The hierarchs of the Church of Cyprus are now in a difficult position, who have been in favor of the narrative of the Moscow Patriarchate in relation to the Church of Ukraine. The Cypriot hierarchs, who voted in the minority at the Holy Synod for the Ukrainian, had expressed the position that the only regular leader of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is Metropolitan Onoufrios, who belonged to the Moscow Patriarchate. Simply put, they believed that the Church of Russia should spiritually guide the tens of millions of Ukrainian Orthodox. However, Metropolitan Onoufrios, under the weight of the crimes committed by the Russians in Ukraine, was forced to distance himself and sever relations between himself and the Kiev Diocese with the Moscow Patriarchate. On the other hand, the Diocese under Onoufrios does not maintain relations with the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, which recognizes only the Autocephalous Orthodox Church of Ukraine. It should be reminded that members of the Holy Synod of the Church of Cyprus decided not to cooperate with the Archbishop of Cyprus because of the Ukrainian. Developments, however, justified the election of the Archbishop and the majority of the Holy Synod, and as a matter of fact, things have changed.
He pretends not to understand >Following the decision of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (under the auspices of the Moscow Patriarchate) to sever ties with the Russian Church, the Russian Church has been in turmoil. The Holy Synod of the Moscow Patriarchate has expressed its regret that in some provinces of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church the commemoration of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia has ceased. These are not really some provinces, but all the provinces that are not under Russian military occupation.
The head of the Department of Foreign Ecclesiastical Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate, Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk, tried to attribute her decision under the Onofrio Church to “pressure from extremist groups, schismatic structures, local authorities, simply prohibit the activities of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, as well as on the part of the nationalist tendencies of a section of Ukrainian public opinion. “
In fact, the Orthodox Church under Onoufrios is left alone with no relations with other churches, and it seems that efforts will be made to merge with the Church under Constantinople recognized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate under the Epiphany.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine, with the blessings of the Patriarch of Moscow, led many local churches to condemn Patriarch Kirill. Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew said in an interview with ERT that the Patriarch of Moscow “should react to the invasion of Ukraine and condemn the war, as all other Orthodox Primate did.” He did not do it, that's to his detriment and I'm very sorry.
“We may have had other differences, the one known for the autocephaly of the Church of Ukraine, the difference we have for centuries now because the Russian Church is eyeing the primacy of Constantinople, undermining the foundations of the throne of Constantinople, but I was waiting for Brother Cyril to “A crucial, historic moment, to rise to the occasion,” he added.
Finally, the Ecumenical Patriarch said, Mr President, I can not agree with you, I resign, I leave & # 8221 ;. Will she put him in jail? “I do not know what President Putin would have done if the Patriarch had reacted to his plans, but that is what we, the other Prelate brothers, would have expected.”
In Russia, either during the period of the Tsars or during the period of the Soviet Union, as today, the Orthodox Church was permanently in the service of the state, promoting Pan-Russianism. In fact, in the period 1917-1989, the respective Patriarchs maintained relations of cooperation with the secret services of the USSR. The same is true today, with the Kremlin pursuing a foreign policy, mainly in the Balkans, through Orthodoxy, and with Patriarch Cyril fully identified with President Putin. The Moscow Patriarchate has traditionally pursued an expansionist policy towards the Ecumenical Patriarchate in order to strengthen its influence over all Orthodox, using the argument that it is the largest Orthodox Church in terms of population. It is a characteristic fact that where the Russian-Soviet state pursued an expansionist policy, the Russian Church also followed, placing the respective regions under its jurisdiction. Examples were Georgia with the abolition of the local Church and its annexation to the Moscow Patriarchate, Estonia and Bessarabia (Russian-occupied Moldavia). In all cases the service in the temples was in Russian, which served Pan-Russianism, and was implemented by the state during the Soviet era. This model “worked” until the day before yesterday in Ukraine, but the bloodshed left no room for the continued presence of the Russian Church, which “blessed” the massacre.