Recognition of OCU and the Church of Cyprus: the story of one betrayal
Why did Abp. Chrysostomos, who recently said he wouldn't commemorate Dumenko, do this contrary to the Synod's opinion? How will it end for the Church of Cyprus?
On October 24, the Orthodox world was stirred up by the news of the commemoration of Sergei (Epiphany) Dumenko by the Primate of the Church of Cyprus, H.B. Archbishop Chrysostomos. During the Divine Liturgy at the Chrysorrogiatissa monastery during the consecration of the new bishop Arsinoe, Chrysostomos made at the entrance a liturgical mention of Epiphany Dumenko among the Primates of the Local Churches.
This event caused stormy jubilation in the OCU and indignation within the Church of Cyprus. Shortly after, the scandalous details of the Archbishop's act became known.
Firstly, he did it secretly, without informing anyone. Metropolitan Athanasios of Limassol, who concelebrated this liturgy, was shocked, and after the commemoration he left the temple before the end of the service.
Secondly, Archbishop Chrysostomos made a liturgical mention of Epiphany in secret from the Holy Synod, whose meeting took place literally the day before, on October 23rd.
Thirdly, the issue of recognizing the OCU by Chrysostomos was raised at the previous meeting of the Synod on September 9, but then almost all the bishops spoke out against it, and the Archbishop promised he would not commemorate Epiphany Dumenko, since the Holy Synod had a different opinion.
Fourthly, a lot of hierarchs openly call Epiphany and the members of the OCU schismatics who have nothing to do with the Church.
Fifthly, the primate did not have the right to single-handedly recognize the OCU, since, according to the Statute of the Cypriot Church, such decisions are made exclusively in a conciliar manner, by the decision of the Holy Synod.
After the commemoration of Dumenko, four of the most authoritative Cypriot hierarchs turned to Chrysostomos with an appeal to withdraw the unilateral recognition of the OCU, since, we quote, "it constitutes a flagrant violation of the synodal, conciliar and democratic structure of our Orthodox Church."
Archbishop Chrysostomos said that his recognition of the OCU "will serve Orthodoxy and the Church of Cyprus". But let's take a look at what the archbishop meant by serving Orthodoxy quite recently.
The evolutionary path of Archbishop Chrysostomos: from condemnation of the schism to its endorsement
Shortly after the Tomos granting in January 2019, Archbishop Chrysostomos publicly refuted the words of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry about his alleged support of the OCU, stating that he was offered to receive Epiphany Dumenko in Cyprus, but he rejected this offer, stressing that he would not and will not commemorate him at the Divine Liturgy.
I would not and will not commemorate Epiphany at the Divine Liturgy.
Archbishop Chrysostomos, January 2019
On February 18, 2019, a meeting of the Synod of the Church of Cyprus was held under the chairmanship of Archbishop Chrysostomos. The communiqué of the Synod, in particular, states that Cypriots do not consider members of the OCU as priests and bishops:
“The two-thousand-year experience of the Cyprus Church and the entire Orthodox Church as a whole gives us reason to doubt the possibility of legally backdating those ordinations that were committed by banned, excommunicated and anathematized bishops. The ban, excommunication and anathema of individuals who initiated the Ukrainian crisis were recognized by all Orthodox." In other words, Archbishop Chrysostomos, who signed this statement, did not consider Epiphany Dumenko to be a bishop.
In April 2019, Archbishop Chrysostomos met with the Primates of the Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem Churches and assumed the functions of a mediator in resolving the "Ukrainian issue" in Orthodoxy. In a communiqué following the meeting, it was said that the Primates called on all parties to work on “protecting the faithful as well as sacred temples and monasteries from seizures and any violent actions, no matter where they come from or whatever reasons or motives gave rise to them.” Recall that at that time the schismatics had already seized hundreds of the UOC temples, and the hierarchs knew about it.
In May 2019, Archbishop Chrysostomos discussed the Ukrainian issue with the Primates of the Serbian, Bulgarian and Greek Churches. After them, he said that if one sides with the ROC or Phanar, then "there will be a split in Orthodoxy with mathematical precision."
However, in September 2019, it turned out that Patriarch Bartholomew did not like all these events. The rhetoric of Archbishop Chrysostomos immediately began to change. He stated the following: “As the Church of Cyprus, we do not claim to recognize the OCU, but we do not say that we do not recognize it. We maintain a neutral position and want to have good relations with everyone.”
Once it became clear that the head of Phanar disliked the mediating efforts of the Primate of the Church of Cyprus, the Archbishop's rhetoric immediately began to change.
But as early as December 2019, Archbishop Chrysostomos suddenly lost his former neutrality and announced that he condemned the position of the Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church. According to Abp. Chrysostomos, it is Patriarch Kirill, and not the head of Phanar, who wants to be the first in Orthodoxy: “I told him that he would not be the first: ‘Seventeen past centuries have secured the first place in the Orthodox world for Constantinople’. That’s all. Full stop. Don't be fooled. Understand that’."
Soon, Chrysostomos ignored the invitation of Patriarch Theophilos to a meeting of the Primates and hierarchs of Churches in Amman, dedicated to the Ukrainian issue, for which he received a valuable pen, as well as personal gratitude from the head of Phanar.
And in March 2020, the Cypriot Primate took part in a meeting of the Synod of the Church of Constantinople and declared that to recognize Epiphany is “not a problem” for him. The very same Epiphany, whom the Cypriot Synod directly called a layman in February 2019. This is the evolution of the views of Archbishop Chrysostomos.
What does the Archbishop’s act entail?
And now he went against the catholicity and synodality of the Cyprus Church and recognized Epiphany without warning anyone, single-handedly. Moreover, it turned out that two months ago he wrote a letter to the head of Phanar on the recognition of the OCU but did not dare to publish it. So he made up his mind not spontaneously. What are the consequences of this recognition?
The first consequence is the triumph of papacy of the head of Phanar. The head of the Archdiocese of Phanar in the United States, Elpidophoros, stated this in a clear-cut way when commenting on the commemoration of Dumenko: "The Ecumenical Patriarchate continues to rule the Church."
The second consequence is the exacerbation of the schism in World Orthodoxy, which was announced by the four Cypriot bishops in their urgent appeal.
The third consequence is the actual division and the threat of schism within the Church of Cyprus itself. This was directly stated by Metropolitan Nikiforos of Kykkos, who asserts that Dumenko is a schismatic, and that “who receives the non-communicants in a Eucharistic communion also becomes non-communicant.”
We can safely say that the act of Archbishop Chrysostomos, as well as the recognition of the OCU by the Churches of Greece and Alexandria, is an exclusively a political, rather than ecclesiastical act. And this is easily confirmed by the facts.
The communiqué of the Church of Cyprus in 2019 on the Ukrainian issue said that the goal of the Tomos, which Phanar declared as achieving the unity of Ukraine's Orthodoxy, has not been achieved, there is no unity. Now, almost two years later, it is completely clear that there is no sign of any unity in Ukraine. And Archbishop Chrysostomos is aware of this very well.
In another paragraph of the communiqué, it was said that Phanar must find a way to reassure believers about the validity of the ordinations of the OCU members. Was there such a way? No. Does Archbishop Chrysostomos know about this? Certainly!
***
Christ clearly told us: "The tree is known by its fruit" (Matthew 12:33). What are the fruits of the Archbishop's act? Strengthening of the heretical papacy of Phanar in Orthodoxy and deepening of the schism.
Is there any reason for rejoice about all this? For Sergei Dumenko, Zoria and other schismatics – there is indeed – they will now have more reasons to seize the UOC temples. Phanar has also a reason to rejoice – it once again proved its ability to achieve results at any cost. Yet – is there any reason for the Church to rejoice amid the ever-deepening schism?
