Ο ΟΙΚΟΥΜΕΝΙΚΟΣ ΠΑΤΡΙΑΡΧΗΣ ΠΡΟΣ ΤΟΝ ΜΑΚΑΡΙΣΤΟ ΜΟΣΧΑΣ ΑΛΕΞΙΟ ΓΙΑ ΤΗΝ ΥΠΕΡΟΡΙΟ ΔΙΚΑΙΟΔΟΣΙΑ ΤΟΥ ΟΙΚΟΥΜΕΝΙΚΟΥ ΘΡΟΝΟΥ

Eordaia.org 17 Οκτωβρίου 2018, 08:47

Του Παναγιώτη Αντ. Ανδριόπουλου

Με αφορμή επιστολή του Οικουμενικού Πατριάρχου Βαρθολομαίου προς τον μακαριστό Πατριάρχη Μόσχας Αλέξιο Β’, η οποία είδε το φως της δημοσιότητος, οιονεί ως «ντοκουμέντο» και δια της οποίας ο Πατριάρχης αναγνωρίζει την πράξη της καθαίρεσης του νυν Μητροπολίτου πρ. Κιέβου Φιλαρέτου, ας επισημάνουμε και ας υπενθυμίσουμε τα ακόλουθα:

1. Ο Μητροπολίτης Φιλάρετος έχοντας χειροτονηθεί από την Εκκλησία της Μόσχας και Ιεράρχες της, έλαβε την καθαίρεση, ορθώς ή αδίκως, από τη Μόσχα, αρμοδίως, οπότε και όταν κατά την τάξη την ανακοίνωσε στον Οικουμενικό Πατριάρχη, εκείνος την αναγνώρισε.

2. Όταν γράφτηκε αυτό το Πατριαρχικό γράμμα ο Οικουμενικός Πατριάρχης δεν είχε την Έκκλητο αναγωγή-προσφυγή του Μητροπολίτου Φιλαρέτου, ώστε να μπορεί ιεροκανονικώς να αποφανθεί. Συνεπώς αποκρίθηκε εκείνη την ώρα έτσι όπως έπρεπε.

3. Το εκκλησιαστικό ζήτημα της Ουκρανίας έχει την πτυχή της Εκκλήτου προσφυγής του Φιλαρέτου, του Μακαρίου και των συν αυτοίς, αλλά από την άλλη και την άρση της πράξης του Πατριάρχου Διονυσίου του Δ’, η οποία πράξη είτε από εσφαλμένη είτε από ιδιοτελή ερμηνεία δημιουργούσε μια περίπλοκη, ιεροκανονικώς, κατάσταση στην Ουκρανία, δίνοντας το δικαίωμα στον Μόσχας να χειροτονεί όποιον εξέλεγε η κληρικολαϊκή και ο οποίος θα έπρεπε να μνημονεύει τον Κωνσταντινουπόλεως. Αυτήν την αναγκαία για εκείνες τις εποχές κατάσταση ήρε στην τελευταία συνεδρίαση της Ιεράς Συνόδου ο Πατριάρχης και φυσικώ τω τρόπω επανήλθαμε στην προ αυτής κατάσταση, όταν οι Κιέβου εξελέγοντο στον Πάνσεπτο Πατριαρχικό Ναό του Αγίου Γεωργίου στο Φανάρι (βλ. περίπτωση Κιέβου Σιλβέστρου στα 1649, μεσούσης της Τουρκοκρατίας!).

4. Θα μπορούσαμε να παραθέσουμε εκατοντάδες περιπτώσεων Εκκλήτου προσφυγής προς τον Οικουμενικό Πατριάρχηαρχιερέων και άλλων κληρικών αλλά και λαϊκών από άλλες τοπικές εκκλησίες και πρεσβυγενείς ακόμη Θρόνους. Είναι, αναμφίβολα, το ορατό σημείον ενότητος! Η επιστολή του Οικουμενικού Πατριάρχου του 1992 αναγνωρίζει δικαστική αρμοδιότητα στην Εκκλησία της Μόσχας, δεν δηλώνει όμως καμία παραίτηση από το δικαίωμα επανεκδίκασης, το οποίο και εφάρμοσε.

Τέλος, δημοσιεύουμε στη συνέχεια την επιστολή του Οικουμενικού Πατριάρχου Βαρθολομαίου προς τον Πατριάρχη Μόσχας Αλέξιο Β’ (11-7-1995), ώστε να πληροφορηθεί ο καθείς ότι οι θέσεις του Οικουμενικού Θρόνου για την υπερόριο δικαιοδοσία του ουδέποτε μεταβλήθηκαν, έστω και κατ’ ελάχιστον.

Η παρακάτω επιστολή αποτελεί μνημείο κανονικότητος, αλλά αποδεικνύει και την τραγικότητα του Πατριαρχείου Μόσχας, το οποίο δεν μπορεί να αποδεχθεί τον κεντρικό ρόλο του Οικουμενικού Πατριαρχείου στην Ορθόδοξη οικουμένη.

Ίσως είναι η ώρα για να το πάρει, επιτέλους, απόφαση!

ΔΕΙΤΕ ΠΕΡΙΣΣΟΤΕΡΑ (ΑΝΑΛΥΤΙΚΑ) ΕΔΩ

as it is known, the leaders of schisms and irregular situations are not theonly ones to blame, and still less to blame are their distant descendants oftoday

—

was by no means unknown to the Church of Constantinople dueto her inherent ties to all the Orthodox peoples of the Balkans and beyond. Thus, regretfully, but with great forbearance, we can at bestcharacterize the canonical-historical presentation of the problem in yourletter as an oversimplification.Third, it is certainly well known to Your Beatitude and your brothers thatthe recent attempt by the Church of Constantinople to regularize a faction

within the Diaspora’s pending canonical issues —

which ought not to be

—

was neither without precedence nor was it a hurried or novel action.On the contrary, this recent attempt came about in continuation and as anatural consequence of similar formal acts of the past clearly aimed atunification in the spirit described above. We regret that unfortunately thesame cannot be said for the repeated actions undertaken by the Church o fRussia in these very same regions of the Diaspora. The consequences ofsuch actions not only undermines the peace of the Church which hasexisted between us until now, but also mortally injures pan-Orthodoxorder and progress; the foremost and most outrageous instance being thetotally un

manageable “autocephality” of the Metropolia in America.

Fourth, we must confess with great sadness that throughout the entireseventy years of Soviet tyranny the Mother Church of Constantinople,while painfully observing the uncanonical defiances [sic] or incidentsgoing on here and there, had the impression that such actions weredictated or even imposed by the hegemonic tactics of the atheistic regime.Thus, we co-suffered with you and judged with leniency. Today,however, when the winds of freedom in Christ blow again for all it would be truly sad to think that the long-term and unconsciously

—

fromreckoning the greater endurance the redefining of the jurisdictional boundaries of your Most Holy Church as effected by the vicissitudes ofhistory. However, as you were so timely reminded by our three-mandelegation headed by His Eminence Archbishop Stylianos of Australiawith regard to the Estonian ecclesiastical issue, the Church ofConstantinople would be able to teach many through its own example ofmartyrdom. It is well known that during the Ottoman Empire, the Churchof Constantinople, after rather immense jurisdictional expansion, found

that in these new times she had to strip herself

—

certainly this was painful and not pleasant

—

of her racially closest children, the Hellenes, because she did not want to be an impediment to their further progresstoward political freedom. The Church realized that true strength is notfound in great numbers and worldly well being, but in bearing witness tothe will of God through obedience.Fifth, of course to a certain extent we can comprehend the fears YourBeatitude and your Holy Synod have as to the consequences which thesettlement of the Ukrainians in the Diaspora could eventually have had onthe general situation in Ukraine, if proper care had not been taken. In thisregard we would like to assure you that the induction of the Ukrainiancommunities into the canonical order of the Orthodox Church byreceiving them under the omophorion of the Ecumenical Patriarch will,we believe, finally prove to be beneficial for the relationship between theMost Holy Church of Russia and the faithful in Ukraine. This is so because on the one hand those received were obligated to formallydeclare that they will not seek autocephaly of the Ukrainian Church, orevent [sic] a part of it, through know[n] methods employed by the

“autocephalists” who operate in every way possible. On the other hand, it

is no longer possible for them to cooperate or to commune withschismatic Ukrainian groups which are out of communion with theOrthodox Church without bearing harm to themselves, provided the

canonical principle “one who receives communion with another who isout of communion finds oneself also out of communion” is still valid for

them.The same must be also said of our dutiful assistance offered Estonia, asour official delegation mentioned above tried to fully explain when theyvisited you. Responding to the persistent petition of the EstonianOrthodox Church to return to the autonomous status granted her by theEcumenical Throne in a Patriarchal and Synodal Tome, whichunfortunately was forcefully and simultaneously unilaterally abolishedwhen the Soviets deprived the Estonians of political freedom, we are providing a way out of the bitterness borne from the hardshipscontiguously endured during the tyrranical period.

The development and further regularization in their relations with theChurch of Russia would thus become easier psychologically and certainlyno one could then deny the Church

of Russia’s contribution to them.

Sixth, after having explained both of these matters

—

Ukraine andEstonia

—

we were left with the impression that we had not onlyfraternally informed the Most Holy Church of Russia of our intention andactions regarding these issues, but that we had also listened to the fearsand objections which you expressed to our Patriarchal delegation. OurHoly and Sacred Synod indeed properly weighed all these things withrespect to how it would further handle things. For these reasons we mustsay that your letter came literally as a lightning bold out of the blue sky.We were even astounded that during a recent trip to Geneva YourBeatitude unjustifiably eschewed our Holy Stauropegial Church there bynot celebrating the solemn Divine Liturgy on the occasion of your visitand instead you felt the need to go to a heterodox church, which wasindeed scandalous not only to the Orthodox, but to others as well.Seventh, we do not wish, dear brother, to comment on all that HisEminence Metropolitan Damaskinos of Switzerland relayed to us inwriting concerning similar complaints coming either from Your Beatitudedirectly or from His Eminence Metropolitan Kyrillos of Smolensk andKalliningrad who was accompanying you. Because when you say, amongother things, that for our recent visit to the Vatican the consent of all the

Orthodox was needed, or that we “concelebrated” with the Pope of Rome,

then, certainly, our understanding of each other becomes especially problematic. Nonetheless, Your Beatitude, as much for ourselves personally as for themost reverend brothers with us, we in no way desire to agitate ourfraternal relations. Our relations indeed are indispensable for all of usnow more than ever as we are in the midst of a world which is constantlychanging and being subjected to a myriad of dangers. Likewise, however,we must state that the rumors regarding a break in our relations or anyother kind of threat find no justification whatsoever in our goodconscience; in no way, therefore, will we be pressured by any of our brothers. This would be demeaning and unacceptable not only for us, butthem as well.

Praying from the depths of our heart that both in peace and good healthyou will continue the good fight for the restructuring and spiritualedification of the Russian people which, to the joy and spiritual pride of

us all, is being renewed with God’s blessings after their hardships, we

remain with indissoluble love in the Lord and esteem.

Your venerable Beatitude’s Beloved brother in Christ,

+BARTHOLOMEW of Constantinople

Eordaia.org

Όλα τα άρθρα του συντάκτη ›

Eordaia.org

Σχετικά άρθρα

Ο ΟΙΚΟΥΜΕΝΙΚΟΣ ΠΑΤΡΙΑΡΧΗΣ ΒΑΡΘΟΛΟΜΑΙΟΣ ΓΙΑ ΤΟΝ ΜΑΚΑΡΙΣΤΟ ΚΑΣΤΟΡΙΑΣ ΣΕΡΑΦΕΙΜ

ΤΕΛΕΤΗ ΟΝΟΜΑΣΙΑΣ ΣΕ ΑΡΧΙΜΑΝΔΡΙΤΗ ΤΟΥ ΟΙΚΟΥΜΕΝΙΚΟΥ ΘΡΟΝΟΥ Ο π. ΝΑΘΑΝΑΗΛ ΦΙΛΙΟΣ (ΔΕΙΤΕ ΤΗ ΑΠΟΦΑΣΗ ΤΟΥ ΟΙΚΟΥΜΕΝΙΚΟΥ ΠΑΤΡΙΑΡΧΗ ΒΑΡΘΟΛΟΜΑΙΟΥ)

ΣΥΝΑΞΗ ΤΗΣ ΙΕΡΑΡΧΙΑΣ ΤΟΥ ΘΡΟΝΟΥ ΣΥΓΚΑΛΕΙ ΑΠΟ 1 ΕΩΣ ΚΑΙ 3 ΣΕΠΤΕΜΒΡΙΟΥ, ΣΤΗΝ ΠΟΛΗ, Ο ΟΙΚΟΥΜΕΝΙΚΟΣ ΠΑΤΡΙΑΡΧΗΣ ΒΑΡΘΟΛΟΜΑΙΟΣ