Russia’s offensive in Ukraine since February 24 “is a shock to all churches,” explains Pavlo Smytsnyuk, the director of the Ecumenical Institute of Lviv, western Ukraine. “They are therefore forced into a form of creativity to cope with the crisis.”
Faced with the Russian offensive, the local churches are united and show “creativity”, assures Pavlo Smytsnyuk, the director of the Ecumenical Institute of Lviv, in western Ukraine, a predominantly Catholic city. He is currently traveling through the United States and is in daily contact with his Ukrainian, Catholic and Orthodox interlocutors. He returns to the turmoil caused by the war in Ukraine, which in particular questions the affiliation of many Ukrainian Orthodox parishes to the Moscow Patriarchate.
How have the churches in Ukraine reacted since the start of the offensive?
Pavlo Smytsnyuk : This is a shock to all churches, who are therefore forced to use some form of creativity to face the crisis. They all condemned this attack, each with their own statement. There was also a strong statement from the All-Ukrainian Council of Churches and Religious Communities, including Jews and Muslims. All these bodies defend the integrity of Ukraine. We have never seen such solidarity between churches in Ukraine.
Priests and seminarians are not currently required to engage in general mobilization.
They also adapt to the practical level. The Kiev Greek Catholic Seminary, where I teach, went into exile in Lviv, with the students from central and eastern Ukraine, subject to the most intense fighting. For the time being, priests and seminarians have not been forced into general mobilization.
Will this war change the already complex landscape of Orthodoxy in Ukraine?
I believe so, because we find that the Patriarch of Moscow, Kirill, and the Primate Onuphry, the metropolitan of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church who remains under Moscow’s jurisdiction, are not saying the same thing. The Patriarch of Moscow sends ambiguous messages. He asked not to reach the civilians, but is not denouncing the war. When he defends “the unity of holy Russia”, he uses the same language as Putin and Lukashenko. On the contrary, Onuphre condemned the war by explicitly asking Putin to stop the offensive. This is a big change because his church has always emphasized this idea of Russkiy Mir, of the “Russian world”, with the idea of a civilization united by a single culture. She is going through a crisis moment.
A denunciation of the war by Patriarch Kirill, as some of the Orthodox clergy had hoped, would have saved this Ukrainian Orthodox Church’s communion with Moscow.
The Russian Orthodox Church has always considered itself cosmopolitan. Patriarch Kirill claims to have a church that exercises jurisdiction beyond the territory of the Russian state, to Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus and even Japan. It is therefore a Church which is not national, but which wishes to be pluralistic and cosmopolitan. But today his position is in agreement with the Russian authorities. The future of the Ukrainian branch is therefore uncertain, many think that it will break loose. A denunciation of the war by Patriarch Kirill, as some of the Orthodox clergy had hoped, would have saved this Ukrainian Orthodox Church’s communion with Moscow. But now it will be very difficult.
Could this speed up the autocephalous movement of the Ukrainian Orthodox as a result of this war?
Ukrainian Orthodoxy is divided into two churches: one, which is part of the Russian Church, the other, autocephalous (independent), founded by Constantinople in 2019. Currently, as of 2019, there are between 400 and 600 Orthodox parishes of the affiliated church in Moscow joined the Autocephalous Church, for a total of about 10,000 parishes. This is much less than the Patriarchate of Constantinople had imagined, but current events are likely to accelerate these changes in parish jurisdiction.
Some theologians even begin to speak of a Council of Union, to restore the unity of an Orthodox Church of Ukraine, independent of Moscow.
And further, some theologians even begin to speak of a Council of Unity, to restore the unity of an Orthodox Church of Ukraine, independent of Moscow. In recent days, meetings of the clergy of several dioceses associated with the Russian Church have called for independence from Moscow. This movement is now supported by their bishops. Until now, this process, initiated under the leadership of former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, seemed too political and many Orthodox priests were wary of this manipulation. But with this new context, the changes of jurisdiction will accelerate.
Would a Russian victory risk being associated with violations of religious freedom?
Yes, of course, this scenario of detachment of the Orthodox Church from Moscow would only apply if independent Ukraine wins the war. On the other hand, if Russia sets up a puppet government in Kiev, it cannot be ruled out that the new authorities will block the activities of an autocephalous Orthodox Church, just like that of the Catholic Church. Under the presidency of Viktor Yanukovych, the pro-Russian president who was in power from 2010 to 2014, there were already threats against the Greek Catholic Church. For example, the Catholic University of Lviv, where I teach, had problems with the Ministry of Education. So if Russia takes Ukraine, the New Orthodox Church and Greek Catholics will be persecuted.
In this war context, can we speak of an “ecumenical charity” in Ukraine today?
Currently there are many small initiatives, mainly to help refugees, but this is not yet part of a global coordination. At the level of the Catholic Church, Caritas organizes regional centers, but the Orthodox Church has fewer charitable networks. At the international level, gestures of solidarity are beginning to emerge. At the European level, the Conference of European Churches (CEC), which brings together mainly Protestants and Orthodox, has sent out a very courageous message by asking the Russian army to return to Russia. But the World Council of Churches (WCC) had initially issued a fairly neutral press release. The Moscow Patriarchate is still represented in these bodies, which affects how they respond.
The other Orthodox churches also showed their solidarity. The Holy See has been very cautious, but I think it is working for a peaceful solution, as the symbolic gesture of Pope Francis’ visit to the Russian embassy suggests. Vatican diplomacy has traditionally acted in a more discreet manner, but I remember Cardinal Etchegaray was often sent into crisis situations during the time of John Paul II. One could also imagine today that the Pope would send a cardinal to Russia, to Belarus and especially to Ukraine to show his solidarity.
By dailer.xyz