If tomorrow we wake up autocephalous

The recent article of the UOJ "Bacon for the Saints of the Maccabees" caused a lot of objections among readers, namely, its thesis that in today's conditions the break of the spiritual and canonical connection with the Russian Orthodox Church and the creation of the Unified Local Church (ULC) is a betrayal of Orthodoxy.

Where is the betrayal, if the ULC becomes the same as other Local Churches? What is wrong with autocephaly for the UOC if it is canonical? Let's try to understand.

Question one: who are the initiators and the main driving force behind the idea of the ULC?

Yes, among the UOC itself, there are supporters of autocephaly. And among the episcopate, and among the clergy, and among the laity. They are not so many, and the degree of their commitment to this idea is very different. But the fact is it is not they who promote the idea of autocephaly. This idea is actively encouraged by politicians, the powers that be, namely President Petro Poroshenko, Speaker Andrei Parubiy, Prime Minister Vladimir Groysman and others. It is these people who travel through the eastern patriarchates and are negotiating over the ULC. These people raise the topic wherever possible: at briefings, press conferences, rallies, commemorations, negotiations, etc. These people are the locomotives of pressure on the canonical UOC in the issue of autocephaly.

Question two: what is the main goal of the ULC?

These same powers do not completely hide the goal of autocephaly – confrontation with the "aggressor state". Petro Poroshenko said this in a speech on Vladimir's Hill on the day of the Baptism of Rus in 2016: "We will not indifferently watch the intervention of another state in our church affairs, its attempts to take advantage of the feelings of the part of the Ukrainian Orthodox. <...> Two and a half years ago, Moscow unleashed a war against the gilded Kiev. <...> This is one of the reasons why the Verkhovna Rada has reasonably appealed to the archbishop of Constantinople and New Rome, the Ecumenical Patriarch."

Yes, the President said that this is only "one of the reasons", but somehow, others were not mentioned. As he did not voice them in 2017, this time on Facebook:



Again Moscow, again the "aggressor state"! There are simply no other reasons. You can collect thousands more similar statements from the lips of Ukrainian politicians, public and religious figures. All of them testify quite clearly: the ULC in Ukraine is needed to combat the "aggressor state".

There is no question of any "church good", "success of the saving mission of the Church" and similar thing, although these criteria should be the basis for the solution of the issue of autocephaly. This is what the leaders of the Local Churches say in the film "The UOC: in Faith and Truth".

Well, tell me, why did Christ founded his Church on earth? Isn’t it to be an obedient tool in the fight against the "aggressor state"?

Let's carefully read the Gospel. After all, during the earthly life of the Savior in Palestine, there was an "occupant ", the Roman Empire, which implanted the hated for many Russian world, sorry, the Roman world (Pax Romana). And then politicians, the Pharisees, tried in every way to force Christ to condemn the "occupant", or even better, to lead a Jewish uprising against it: "But Jesus, having learned that they want to come, inadvertently take him and make him king, again retired to the mountain alone" (John 6:15). And Christ in general did not say anything about the Roman Empire, except that "give Caesar's things to Caesar" (Mt 22: 21). Unpatriotically somehow...

Question three: what is the basis for the ULC?

Unequivocally, the idea of Ukrainian identity and Ukrainian statehood will be the basis for the ULC. A couple of characteristic quotes from the lips of the "Patriarch" Filaret (Denisenko): "Today everyone who cares about the Ukrainian state is confident that there should be a Unified Local Ukrainian Orthodox Church in our country" ( "The Word of the Creation of the Unified Local Orthodox Church in Ukraine"). "There will be one Local Church, and there will be church peace. Because there will be a state" (an interview with the Radio Liberty on February 7, 2017).

What can we say about the religious consciousness of people who during the "cross procession" of the UOC-KP on July 28, 2017 chanted: "Ukraine over all!", "Glory to the nation!", "Death to the enemy!"?

You can take almost any speech of the supporters of the ULC and count how many times the word "Ukraine" is mentioned there and how many – "Christ". Let’s take, for example, the already mentioned "The Word of the Creation of the Unified Local Orthodox Church in Ukraine". In this rather small publication, the word "Ukraine" and its derivatives occur 34 (!) times. Guess how many times the "patriarch" Filaret mentioned the name of Christ the Savior. Once! – at the end. But after all, Apostle Paul once said that "no one can lay another foundation except that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ" (1 Cor. 3:11). But, apparently, this is not about the ULC.

Question four: what methods are used to create the ULC?

Again, the answer is absolutely unambiguous – violent. At the legislative level, these are frankly anti-church bills Nos. 4128, 4511 and 5309. They are not only anti-church, they are also openly anti-constitutional and anti-popular. All sane experts, even those far from sympathizing with the UOC, unanimously speak about this. Nothing, except enmity, hatred and violation of the rights of a huge number of Ukrainian citizens, these bills cannot bring. But the government persistently does not remove them from the agenda of the Verkhovna Rada. Even if they are never accepted, the mere fact of their being considered by the parliament is a very powerful factor of pressure on the UOC and, above all, on its Primate, His Beatitude Onufry, in the matter of creating the ULC.

In the information space, the canonical Church is being unreasonably demonized and discredited. "The Church of the invader", "agents of the Kremlin", "Gundyaev supporters", "separs", "enemies of the Ukrainian nation"! These and similar epithets echoe through the media, causing idle speculation. After listening to some of the hosts of the "5th channel", "1+1", "ZIK" and other channels, you want to come up to them and wash their mouth with fragrant toilet soap.

Politicians, public figures, people who call themselves scientists, philosophers, intellectuals, historians, etc., are joining this campaign of denigrating the UOC and, accordingly, praising the schismatic "patriotic" confessions. All of them "scientifically" justify the "urgent" need for the creation of the ULC as soon as possible. All of them also brand the canonical Church with bad words and accuse it of all the failures of Ukraine: economic, political, military, international, etc. It turns out that it's not the mediocre politicians and unprofessional managers who are to blame for everything. It's ... the Ukrainian Orthodox Church to blame! It remains only to shout: "Christians – to lions!".

Seizures of the UOC churches have became commonplace. News about this is already taken for granted.



Such work by radicals from the "Right Sector" has even been formalized in the agreement "On Cooperation and Interaction", in the first paragraph of which the goal of such cooperation – the creation of the ULC – is written in black and white.

Question five: what if the UOC becomes autocephalous, unites with the schismatics and enters the ULC?

First, an event that will happen with 100% probability is a devision in the Church itself. A huge number of bishops, priests, monks and laymen will not support autocephaly and will announce their transition under the direct omophorion of Patriarch Kirill. Monasteries, parishes and entire dioceses will not obey the decision about autocephaly. This will breed chaos and mess. Everyone will stop understanding at all on whose side the truth is. Supporters of opposing opinions on the issue of autocephaly will inevitably radicalize and start blaming each other for all mortal sins. The seizure of temples and church property, violence and outrages will increase many times.

Many times it has been said that in Ukraine there is no very first, necessary (but insufficient) condition for canonical autocephaly – unanimity on this issue of the Church itself! No matter how much the supporters of autocephaly would like, the UOC is now dominated by the view of the optimality of the current canonical status of the UOC: independence in governance and preservation of the spiritual connection with the Universal Orthodoxy through the Russian Orthodox Church.

Moreover, all the attacks on the Church, mentioned above, only enhance this unity with the Orthodox world through the ROC as a symbol of belonging to the Church of Christ. The strength of the action is equal to the force of opposition. This is Newton's third law. The law is physical, but it is applicable here to the fullest. For every action, there is an equal (in size) and opposite (in direction) reaction. It is the same in this case. The UOC has an external force that makes it break the canonical connection with Russian Orthodoxy and unite with the schismatics. But this raises an opposite reaction, equal in force - the conviction of standing in unity with the ROC in spite of everything.

There is a common phrase that in the era of Soviet persecution, the Church was rescued by "white headscarfs", that is, simple believing women, grandmothers, often uneducated but faithful to the Church, despite any threats by the authorities and atheistic propaganda.



So, open hostility against the UOC has led to the fact that today's "white headscarfs" are mostly convinced: autocephaly, whatever it may be, is a betrayal of Orthodoxy. And from this point of view, they will not be moved by any logically correct theological arguments about the graciousness of the canonical separation from the ROC. Should any bishop, priest or monk declare the disobedience of autocephaly – and the "white headscarfs " will immediately be on his side. Only decades of the state’s benevolent attitude to the Church can change this belief.

Secondly, all these divisions and subsequent quarrels and confrontations finally discredit the Church in the eyes of secular society. Already, the mutual accusations of different faiths lead to the fact that the person standing on the doorstep of the church often does not cross this threshold, because he does not understand how people who call themselves Christians can be so hostile to each other.

"For it is for your sakes, as it is written, that the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles" (Rom. 2.24). Unfortunately, this applies to the Ukrainian situation to the full. Often in the eyes of people, not churched yet, the Orthodox appear some vicious little people who fight because of some canonicity or non-canonicity. This question of canonicity, be it God's will, we will consider in the next article. Now we simply say: canonicity or non-canonicity is not an idle question. This is one of the most important issues, radically affecting the fate of man in eternity. But as a rule, a person learns about this, having already crossed the threshold of the temple. If he/she, of course, crosses it, looking at our inter-confessional enmity.

Thirdly, the inevitable uprising of a large part of believers against autocephaly and the following surge of violence on both sides will become a powerful catalyst for the growth of separatist sentiments. It's no secret that in the south-eastern regions of Ukraine there is latent (hidden) sympathy for the ideas of separation from Kiev with its constant failures in politics and economy. From time to time, there are already open demands of workers of this or that idle enterprise to resume economic ties with Russia. And it's not about sympathy for the "Russian world". These workers simply have nothing to feed their families. Relationships are not being restored, social tension is growing. If a religious factor is added to this, the situation can simply explode with a very high probability.

We have already experienced this. When the Brest Union of 1596 (the same ULC of the end of the 16th century) was added to all the oppression of the "Little Russian people" in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Cossack uprisings broke out, and all this ended with the accession of Ukrainian lands to Russia in 1654. Today, all historical processes are happening much faster, and what in the 17th century took almost 60 years, now can happen in two or three years.

A question arises to Poroshenko and others: do you need it?!

Fourthly, having separated completely from the Russian Orthodox Church, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church will fall into an inevitable dependence on secular power. This has always been the case everywhere: in Russia, Bulgaria, Romania, etc. The Church will be forced, willingly or unwillingly, to fulfill the wishes of this authority. And if in the past centuries it was not so bad, because the authorities had Christian beliefs, today the situation is completely different.

And it's not just that the Church will be used as an election campaign machine. If only this ... The Church sooner or later will be forced to the following:

• recognition of same-sex marriages, the rights of LGBT representatives, etc.;
• recognition of the human right to euthanasia;
• recognition of alternative forms of the family;
• recognition of the right of women to priesthood;
• gradual removal from the public places of Christian symbols, so as not to "hurt" the feelings of representatives of other religions;
• prohibition on mentioning the exclusive truthfulness of the Christian religion (this is not tolerant);
• finally – the reduction of the whole church life to beautiful rituals, away from someone's eyes.

It sounds too much, doesn’t it? But it's worth taking a look at what is happening in Europe today, and this will not seem unthinkable any more. We aspire to Europe. Several years of massive propaganda, a formed public opinion, relevant legislation, the obedient ULC – and all this can become a reality in Ukraine. This will eventually be required by European officials from the Ukrainian authorities, and the Ukrainian authorities, in turn, – from the ULC, because the Church in Ukraine is the most massive non-governmental organization that has an impact on a huge number of people. And it will be definitely forced not to prevent the planting of "European values" in Ukraine.

Of course, this can also happen under the current status of the UOC. But in unity with the ROC, there are many more opportunities and resources to resist all this. In any case, you can nod to the Moscow Patriarch and say, "Go and decide with him."

In Europe, on all the above points, the Protestant denominations have already surrendered to the mercy of the winner. The Catholic Church still resists, the marriage of same-sex couples in churches are isolated cases initiated by individual priests. Similar precedents have taken place in Switzerland, Australia and some other countries and caused the Vatican to condemn them. But the pressure on the Roman See in this matter is increasing. Here, for example, is a screen from the site of a respectable German agency Deutsche Welle:



Notice, this is an opinion of believers, churched people. For your information: in Germany, being a Catholic, as well as a member of any other confession, is not easy. To do this, you need to register as a member of a community and pay a special tax, the amount of which depends on income and on the federal land. For example, for a resident of Bavaria, this tax is € 800 (!) per year. That is, when we read that 70% of Catholics are for the wedding of homosexuals or 87% - for the women's priesthood, one must understand that this is the opinion of people who do not just go to church but keep it out of their own pocket. And as you know he who pays money orders music. And this is not only in Germany.

Ask yourself why the Roman Curia is so persistently seeking cooperation with the ROC? So the State Secretary of the Vatican, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, is going to visit Moscow. And in the notorious Havana Declaration of 2016, signed by Pope Francis and Patriarch Kirill, the Roman See generally agreed to the unheard – to recognize the union as a historical mistake (!): "Today it is obvious that the method of "uniatism" of the previous centuries, which implies bringing one community into unity with the other through its separation from its Church is not a way to restore unity" (Para. 25 of the Declaration). Why such concessions?

Not the last place in the motives of the Vatican is the search for a natural ally in the confrontation with militant European secularism (deviation from the truths of faith). And the Roman See finds precisely the ROC – numerous, influential and conservative – to be such an ally.

It can also be said that the Ukrainian authorities in the case of autocephaly will already fully use the ULC in the fight against the "aggressor state". And this is prayers for the victory of the "Ukrainian weapon", and the proclamation of anathemas to "separs" and "occupants", and "death to the enemies" during religious processions and other church occasions (as now happens in the Kiev Patriarchate), etc.

Fifthly, the creation of the ULC will inevitably raise a question that is extremely important for the majority of Local Orthodox Churches: how to deal with the non-canonical ordination of the "clergy" of the UOC-KP and the UAOC. In many churches there are unrecognized schismatic groups. If you issue a decision, loudly call it a "tomos" and declare all of them canonical, an extremely dangerous precedent will be created. The temptation to engage in schismatic activities will increase many times, and the church discipline will fall just as much. The very concept of the priesthood will be blurred. In any country, any clown will be able to put on priestly robes, receive "ordination" from the same clown and begin "to celebrate a mass". And to the question of grace, they will say: "Graceless? Well, let them! Time will pass - they will recognize and put up with it" and, in doing so, nod to Ukraine.

It is impossible to imagine that the present "priests" and "bishops" of the UOC-KP and the UAOC will repent, perform the penance, serve as readers or other lower clerics for some years and only then be granted the canonical ordination. This is definitely fantastic!

There is, however, an option of their reordination without any repentance and penance. But in this case the next moment arises.

Sixthly, a personnel issue. Any division at the time of its occurrence is experiencing staff shortage. So it was with the creation of the UAOC in 1921, so it was during the creation of the UOC-KP in 1992. The personnel question is addressed in such cases in two ways. The first is draining priests from the canonical Church, who are barred from priesthood for some faults or feel offended by some of their bishops, i. e. not very stable morally. Some archimandrite wanted to become a bishop but is not given an opportunity. Immediately there is a way out – to go to schismatics, as a rule, dragging the Church through the mud, and quickly deserve "hierarchy".

The second way is the "ordination" of all comers, who at least somehow fits it. As a rule, these people are guided not by motives of selfless service to God and neighbour, but by the desire for rapid career growth and personal welfare.

In order to be convinced of all this, it is enough to read the biographies of the "bishops" of the UOC-KP and the UAOC on their official websites. They are either former priests of the canonical Church (including those from the Russian dioceses) who left it because of conflicts with their bishops. Or, quite young people, emerging from nowhere and making a great church career in record time.

And in the case of autocephaly, all this "brethren" will join the ULC. We can assume that scandals such as "Bishop of UAOC sold a monastery" will happen regularly.

Seventhly, under autocephaly, both the state and the former schismatic "clergy" who join the ULC, will require a revision of the church saints. It will be somehow unpatriotic to celebrate the saints of the "aggressor state", especially the tsar-martyr Nikolai and his family, the new martyrs of Russia, the blessed Xenia of Petersburg and Matrona of Moscow and many others. Instead, there will appear such personalities as Vasily Lipkovsky, "holy revolutionaries and warriors of the UPA", etc.

We can say that with a high degree of probability we are expected to refuse from the Church Slavonic language of worship, to introduce the Gregorian calendar, and so on. There is much more to talk about.

It is quite clear that the unscrupulous politicians through autocephaly want to make the Church of Christ an obedient tool against the "aggressor state", they want to use it in the election campaign, they want to force it to serve the Ukrainian national idea and accept the "European values" mentioned above.

Isn’t the acceptance of this a betrayal of Orthodoxy?