Author Topic: Interview with Pat. Filaret of the UOC-KP on the Church in Ukraine  (Read 1899 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Recently, Oleg Sukhov of the Kyiv Post conducted an interview with Patriarch Filaret of the UOC-KP in which Patriarch Filaret comments on many things, including the status of the relations between the various Orthodox Churches in Ukraine.  I'm posting this because the interview responses are of ecclesiastical interest.  I am not passing judgment on Patriarch Filaret's comments, but am presenting them because I think that his views and perceptions are worth consideration.

Here is the article:
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/patriarch-filaret-moscow-church-does-not-serve-needs-of-people-366758.html

Here are a few interesting snippets reflecting Patriarch Filaret's view on the status of ecclesiastical relations in Ukraine:

Quote
[Pat.] Filaret said nothing had changed in the position of the Moscow Patriarchate’s Ukrainian branch regarding unification since Metropolitan Onufry, seen by many as pro-Russian, became its head in August.

Quote
Ironically, it was [Pat.] Filaret who ordained as bishops both [Met.] Onufry – in 1990 – and the current Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia, Kirill, in 1976.

Quote
[Pat.] Filaret described [Pat.] Kirill as “not a spiritual man” who likes the “external grandeur of the Catholic Church” and looks to its wealth as an example. At the Kyiv Patriarchate, there is little leeway for corruption because it is quite poor, [Pat.] Filaret said.

Quote
[Pat.] Filaret said that in 1992 he met with [Pat.] Bartholomew, the patriarch of Constantinople, who said the Ukrainian church had a right to autocephaly. But [Pat.] Bartholomew said the two major Ukrainian Orthodox churches should first unite before their independence is recognized, [Pat.] Filaret added.

He said that the Kyiv Patriarchate was still having informal talks with the Constantinople Patriarchate and discussing potential recognition.

Quote
[Pat.] Filaret also said that most Ukrainian bishops initially supported the Ukrainian church’s independence in the early 1990s but then backtracked because of pressure by security agencies.

I'm intentionally not quoting the political parts here, and hope that we can keep the discussion free of that.
« Last Edit: October 02, 2014, 03:08:04 PM by Yurysprudentsiya »

Offline hayabusa

  • An honorary Serb
  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 370
  • I reject the Crete 2016 robber council
  • Faith: MP, but my hart belongs
  • Jurisdiction: to Eparchy of Raska-Prizren in Exile
Re: Interview with Pat. Filaret of the UOC-KP on the Church in Ukraine
« Reply #1 on: October 02, 2014, 03:27:20 PM »
I am prevented from participating in this thread, since I'd have to refer to the interviewed person in the fashion as if he was not defrocked and laicized.

However, Sheikh Imran has given quite an amazing lecture relevant to this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM7Sya3nZMQ

Edited, typo
« Last Edit: October 02, 2014, 03:37:49 PM by hayabusa »
Hayabusa's avatar and signature line have been edited thrice (10 and 14 Dec 2015, 8 Jan 2016) in order to conform to forum rules regarding political commentary in the public fora. 

Mor Ephrem, section moderator

Offline Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,017
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South (OCA)
Re: Interview with Pat. Filaret of the UOC-KP on the Church in Ukraine
« Reply #2 on: October 03, 2014, 11:14:13 AM »
I am prevented from participating in this thread, since I'd have to refer to the interviewed person in the fashion as if he was not defrocked and laicized.

However, Sheikh Imran has given quite an amazing lecture relevant to this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM7Sya3nZMQ

Edited, typo


"Sheikh" Imran is now an authority???!!!???

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,773
Re: Interview with Pat. Filaret of the UOC-KP on the Church in Ukraine
« Reply #3 on: October 03, 2014, 11:34:52 AM »
Recently, Oleg Sukhov of the Kyiv Post conducted an interview with Patriarch Filaret of the UOC-KP in which Patriarch Filaret comments on many things, including the status of the relations between the various Orthodox Churches in Ukraine.  I'm posting this because the interview responses are of ecclesiastical interest.  I am not passing judgment on Patriarch Filaret's comments, but am presenting them because I think that his views and perceptions are worth consideration.

Here is the article:
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/patriarch-filaret-moscow-church-does-not-serve-needs-of-people-366758.html

Here are a few interesting snippets reflecting Patriarch Filaret's view on the status of ecclesiastical relations in Ukraine:

Quote
[Pat.] Filaret said nothing had changed in the position of the Moscow Patriarchate’s Ukrainian branch regarding unification since Metropolitan Onufry, seen by many as pro-Russian, became its head in August.

Quote
Ironically, it was [Pat.] Filaret who ordained as bishops both [Met.] Onufry – in 1990 – and the current Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia, Kirill, in 1976.

Quote
[Pat.] Filaret described [Pat.] Kirill as “not a spiritual man” who likes the “external grandeur of the Catholic Church” and looks to its wealth as an example. At the Kyiv Patriarchate, there is little leeway for corruption because it is quite poor, [Pat.] Filaret said.

Quote
[Pat.] Filaret said that in 1992 he met with [Pat.] Bartholomew, the patriarch of Constantinople, who said the Ukrainian church had a right to autocephaly. But [Pat.] Bartholomew said the two major Ukrainian Orthodox churches should first unite before their independence is recognized, [Pat.] Filaret added.

He said that the Kyiv Patriarchate was still having informal talks with the Constantinople Patriarchate and discussing potential recognition.

Quote
[Pat.] Filaret also said that most Ukrainian bishops initially supported the Ukrainian church’s independence in the early 1990s but then backtracked because of pressure by security agencies.

I'm intentionally not quoting the political parts here, and hope that we can keep the discussion free of that.
OK ::)
For some free discussion:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,61438.msg1198515/topicseen.html#msg1198515
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline kijabeboy03

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,079
  • Seek truth from facts.
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Alexandrian Orthodox Church Abroad
Re: Interview with Pat. Filaret of the UOC-KP on the Church in Ukraine
« Reply #4 on: October 06, 2014, 09:45:51 AM »
Glass houses...

Offline Jeffrey

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 76
Re: Interview with Pat. Filaret of the UOC-KP on the Church in Ukraine
« Reply #5 on: October 06, 2014, 08:57:07 PM »
I am prevented from participating in this thread, since I'd have to refer to the interviewed person in the fashion as if he was not defrocked and laicized.

However, Sheikh Imran has given quite an amazing lecture relevant to this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM7Sya3nZMQ

Edited, typo


"Sheikh" Imran is now an authority???!!!???

Not for the first time do I see a video of Sh Imran.  Fascinating guy, not unintelligent.  These days it is worth while to know something of Islam, after all.  On the whole, I found his talk nonsense.  It's attempt to apply a post colonial and anti colonial reading has some interest, but the conspiracy thinking and Jew-blaming are nonsensical and with out merit, and spoil utterly any value in the analysis.  Moreover it hardly has anything to do with the interview with the head of the KP.  

The problem with his talk is not that he is a Muslim or a sheikh.  A Muslim, even a sheikh may sometimes have historical insight even though his Prophet is not really the Messenger of God, and it is nonsensical to think otherwise.  

Why the quote marks?  I am not familiar with Sh Imran's scholarly credentials, but I am not aware that there is any doubt or controversy about them so why the quote marks around his title?  There is far more immediate controversy around the Patriarchal title of the one who gave the Patriarchal interview!

I from time to time monitor RISU, a definitely pro-Ukrainian source, in fact I read it much more than any pro-Russian source.  Thank God for google translate!  I have seen many if not all of the statements of Patriarch Philaret (Denysenko) at the time of the election of Met Onufry.  Pat. Philaret's statements are so political, so posturing and manipulative, as were Archbishop Evstrati Zorya's, even before the election itself.  And the immediate and personal attack upon Met Onufry as soon as he was elected!  I find them nauseating.  Maybe they are short term political good for the speakers, but they will not benefit the Church or the Ukrainian nation in the long run at all.  For anyone who has watched Pat Philaret's career his painting himself as poverty stricken clean administration is a sort of sick joke, and it was when he was high in the MP too.   You don't have to be MP or pro-MP to see that.  


« Last Edit: October 06, 2014, 08:59:16 PM by Jeffrey »

Offline Jeffrey

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 76
Re: Interview with Pat. Filaret of the UOC-KP on the Church in Ukraine
« Reply #6 on: October 07, 2014, 02:51:36 PM »

"The problem with his talk is not that he is a Muslim or a sheikh.  A Muslim, even a sheikh may sometimes have historical insight even though his Prophet is not really the Messenger of God, and it is nonsensical to think otherwise."


I am sorry for my poor sentence structure.  I meant it is doesn't make sense to assume a muslim can not ever make a clear observation.  I reject his conspiracy theory in substance, not ad hominem.

I do also think that it is nonsensical to think that their Prophet is really the Messenger of God, but that is a totally different discussion - of course.

« Last Edit: October 07, 2014, 02:53:32 PM by Jeffrey »