Are deliberations regarding autocephaly and Feofania needed today?

Council of the UOC in Feofania. Photo: UOC Press Service

Since mid-September, several respected hierarchs of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church have entered into sharp polemics about autocephaly, taking diametrically opposed positions regarding the possibility of granting the Church an autocephalous status. After Metropolitan Theodosiy’s podcast, the discussions abruptly shifted to the Council of the UOC in Feofania. Some hierarchs insist that the Council was held under government pressure, while others claim that no pressure was exerted. The statements are becoming increasingly harsh – at times even offensive.

Some believers take the side of “their” hierarchs and accuse the “others.” The rest simply watch the situation with bewilderment and dismay, unable to understand how such a thing can happen under the current circumstances the Church is facing.

1. The UOC stands one step away from a ban.
Amid church seizures and the relentless mobilization of clergy, the authorities have decided to ban the activities of the Kyiv Metropolis of the UOC. Should this occur, the Church will face extremely serious challenges to its very functioning. How appropriate, then, are disputes among the hierarchy on any subject at all?

2. The topic of autocephaly is entirely out of place right now.
Both its proponents and opponents clearly understand that the issue they are debating is purely theoretical. The topic of Feofania is even less relevant – its discussion can bring no benefit whatsoever to the Church.

The UOJ conducted two polls on social media and its website, asking believers whether they supported the public polemics among UOC hierarchs on the subjects of autocephaly and Feofania. Two-thirds responded that such debates today only undermine the unity of the UOC and scandalize the faithful. This result is hardly surprising. People observe the “showdowns” among bishops with confusion and anxiety – while the enemies of the Church rub their hands in satisfaction.

At a time when the Church needs maximum mobilization and unity, the opposite is occurring. And, sadly, these processes have very little in common with Christianity. For in these mutual jabs and accusations there is everything but love. And without love, any claim to correctness or appeal to the canons is nothing but “a resounding brass.”

“Owe no one anything, except to love one another; for he who loves another has fulfilled the law,” wrote the Apostle Paul.

To this – we call everyone.

Read also

Lavra as a backdrop for a name-day celebration

Any service held by Epifaniy in the Lavra is simply an off-site event organized on the principle of “everything I need, I bring with me,” where the Lavra itself is used as a backdrop, a rented venue.

What is the difference between Dumenko and "Patriarch" Nikodym?

The difference between Dumenko and Kobzar is not in having or not having apostolic succession or spiritual gifts, nor in the depth of their theological knowledge.

Admit you're a Moscow priest – get a deferment

If you declare yourself a "Moscow priest," you are (according to the authorities' assurances) classified as "critically important infrastructure" and given a deferment. If you don't admit it, they force you to renounce your priesthood and go to war.

Why, by inciting hatred against UOC, you are inciting it against Christianity

UOC representatives have long warned the “patriotic confessions” that stirring up hatred toward the Church’s faithful would, in the end, turn against those who lit the fire.

Ukrainian rule of law: Will OCU clerics be jailed only for murder?

Courts hand down sentences to UOC clergy on absurd charges, while the state will not so much as wag a finger at OCU members for open incitement to violence.

Why the Lavra’s patronal feast passed in silence

Since the Lavra was handed over to the OCU, it comes to life only when Serhiy Dumenko is on site.