Canonically canadian

19 February 2013, 11:50 | Andrew Sorokowski's column | 0 |   | Code for Blog |  | 

Andrew SOROKOWSKI

“That’s uncanonical!” One often hears this objection, directed to everything from icons to patriarchates, in the Orthodox world. What does it really mean?

This was the topic of a talk given in Toronto last January 27 by Wasyl Sydorenko, entitled “Canonicity and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada,” and available on YouTube.

First of all, one must commend Mr. Sydorenko, a University of Toronto librarian and a member of the Brotherhood for the Revitalization of Ukrainian Orthodoxy in Canada, for the calm and logical manner of his presentation. If all those who discuss controversial religious issues would emulate his tone and demeanor, considerable progress in religious understanding would surely result.

The speaker first points out that the canons of the Orthodox Church are no mystery: one can find them in published form, with many available on the internet. Canons, he explains, are simply laws. As with most laws, sooner or later they become obsolete. Many of the old Orthodox canons that formed part of imperial Byzantine law, such as those forbidding treatment by Jewish physicians, make no sense in the modern world.

More important, Mr. Sydorenko stresses that the canons of a body like the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada (UOCC) are registered with the government, which issues a charter to that organization. They thus become Canadian by-laws, applicable to a Canadian Church. The laws of the Orthodox Churches of Greece, Russia, or Ukraine, or of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, are simply irrelevant. And the heads of foreign Churches, even of a Ukrainian Church, do not have jurisdiction over a Canadian Church. Thus, while such a Church may be in communion with various other Orthodox Churches, it is not administratively subordinated to them, or to the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.

Mr. Sydorenko warns, however, that there is a move by Constantinople to create a united world Orthodox Church, based on territorial rather than ethnic or national divisions. This would violate the rights and independence of the UOCC, which is a conciliar (sobornopravna) Church which creates its own canons.

The question of whether Orthodox Churches should continue to be ethnically based leads to Mr. Sydorenko’s second talk, given on the same day, on “Ethnicity, Symbolism and Orthodox Christianity.”

Here he confronts the issue of phyletism, that is, of exaggerated ethnic or national identity in Orthodox church life. He notes the virulent attacks on Ukrainian Orthodoxy by Greek, Russian, and other Orthodox, accusing Ukrainians of mixing nationalism with religion. Sydorenko points out that these Churches themselves have historically done the same, and continue to do so. This is apparent, for example, in the symbolism of the double-headed eagle, a political image used in the Byzantine Greek as well as in the Russian Church.

Wasyl Sydorenko’s comments reveal some of the strengths and weaknesses of Orthodoxy throughout the world. Traditionally, Orthodox Churches are national, with strong ethnic cultural identities. There is thus a danger of mixing religion and nationalism. To argue that other Orthodox Churches have been equally guilty of phyletism does not, of course, dispose of the objection.

Historically, most of the Orthodox Churches, while independent of each other and of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, are dependent on secular governments. Thus, in Byzantium, the Emperor guaranteed the enforcement of the church canons. This created a certain stability as long as Church and State supported each other. But it proved disastrous for the Russian Church after the Revolution. The Ecumenical Patriarchate itself is dependent on the government of Turkey, a formally secular but overwhelmingly Muslim country. A Church’s close association with the State gives the latter immense power to control and even destroy it. At the same time, that association can discredit the Church in the eyes of believers. This happened in Russian-ruled Ukraine. Moreover, it could prove dangerous for Orthodox Churches in countries like Canada, where the norms of public life are diverging more and more from those of Christianity. If the billion-strong Catholic Church must struggle with the U.S. government over fundamental ethical issues, would a small, isolated Church dependent on a government charter fare any better?

Mr. Sydorenko’s vision of Ukrainian Orthodoxy in Canada also offers an interesting contrast with Patriarch Sviatoslav’s vision of his Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church. While the UOCC stresses its canonical and cultural independence of any foreign Orthodox Church authority, a worldwide Ukrainian UGCC presupposes a Patriarch of Kyiv with universal authority. In the long run, a self-governing UOCC may become a preserve of a peculiarly Ukrainian-Canadian Orthodox tradition. How that squares with the Christian mandate to preach to all nations is, at the least, a matter for discussion.

Be that as it may, Mr. Sydorenko provides a persuasive defense of an independent, self-governing Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada.

Система Orphus
Rating
0
0
0comments count

comments

add comments 

    Сan leave comments only to registered visitors Еnter

    Expert thought

    • 2 May 2019, 12:38 | Andrew Sorokowski's column | 

      Donbas: Religious Freedom in Proxy-Occupied Areas

      In view of the restrictive 2018 Luhansk People’s Republic statute, it is not surprising that some groups declined to apply for registration, while others were refused. The result is that many religious communities find themselves outside the law…. the 48 Baptist Union congregations have had to cease their activity altogether.

    • 27 February 2019, 13:16 | Andrew Sorokowski's column | 

      The Clerical Abuse Crisis: Not Our Problem?

      …while sexual abuse, episcopal cover-ups, and homosexual clergy may be specific to the Latin-rite Church, the broader implications of today’s crisis touch the Ukrainian Greco-Catholic Church too.

    Last comments

    • shkuleta | 24 May 2019, 16:01

      Хтось Сімпсонів передивився

    • Михаил | 23 May 2019, 23:37

      Ну лицемер! Ну флюгер! Никак не меняется.

    • barni | 23 May 2019, 22:59

      По-перше, може я погано шукав, але дослівного "привітання" "намісника і непомильного я НЕ ЗНАЙШОВ" !? По-друге, ДУЖЕ СПОДІВАЮСЬ І ВІРЮ, що туди поїхали військові з фронту !!! І

    • Михаил | 23 May 2019, 02:01

      Было бы неплохо присоединить к УГКЦ православную церковь, но "пцу" таковой не является. Хотя, согласно католической традиции, считается крещеным человек, даже если этот обряд совершен в

    • Михаил | 22 May 2019, 21:07

      Пан velovs, но так же нельзя. Что же вы отрицаете очевидное, на белое, говорите черное! Денисенко же сам признался в "ситуативном" обмане турок.

    Most Popular Articles month