A translation of the full version of the
comments of His Beatitude Sviatoslav
in his September 2015 interview with “Kathpress”
Question: Metropolitan Antonii said that, during your stay in the Holy Land, your appeals changed from radical (we
must fight unto victory) to reconciliation.
Patriarch Sviatoslav: Actually, this was my third appeal for
reconciliation during the previous year. It is interesting that they have only
now acknowledged it. These appeals to end the war against Ukraine were made
last year in an interview with Zenit and George Weigel news agencies.
The Ukrainian
Greek-Catholic Church has consistently denounced the aggression of Russia against
Ukraine. I also consider it unacceptable to create an image of Ukrainians as enemies
of the Russian people by attaching various labels to those who that assert the right
of Ukraine to exist as an independent state.
Our repeated appeals for
reconciliation were primarily directed not to the presidents of Ukraine and Russia
(as did the Russian Orthodox Church), but to the Ukrainian and the Russian peoples. We
believe that Russian propaganda is fuelling mutual ethnic hatred. It does this by arguing
that the Ukrainian nation, language, and culture do not exist, and the very
existence of the Ukrainian State is a wound on the body of the one Russian
people. This propaganda claims that Ukraine is not a nation or state, but only
“a territory.” Our appeals’ message is to resist this propaganda, because propagandists
and politicians come and go, but nations remain. When we are able to see
ourselves as neighbours with equal rights, only then can we speak of true
reconciliation, and seek the means for peaceful coexistence.
Our appeal from the Holy Land was special in that, it was a call to [recognise] the common
spiritual heritage of Ukrainians and Russians, the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church
and the Russian Orthodox Church. [This common heritage includes] the holy
martyrs Borys and Hlib/ Boris and Gleb, the first declared saints of Kyivan
Rus, the thousandth anniversary of which we are celebrating this year. It is important to note that, this year, the Russian Orthodox Church has paid enormous emphasis to the
millennium of the death of St. Vladimir, but completely avoided any attention to
Boris and Gleb. Perhaps the example of Saints Boris and Gleb speak to the
conscience of Russians and Russian Orthodox, reminding them that we must to
obey God rather than men.
The Ukrainian
Greek-Catholic Church has never called for violence and war, contrary to our
adversaries accusations. “We have consistently condemned the aggressors and
those who supply weapons and illegal armed formation. Also, together with all
members National Council of Churches and Religious Organisations, we called
upon them to lay down their arms. We affirm the right and duty of Ukrainians to
defend their country from foreign invaders, in accordance with the social doctrine
of the Catholic Church. We provide chaplains to minister to Ukrainian soldiers who
are defenders of a just peace. We educate Ukrainian society based on Christian
patriotism, not based on hatred of foreigners, but with Christian love to our
people, our country, and our own state.
We believe that
Ukrainian victory will be achieved by a just peace, which can never, under any
circumstances, be achieve on the terms of an aggressor. We consistently call
for reconciliation, but can not accept reconciliation from war, violence, untruth,
and the denial of the right of the Ukrainian nation and state to exist.
Question: Metropolitan Antonii explained that the Ukrainian Orthodox Church hold a
position to the war in East Ukraine similar to that of Francis Pope and the
Vatican, in order to keep the path to dialogue open. What is your comment?
Patriarch Sviatoslav: In the Early Church, especially during the first millennium, the Pope, as successor of the Apostle Peter and Supreme Pontiff, was considered the highest arbiter of the Church of Christ. He was
appealed to in cases of dogmatic and administrative disputes among the
individual local Churches. According to the ancient rule nemo iudex in causa sua (no one can act as judge over his own case), he performed and continues to perform this ministry today, not as a
representative of the Roman Patriarchate, but as Supreme Pontiff. Thus,
interestingly, in this vein, we see St. Basil the Great appealing to the Pope
to act as arbitrator and mediator in the disputes of the Churches of Asia Minor (4th Century A.D.)
The local Church is of and must stand with its own people. It must act as its voice, its mother, and
teacher. This is why, briefly speaking, “the nation’s cause” is “the cause of its
Church,” its causa sua. (its own cause). The Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church stands
with its people. protects their rights and interests, acts as their voice before
the Ecumenical Pontiff. Particularly, in
the case of war against its own people, it appeals to the Holy Father, and
through him to the entire international community.
In a very similar way,
the Russian Orthodox Church is concerned with the “joys and sorrows” of its own Russian nation. For
it, even the idea of a “Russian world” is also causa sua. Even though the
Moscow Patriarch has claimed authority over
all that was “Rus” and not only “Russia,” according to contemporary
reality, this is clearly not possible for him to do. The moral right for him to
represent the “pain and joy” of the Ukrainian people is placed in doubt even by
faithful of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, who see their patriarch as
“patriarch of the aggressor.”
In the matter of the
war in East Ukraine, to compare the role of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church’s mediatory mission and
ministry of the Supreme Pontiff of Christ’s Church is absurd and dangerous.
This demonstrates that the pain and suffering of the Ukrainian nation caused by
the war, that is “the nation’s cause,” is not the causa sua of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Therefore,
ordinary people are asking the question: if this Church is completely aloof
from its people and appears in the position of a partisan judge or mediator, then whose side is
it on? How can a Church that claims to be the only Orthodox Church of this
nation, stand aloof from the cause of its life or death? I want to believe that
this is just an unfortunate comparison and not a refusal of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church to be a national
Church for Ukrainians.
Question: Metropolitan Antonii equated the subordination of the Ukrainian
Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) to Patriarch Kirill to the subordination
of Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church to Pope Francis. Is this correct?
Patriarch Sviatoslav: This comparison is also completely
inappropriate. Even in the Orthodox world, the Moscow Patriarch never
considered himself universal or as having any ministry or jurisdiction outside of
his own Patriarchate. Moscow has consistently denied any universal service in
the Orthodox Church even to Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew. Indicative in
this is the recent theological discussion of the Orthodox-Catholic theological
commission of ecumenical dialogue, which the Catholic Church holds with the
Orthodox Churches.
The Ukrainian
Greek-Catholic Church, a local Church with its own particular law, is in
communion with the Holy Father as Universal Pontiff. We do not belong to the
“Latin Patriarchate.” According to the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, our
Church enjoys all the rights patriarchal dignity, except the title
“patriarch” for the Head of our Church, and we have steadily been building
our own patriarchate.
As to the Ukrainian
Orthodox Church, despite all its rights and so-called autonomy, it belongs to
the Moscow Patriarchate and is not seeking to achieve its own. This dependency
on the Moscow Patriarchate for the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is an integral part of its
ecclesiological identity. Through its very unity with Moscow, the Ukrainian Orthodox
Church remains in communion with the rest of world Orthodoxy. A danger should
noted: Moscow’s subconscious view of itself as the Third Rome, as much as the
Patriarch of Moscow equates itself to the Universal Pontiff [of Old Rome]. So
the analogy between the union of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church with the
Universal Pontiff and unity of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church with the
Patriarch of Moscow is, to be polite, a failure.
Such an analogy could
be seriously considered if the Ukrainian Orthodox Church belonged to the ancient
Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople. Then Patriarch Bartholomew would be
truly seen as the “pope of the Orthodox world.” I hope that, here, we are merely
dealing with a mistake of an Orthodox spokesman, rather than a “confession of
faith” and the real ecclesiology of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
trad. ADM