До теми нещодавнього лондонського візиту Патріарха Кирила, – Майкл БурдоBEHIND PATRARCH KIRILL’S VISIT
Доктор канонік Майкл Бурдо, який на запрошення кафедри церковної історії та Інституту історії Церкви нещодавно приїжджав до Українського Католицького Університету з відкритою лекцією “Релігійна Свобода для України: внесок Кестонського коледжу 1968-1989рр.”, опублікував власну статтю з коментарем стосовно візиту до Лондона патріарха Кирила, що відбувся 18 жовтня 2016р. В публікації автор також порушує тему війни Росії проти України та аналізує факти з історії підпілля УГКЦ в контексті сучасної однозначно спрямованої політики Російської православної Церкви.
Далі оригільнальний текст.
Church Times ‘ 24 October 2016
by Michael Bourdeaux
BEHIND PATRARCH KIRILL’S VISIT
Ukrainians in the Moscow region have – or rather had – their own church in the town of Noginsk, subject to the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Kyiv. In Ukraine there are hundreds of Orthodox churches under the jurisdiction of Patriarch Kirill of Moscow. On 3 October the Moscow Regional Court confirmed its earlier ruling that this one Ukrainian church was to be demolished; there will soon be reports that the Russian nationalists have done their work.
I encountered the Russian Orthodox Church face to face 57 years ago when I went to Moscow as a member of the first-ever student exchange between the UK and the Soviet Union. Believers, it seemed, by 1959 were beginning to feel there was lasting substance in their improved destiny since Stalin had back-tracked on his policy of eliminating Christianity during the purges. But everything was about to change: Nikita Khrushchev, General Secretary of the Communist Party of the USSR, began a new period of religious persecution, total in its scope, brutal in its execution. Khrushchev boasted that he would live to see the last old woman lock the door of the last church on his territory.
Khrushchev had form. Before coming to Moscow from Ukraine to take over the top position in the communist government he had, thirteen years earlier, in 1946, presided over a brutal attempt to subdue Western Ukraine, which the Red Army’s victory had just incorporated into the Soviet empire. The institution most openly supportive of Ukrainian identity was the Greek-Catholic Church, that branch of the Catholic Church subject to the Pope, but honouring the liturgy and practices of the Orthodox Church. The new Soviet policy was absolute: suppression of the Church led to imprisonment and soon the death of many clergy and all except one of the bishops, Cardinal Slipyi alone surviving to be exiled to the Vatican in 1963.
Some clergy saved themselves and their families (this church accepts married priests) by becoming Orthodox and making a submission to the Moscow Patriarchate, whose leaders, to this day, continue to justify their complicity in Stalin’s and Khrushchev’s actions. There were secret consecrations of bishops in the gulag. Following years of underground activity, the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church regained its legal status in 1989 and eventually most – though not all – of its stolen property.
Is all this relevant to last week’s visit to London by Patriarch Kirill? Very much so. The Putin regime is implacably hostile to Ukraine. As well as its illegal seizure of Crimea two years ago, it is engaged in fomenting strife in the eastern part of the country, which is Russian-speaking, but far from universally wishing to secede from the Kyiv government. Putin at first denied Russian involvement in the territory-snatch, but has since admitted it.
Following a meeting between the Patriarch and Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk on the one hand and Archbishop Welby and the Bishop of London, Richard Chartres, on the other, a press statement noted their
“shared compassion for Christian and other minorities in many parts of the world, especially in the Middle East, where they have been systematically targeted and persecuted and their communities decimated”. There was no mention of Ukraine. The Eastern Ukrainians are a majority – not a minority – subjected to a foreign power in a conflict which has recently been almost totally absent from the news, despite the Ukrainians having lost some ten thousand people in this war.
The Patriarch’s visit has clearly improved official relations between the two churches and perhaps paved the way for a formal visit by Archbishop Welby to Russia, something which Archbishop Rowan Williams never managed to achieve, despite his deep insight into the Orthodox Church. Patriarch Kirill imparted, through his official press service, a lively impression of his visit to Buckingham Palace: “I saw the Queen in good health, [I saw] her bright luminous eyes. She showed wonderful reaction to my words, she said many proper things and the conversation left me with a pleasant intellectual and emotional impression.”
The official Russian spokesman for the Patriarchate’s press service, Fr Alexander Volkov, was less positive. He repeated the tiresome mantra that the Lambeth talks had included criticism of the Church of England for “the liberalisation of its teachings, particularly on the ordination of women as priests and bishops and on morals and family issues,” as reported in The Times.
The way would now seem to be open, however, for honest and frank conversations between Anglican and Russian Orthodox church leaders. Although Patriarch Kirill’s visit was clearly announced as “pastoral” – to his own flock in London – its status was enhanced by his invitation to visit the Queen. Such diplomacy is reciprocal, so perhaps – in a fantasy world – the day might come when Archbishop Welby finds President Putin awaiting him in the Kremlin – a chance to raise the issue of Ukraine directly with its scourge, as well as to alleviate the endless sufferings of people in Syria.
Canon Dr Michael Bourdeaux is the Founder and President of Keston Institute, Oxford