UKRAINIAN LOCAL CHURCH: REALITIES OF THE PROCLAMATION AND PROSPECTS

Andrii Kobetіak

doi:10.23856/4706

Andrii Kobetіak Zhytomyr Polytechnic State University http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6899-0571

Keywords: Ukrainian Church, autocephaly, metropolitan, religion, local council, society, interfaith relations

Abstract

The article analyzes the process of formation of the newly formed Local Ukrainian Church at the present stage. It is determined that the institutional design of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine takes place in a multi-religious environment. Therefore, the article predicts that today in Ukraine, there is no reason to talk about the United Church in the future. It is determined that the Ukrainian church issue is a kind of watershed in terms of the main controversial issues that have troubled the Ecumenical Church in recent centuries. Therefore, it has been proved that the settlement of the Ukrainian question is of great importance not only for the Orthodox believers of Ukraine, but also for the whole Orthodoxy. Most countries that have received autocephaly in our time have been waiting for decades for world recognition of their own church. Therefore, the recognition of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine by only a part of the Local Churches is a natural process. It is established that autocephaly in modern conditions of society development and hybrid war is a vital condition for the country's survival. It has been studied that in modern conditions the Kyiv Church has received a great credit of trust in the eyes of the Ecumenical Patriarch. The consolidated Kyiv metropolitanate may become the largest national Orthodox church in the world, which will significantly change the balance in the structure of the Universal Orthodoxy.

References

1. Bortnyk S. (2020). Stratehiya prymyrennya. Rolʹ tserkov v Ukrayini [Strategy of reconciliation. The role of churches in Ukraine]. Kiеv. [in Ukrainian].
2. Butynsʹkyy V. (2014). Yurysdyktsiynyy status ukrayinsʹkoho pravoslavʺya i perspektyvy kanonichnoho oformlennya pomisnoyi tserkvy: relihiyeznavchi ta ekleziolohichni refleksiyi (1991 – 2013 rr.) [Jurisdictional status of Ukrainian Orthodoxy and prospects of canonical design of the local church: religious and ecclesiological reflections (1991 – 2013). Chernivtsi. [in Ukrainian].
3. Vavuskos A. Should Tomos on Autocephaly issued by the Ecumenical Patriarchate be ratified by local churches? URL: https://cerkvarium.org/ru/publikatsii/monitoring-smi/dolzhny-li-tomosy-ob-avtokefaliyakh-vydannye-vselenskim-patriarkhatom-ratifitsirovatsya-pomestnymi-tserkvami.html.
4. Herhelyuk M. (2014). Kanonichni ta ekleziolohichni zasady avtokefalʹnoho ustroyu tserkov u strukturi Vselensʹkoho pravoslavʺya: istorychnyy kontekst [Сanonical and ecclesiological principles of the autocephalous system of churches in the structure of the Universal Orthodoxy: historical aspect] (PhD Thesis). Chernivtsi: Сhernivetsʹkyy natsionalʹnyy universytet imeni yuriya fedʹkovycha.
5. Dokumenty Svyatoho i Velykoho Soboru Pravoslavnoyi Tserkvy [Documents of the Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church]. (2016). 112 р.
6. Zvit pro merezhu relihiynykh orhanizatsiy v Ukrayini stanom na 1 sichnya 2021 roku [Report on the network of religious organizations in Ukraine as of January 1, 2021]. URL: https://dess.gov.ua/statistics-2020.
7. Zyzyulas Y. (2005). Samoponymanye pravoslavnykh y ykh uchastye v ékumenycheskom dvyzhenyy: mezhpravoslavnaya konsulʹtatsyya ob otnoshenyy ko Vsemyrnomu Sovetu Tserkvey Shambezy (Shveytsaryya, 19-24 yyunya 1995 h.) [Self-understanding of the Orthodox and their participation in the ecumenical movement: an inter-Orthodox consultation on the attitude to the World Council of Châmbezi Churches]. Pravoslavye y ékumenyzm.
8. Kyrylo (Hovorun), arkhimandryt. (2019). Pomylka Patriarkha. Misto. URL: http://lenta.te.ua/ society/2019/01/12/101033.html.
9. Kolodnyy A. (2009). Relihiyne sʹohodennya Ukrayiny: rozdumy, otsinky i prohnozy (tematychna zbirka vybranykh statey i tez) [Religious present of Ukraine: reflections, assessments and forecasts (thematic collection of selected articles and theses)]. Kiev. [in Ukrainian].
10. Knyha pravyl Svyatykh Apostol, Svyatykh Soborov Vselenskykh y Pomestnykh y Svyatykh Otets [Book of rules of the Holy Apostles, the Holy Councils of the Ecumenical and Local and the Holy Fathers]. (2010). Moscow.
11. Oleksandr (Drabynko), mytropolyt. (2018). Ukrayinsʹka Tserkva: shlyakh do avtokefaliyi. Do dyskusiyi navkolo kanonichnoho statusu, bohosluzhbovoyi movy ta istoriyi Ukrayinsʹkoyi Tserkvy [Ukrainian Church: the path to autocephaly]. – Kiev. DUKH I LITERA. [in Ukrainian].
12. Osoblyvosti relihiynoho i tserkovno-relihiynoho samovyznachennya hromadyan Ukrayiny: tendentsiyi 2000-2020rr. (Informatsiyni materialy) Razumkov centre. Kiev (2020).
13. Poloneni na Donbasi i Moskovsʹkyy patriarkhat. Shcho mozhe zrobyty tserkva? [Prisoners in the Donbass and the Moscow Patriarchate. What can the church do?]. interv'yu L. Fylypovych ta A. Yurasha. URL: https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/28185932.html.
14. Sahan O. (2004). Vselensʹke pravoslav'ya: sutʹ, istoriya, suchasnyy stan [Ecumenical Orthodoxy: essence, history, current state]. Kiev: Svit Znan. [in Ukrainian].
15. Spetsialʹno dlya UPTS MP rechnyk PTSU poyasnyv, shcho oznachaye vyznannya Kiprom [Especially for the UOC-MP, a spokesman for the PCU explained what it means to recognize Cyprus]. URL: https://religionpravda.com.ua/?p=57945.
16. Fihurnyy YU. (2016) Stan i perspektyvy rozvytku Pravoslavnoyi Tserkvy v Ukrayini na rubezhi ХХ–ХХІ st. ta v umovakh hibrydnoyi rosiysʹko-ukrayinsʹkoyi viyny [The state and prospects of development of the Orthodox Church in Ukraine at the turn of the XX-XXI centuries. and in the conditions of a hybrid Russian-Ukrainian war]. Pravoslavʺya v Ukrayini : Zbirnyk materialiv VI Mizhnarodnoyi naukovoyi konferentsiyi. Kiev. P. 864–886.
17. Yablonsʹkyy V. M.; Zdioruk S. I.; Tokman V. V; Astafʺyef V. V.; Valevsʹkyy O. L.; Zubchenko S. O.; Ishchenko A. YU.; Lytvynenko O. M. (2014). Ukrayina ta proekt «Russkoho Myra» [Ukraine and the project "Russian World"] Analitychna dopovid. Kiev. P. 32–41.