UGCC Surprised that State Celebration of 1025th Anniversary of Baptism of Rus Will Begin in Moscow

  • Thread starter Thread starter 5Loaves
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
5

5Loaves

Guest
UGCC Surprised that State Celebration of 1025th Anniversary of Baptism of Rus Will Begin in Moscow
This shows that a scenario that was developed in Soviet times, 25 years ago, is being implemented. We must not forget, however, that the Moscow Church is a subsidiary of the Kyivan Church. It is therefore logical to hold all central celebrations here, where 1025 years ago was the baptism,” said the patriarch.
Click to expand...
The role of the Pope of Rome is the major block to unity? Many of us think the issue of Ukraine and Russia is…

This has all been hashed out here before. The MPs view of Moscow as the leader of Orthodoxy. Russian considers Ukraine to be Russian, When you are as giant as the MP is now and with the state in your corner again, it’s easy to take center stage and speak loudly.

Kuddos to Patriarch Sviatoslav for speaking so boldly.
 
Ukraine is just Little Russia anyway…is it not? 😃

Just kidding!!!
 
5Loaves said:
Kuddos to Patriarch Sviatoslav for speaking so boldly.
Click to expand...
Absolutely agree. It was in the capital of today’s Ukraine - Kyiv (Kiev) - where the Baptism took place in 988. Moscow had not even yet been founded.
 
Sorry, am I missing something? The thread title is “State Celebration”. It only makes sense that Russia’s state celebration should be held in Russia, you know, since that’s the state celebrating.

I would agree that a celebration carried out under the auspices of the Church should start in Kiev.
 
Nine_Two said:
Sorry, am I missing something? The thread title is “State Celebration”. It only makes sense that Russia’s state celebration should be held in Russia, you know, since that’s the state celebrating.

I would agree that a celebration carried out under the auspices of the Church should start in Kiev.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are missing something if all you read was the headline someone wrote, without reading the comments made by Patriarch Sviatoslav…

My bad for using that headline as the title of the thread. :o
 
From the context it sounds like the State in question is Ukraine, not Russia. So why should Ukraine start its celebration of the Baptism of Rus’ in Moscow? I suppose the United States should start its Fourth of July celebrations in London this year.
 
5Loaves said:
Yes, you are missing something if all you read was the headline someone wrote, without reading the comments made by Patriarch Sviatoslav…

My bad for using that headline as the title of the thread. :o
Click to expand...
I have read it. Have you? It has nothing to do with the policies of Russia and everything to do with the Archbishops annoyance that the Ukrainian State isn’t holding events before Moscow.
 
The Head of the Ukrainian Catholic Church Sviatoslav Shevchuk’s remarks were directed squarely at the current President of Ukraine Victor Yanukovych.

The President had evidently met with representatives of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate), Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Kyivan Patriarchate) and the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. Discussions were initiated on how to celebrate this anniversary nation-wide in Ukraine. Nothing evidently has become of this and hence Sviatoslav Shevchuk’s exasperation.

In any event, President Yanukovych uses religious policy for his own benefit and that of his regime. He is widely seen as a thug: witness his imprisonment of political opponents like Yulia Tymoshenko. He has enriched himself and his family mightily since coming into office having, among other things, built himself a supremely ostentatious mansion just outside Ukraine’s capital where he keeps his own waterpark, exotic animals - all at the public expense. His son has now become a rich oligarch in his own right. But this is already off-topic and I only mention it to describe the man Sviatoslav Shevchuk is criticizing.

On a lighter note, I note now from the Ukrainian edition of RISU that the committee in Ukraine’s parliament responsible for religious policy which is run by Ukraine’s democratic opposition and not the president’s party would like to invite both the Pope and the Ecumenical Patriarch for the celebrations in Ukraine. Indeed, Ukrainian Catholic Primate Sviatoslav Shevchuk is friends with the Pope from their days in Argentina and Shevchuk recently completed a successful visit to the Ecumenical Patriarch.

The invite of course is kind of late and the President could kabosh the idea in any event.
 
Formosus said:
From the context it sounds like the State in question is Ukraine, not Russia. So why should Ukraine start its celebration of the Baptism of Rus’ in Moscow? I suppose the United States should start its Fourth of July celebrations in London this year.
Click to expand...
👍
 
KyivAndrew said:
The Head of the Ukrainian Catholic Church Sviatoslav **Shevchuk’s remarks were directed squarely at the current President of Ukraine Victor Yanukovych.
**
The President had evidently met with representatives of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate), Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Kyivan Patriarchate) and the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. Discussions were initiated on how to celebrate this anniversary nation-wide in Ukraine. Nothing evidently has become of this and hence Sviatoslav Shevchuk’s exasperation.

In any event, President Yanukovych uses religious policy for his own benefit and that of his regime.
Click to expand...
I won’t quote your entire post but it’s right on.
 
KyivAndrew said:
…
He is widely seen as a thug: witness his imprisonment of political opponents like Yulia Tymoshenko.
…
…I only mention it to describe the man Sviatoslav Shevchuk is criticizing.
Click to expand...
I think something should be added to this pro-Ukrainian (what necessarily does not mean anti-Russian) discussion.

I admit and agree that Ukrainians were discriminated and so on but now Rusins are being discriminated by Ukrainians just because they claim they exist and are another nation. Where it is pro-Ukrainian, Greek Catholic Rusins are treated badly, where it is anti-Russian, Kyiv Orthodox are preffered. And remember that eastern part of the Ukraine is mostly Russian what is hated state of thing by many Ukrainians. So Ukrainian state and many Ukrainians are responsible, supporting, and at least enjoying ongoing persecutions.

Bad behavior to and questioning (said too politely) of Rusins’ existence is not just exclusively secular topic: some hierarchs of UGCC suggested that eparchy of Rusin Greek Catholic Church should be made part of UGCC what would be perfect tool to haze and make harm to Rusins in very bad way.

Tymosenko is more than political opponent. For many people she is the woman who betrayed the Ukraine and sold (stole) its property in favor of the West. What is more, strongly anti-Russian, especially when her misleading was too evident and had nothing wise to do. So be careful when speaking about “good Ukrainian democratic opposition” and “bad pro-Russians”. It is really much more complicated.

And one less aggressive comment:

Pope Francis also decided not to travel to Slovakia (and Czech Republic) for celebration of a 1150th anniversary of coming Sts Constantine-Cyril and Methodius to Great Moravia what is important generally for and southern and mostly Roman western Slavs (and maybe also for others). Because of inner affairs (removing one archbishop by his predecessor) + abdication of Benedict XVI it was understandable that HH BXVI did not come and was not responding. HAH Bartholomew came.

This Pope probably decided to travel less. And we are not the navel of the world. 🙂

So maybe Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch comes to popeless celebrations in the Ukraine. We will see.

I do not know what are the exact aspects of this Moscow-Kyiv “railery” but seeing state of their relationships it is for me clear that Russians do not have intentions to come to Kyiv to celebrate and Ukrainians would not be very happy to welcome them. And who-will-be-the-first topis is thing of prestige and stubbornness.

If I offended someone, I am sorry but I have strong proximity and attitude to Rusins and references about not very nice Ukrainian policy to Ukrainian Russians (especially under Tymosenko) and Rusins and so I could not just not to respond and react.
 
Nestor_kea said:
I think something should be added to this pro-Ukrainian (what necessarily does not mean anti-Russian) discussion.

I admit and agree that Ukrainians were discriminated and so on but now Rusins are being discriminated by Ukrainians just because they claim they exist and are another nation. Where it is pro-Ukrainian, Greek Catholic Rusins are treated badly, where it is anti-Russian, Kyiv Orthodox are preffered. And remember that eastern part of the Ukraine is mostly Russian what is hated state of thing by many Ukrainians. So Ukrainian state and many Ukrainians are responsible, supporting, and at least enjoying ongoing persecutions.

Bad behavior to and questioning (said too politely) of Rusins’ existence is not just exclusively secular topic: some hierarchs of UGCC suggested that eparchy of Rusin Greek Catholic Church should be made part of UGCC what would be perfect tool to haze and make harm to Rusins in very bad way.

Tymosenko is more than political opponent. For many people she is the woman who betrayed the Ukraine and sold (stole) its property in favor of the West. What is more, strongly anti-Russian, especially when her misleading was too evident and had nothing wise to do. So be careful when speaking about “good Ukrainian democratic opposition” and “bad pro-Russians”.
Click to expand...
Nestor, I’m trying to make out what you say. First off, you put quotes around “bad Russians” which term is nowhere to be found in my comments. In fact, Sviatoslav Shevchuk met the head of the Russian Orthodox Church (or more properly Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate)) in Ukraine Metropolitan Sabodan today, and the two churches - Moscow Patriarchate and Ukrainian Catholic - admit there is no longer a dispute over churches in Halychyna.

Secondly, “pro-Ukrainian”? I am Ukrainian Catholic. What am I supposed to be? anti-Ukrainian?

Thirdly, most of Eastern Ukraine is ethnically Ukrainian though Russian-speaking, not Russian as you say. The recent laws passed by Ukraine’s President granting the Russian language state status pretty well demonstrates there is no anti-Russian discrimination from Yanukovych and the Education Minister Tabachnyk is thoroughly anti-Ukrainian. The only Church visited by Ukraine’s government and ministers is the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) which is the Russian Orthodox Church’s autonomous branch in Ukraine.

There is an anti-Ukrainian government (if it can be called that) running Ukraine. Actually, it is an anti-Christian government at that. Most of these guys all started out with the Donbas mafia-clan which actually couldn’t care less about Ukrainian or Russian. Their main concern is the assets of Ukraine and to divide it up among themselves, the people be darned. Indeed, Yanukovych and his political party would probably severely lose any election even in the Russian-speaking areas of Ukraine if the elections were fair.

Fourthly, Tymoshenko actually got criticized for giving the Kremlin and Russia too much in her talks on gas prices. If you think she or Lutsenko or others belong in prison then that’s your prerogative.

Finally, I have no idea how you switched this topic onto the subject of “Rusyns” and how you believe the Ukrainian Catholic Church treats them. If you wish to start a new discussion on another topic, namely about Ukrainians and Rusyns then you start a new thread by clicking the “Forum Tools” button at the top of the Forum and start new thread. At least that way each subject stays with the subject from the start. You should be careful when you start posting that ethnic group “hate” _________ , or will “haze” _____________, but that’s up to you.

Again, if you wish to attack the Ukrainian Catholic Church on the Eastern Catholic Forum and say they “hate” these and “haze” these people, you should start a new topic thread. I can’t say I will join any such discussion.
 
KyivAndrew said:
Absolutely agree. It was in the capital of today’s Ukraine - Kyiv (Kiev) - where the Baptism took place in 988. Moscow had not even yet been founded.
Click to expand...
In fact, even at the time the Metropolitan moved to Moscow, it still wasn’t much of a city.
 
So they are trying to move the “Holy See” from the original city to another, since the new city is the more dominate politically? Hmm… sounds like an oddly familiar story 🙂
 
GospodiPomiluj said:
So they are trying to move the “Holy See” from the original city to another, since the new city is the more dominate politically? Hmm… sounds like an oddly familiar story 🙂
Click to expand...
Well, the city that the See was moved to (Moscow) wasn’t very dominant at the time of the move (unless I’m misremembering my history). But other than that, I can see a similarity with the Avignon Papacy.
 
Peter_J said:
Well, the city that the See was moved to (Moscow) wasn’t very dominant at the time of the move (unless I’m misremembering my history). But other than that, I can see a similarity with the Avignon Papacy.
Click to expand...
Interesting…I see Rome and New Rome (Constantinople). 😃
 
UncleBill said:
Interesting…I see Rome and New Rome (Constantinople). 😃
Click to expand...
Alright, there’s some similarity there too (likewise with the “Third Rome”). I was thinking the Avignon Papacy because that was another case of moving a See, not just reusing an old name.
 
Peter_J said:
Alright, there’s some similarity there too (likewise with the “Third Rome”). I was thinking the Avignon Papacy because that was another case of moving a See, not just reusing an old name.
Click to expand...
Even though the Pope moved to France no one disputed that it was still the See of Rome…Moscow has not pretended to be Kiev.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top