how everyone will know that you are my disciples: if you have love for one another." If we invent some human means to keep the unity of our Church, how the people are going to know that our unity is true unity based on love and not fictitious unity based on earthly authority (like the fictitious unity around the Roman pope)? How we will know where the true Church is in the times of the coming Antichrist when parts of the Church inevitably are going to fall into apostasy?

Let us have faith in the ability of Christ to preserve the unity of his Church. He can do this better than us.

The first national autocephalous Churches are from the medieval times (only temporarily abolished in the Ottoman era).
There was no enmity between Bulgarians and Greeks during the Ottoman era, no ethnic cleansing and no massacres. The enmity was between the Bulgarians and the Phanariotes who had the strange idea to transform the Ottoman Empire into new pseudo-Roman Empire, the sultan being new emperor, and in order to achieve this suppressed any non-Greek Christian culture. But as in many other cases, God used bad things in order to achieve something good, for example thanks to this enmity now we have a perfect Slavonic adaptation of the Byzantine chant.

There is a funny thing about the ethnophyletism. Almost everyone who accuses someone in ethnophyletism doesn't notice that he himself is nationalist and therefore ethnophyletist. This was true in 1872 when Constantinople condemned the ethnophyletism, and this is true now. We look at the sins of our brothers but we don't want to look at our own sins.

I don't disagree, we trust God's will for what is best for our church and the Holy Spirit to guide our action in unity. But we must also try ouselves to be united right? I can't start anathematising everyone and cut communion for no reason and then wait from God to keep the church united and if this doesn't happen to say "ok it was God's will".
Of course there was and it all started with the creation of Bulgarian exarchate. Ottomans passed a law that said the Christian villages in the region will be under Constantinople if 2/3 or more of the population are Greeks and under the Bulgarian exarchate if 2/3 or more are Bulgarian. The issue was solved balkan style. I'm telling you this to show that autocephaly was not always an easy thing. Somerimes it involves politics and trouble.
Now you're talking like Constantinople was the real ruler of the Ottoman empire, pulling the strings behind the scenes. The truth is that their task was even harder back then, as they had to keep the faith alive under Ottoman rule and by being the main representative of Christianity, the Ecumenical Patriarch was the first to be killed (usually by torture). Constantinople have a dozen of church's martyrs passed by the EP seat. That's why you see the Bartholomew taking his role always so seriously. It's not because of "papism" but because of historical responsibility.

duptriarchates btfo

Where do you get this info? Aren't you guessing based on what we see in Ukraine?

Also this is very wrong:
because there was no such enmity and the sad reality was:

See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phanariotes
For the phanariotes the Patriarchy was nothing more than an instrument to achieve their agenda.

This far into this thread and no one has mentioned how the poroshenko government has sacked historic abbeys and parishes or the disgusting icon of a saint killing the double headed eagle of Byzantium? Why would anyone but glow in the dark cia tigs try to defend that?

Pic?

I want to see the icon

Notice the symbol at the top.

Attached: Azov_symbol.png (1200x801 78.02 KB, 159.66K)

Extremely messed up

Mate, that's a stylized dove, in the shape of a Tryzub.

No, look at the runes up and down the sides of the arch

Lol no. Russia does not have right to claim eastern europe. I like them but they simply do not.
I can no longer tell if this is a slav or some american larp convert.
Leave politics to politics, leave faith to faith.

It's literally the reason why ethnophyletism was condemned.
A pretty biased wiki page but you get the idea
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonian_Struggle
This is getting out of hand. The Ottomans created all that by inserting nationalism in the Christian population and with their rules that created an ecclesiological mess. If you really believe that the Ottomans did all that out of their good heart to help Christians prosper then i can't change your mind. And what interest did they have in messing with the church anyway?
What was their agenda? To preserve Christianity in the Ottoman empire and eventually lead a Christian revolution against the Ottomans which marked the end of their rule in the balkans? I see nothing wrong with that.

Anyway, maybe we have different perspectives of history. I think we should go back to the Ukrainian issue.

That's not an Orthodox icon, but a mural. Are we sure it's in a church anyway? I have encounter countless fake news since all this drama started.
And for some good news:
ukrinform.ru/rubric-society/2603016-epifanij-zaveril-cto-zahvata-hramov-rpc-v-ukraine-ne-budet.html?fbclid=IwAR3vMAISW7DavKbS-Y6kXUxJTz311l7cKOxn4CXzOxye1CQu1WWXqyA7d2g

Unfortunately I agree. I first blamed russians, their stubborness and their hegemonic intent.
But now it's impossible to deny the creation of ukrainian patriarchate was done with ill intent by (((Poroshenko))) and his international ally. They are trying to scar Ukraine permanently by adding a religious scar to the ethnic and political divisions.
The russians acted stupidly, buth Poroshenko and friends were malevolent from the beginning.

tl;dr Politicians divide the faithfuls.
Thank you Putin and (((Poroshenko))).

For anyone interested about the icon that don't want to reverse search it themselves. Here are some articles I found. Sorry I don't know how to archive
orthochristian.com/116903.html
Here seems to be an OCA repository on all of the controversy on the subject for those interested in learning more.
stmaximus.org/ukrainianchurchcontroversy.html

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonian_Struggle
I don't like the way you try to excuse the happenings in Ukraine using inappropriately the Bulgarians as example. What I see in this link is the struggle of 3 independent countries to take possession of the remnants of an empire breaking apart (the Ottoman Empire). This is purely political and unrelated to religion (except that each of the sides tried to use the religion as a tool). Moreover, these are events from the 20th century and in our previous posts (our main topic being the autocephality) we discussed the Bulgarian struggle for independent Church from the 19th century and I will repeat myself saying that this was free from any ethnic cleansing, massacres, etc. Just a competition of culture.

Ok i'll stop the off topic discussion now. I just wanted to give an example that autocephaly can have serious problems sometimes, especially when politics are involved, like today.

And I agree with this.

How do we know this is in a church?

Da proofs
Iconostasis on the left, mural on right

Attached: DSC_5139.jpg (1280x854, 847.31K)

Not very helpful for the whole situation right now tbh. It seems that the church has quite some problems in both Russia and Ukraine. Lets hope that the with the new united Ukrainian church all this will end.

I get a satanic vibe from this