Message from O. Litwin:
Dear UOCC members and members of BRUOC,
Let us summarize the problem and put all the cards on the table. The current tragedy of Orthodoxy is the making of the Ecumenical Patriarch. For whatever reasons of realpolitik, he has deliberately chosen to ignore the reality and has recognized the Russian Orthodox Church at face value as a church like any other. He continues to maintain the charade and tries to convince the other churches that this is a truly canonical position. For its own reasons, the UOCC leadership has been willingly convinced and has agreed to be ONE.
The European Union has recognized that Ukraine needs special help in the face of the economic empire that Russia is setting up. In effect, the European Parliament has accepted that Russia has an imperialistic economic agenda. This economic agenda is no different and is a parallel of the religious agenda of the Russky Mir. What Russia is planning for Ukraine in the economic sphere is the same it is doing for Ukraine through the Russky Mir -- a recreation of the USSR. The UOCC is clearly on the side of Russia and the EP.
The Roman Catholic Church, as part of Europe has not become a spent force but is facing up to the challenges of change. We understand that European values are not limited to economics but the contentious issues should not be enough to deter the Ukrainian Church from abandoning the agenda of Moscow and prevent it from entering the family of Europe from whence it came. The other option is the GULAG of Putin (Lutsenko's words).
The UOCC and its authorities are acting on the side of Russia in ignoring that the ROC is a political arm of the foreign policy of the future Empire. The UOCC is also colluding with Russia in its traditional opposition to European values in an attempt to isolate Ukraine from Europe. The UOCC needs to recognize that its position, relying on the Kanonicity of Moscow and the support of the EP is not a sustainable religious value and that it serves only to keep Ukraine and the diaspora in the backwoods with Russia.
The enlightened UOCC members and BRUOC must present a solution to the impasse that has been set up by the Agreement of 1990 and the UOCC's excuse of the Agreement as binding. There needs to be a review of the Agreement as it was envisioned by the Sobor delegates as a eucharistic union -- not as administrative union, which it has become. There needs to be a recognition that the UOCC members cannot be defined as being ONE with the foreign policy of Russia -- as a necessary result of the Agreement with the EP. There needs to be a recognition that the UOCC is in part an extension of the history and is closely aligned to the Church in Ukraine and cannot be an extension of the false Kanonicity of the ROC in Canada.
If no progress can be made on these issues, then other suitable measures must be taken. The UOCC must be taken to task for not complying with the existing By-laws on the naming of the Bishop. The UOCC must comply with existing By-laws even if they conflict with the EP. This may force the leadership to take a hard look at the Agreement and reassess its value to the membership. If the UOCC is willing to go ahead with a court case that is going to cost $15,000 per day for 15 days, then surely it can afford to fight the battle for the Kanonical EP on the naming of the bishop.
O. Litwin
Dear UOCC members and members of BRUOC,
Let us summarize the problem and put all the cards on the table. The current tragedy of Orthodoxy is the making of the Ecumenical Patriarch. For whatever reasons of realpolitik, he has deliberately chosen to ignore the reality and has recognized the Russian Orthodox Church at face value as a church like any other. He continues to maintain the charade and tries to convince the other churches that this is a truly canonical position. For its own reasons, the UOCC leadership has been willingly convinced and has agreed to be ONE.
The European Union has recognized that Ukraine needs special help in the face of the economic empire that Russia is setting up. In effect, the European Parliament has accepted that Russia has an imperialistic economic agenda. This economic agenda is no different and is a parallel of the religious agenda of the Russky Mir. What Russia is planning for Ukraine in the economic sphere is the same it is doing for Ukraine through the Russky Mir -- a recreation of the USSR. The UOCC is clearly on the side of Russia and the EP.
The Roman Catholic Church, as part of Europe has not become a spent force but is facing up to the challenges of change. We understand that European values are not limited to economics but the contentious issues should not be enough to deter the Ukrainian Church from abandoning the agenda of Moscow and prevent it from entering the family of Europe from whence it came. The other option is the GULAG of Putin (Lutsenko's words).
The UOCC and its authorities are acting on the side of Russia in ignoring that the ROC is a political arm of the foreign policy of the future Empire. The UOCC is also colluding with Russia in its traditional opposition to European values in an attempt to isolate Ukraine from Europe. The UOCC needs to recognize that its position, relying on the Kanonicity of Moscow and the support of the EP is not a sustainable religious value and that it serves only to keep Ukraine and the diaspora in the backwoods with Russia.
The enlightened UOCC members and BRUOC must present a solution to the impasse that has been set up by the Agreement of 1990 and the UOCC's excuse of the Agreement as binding. There needs to be a review of the Agreement as it was envisioned by the Sobor delegates as a eucharistic union -- not as administrative union, which it has become. There needs to be a recognition that the UOCC members cannot be defined as being ONE with the foreign policy of Russia -- as a necessary result of the Agreement with the EP. There needs to be a recognition that the UOCC is in part an extension of the history and is closely aligned to the Church in Ukraine and cannot be an extension of the false Kanonicity of the ROC in Canada.
If no progress can be made on these issues, then other suitable measures must be taken. The UOCC must be taken to task for not complying with the existing By-laws on the naming of the Bishop. The UOCC must comply with existing By-laws even if they conflict with the EP. This may force the leadership to take a hard look at the Agreement and reassess its value to the membership. If the UOCC is willing to go ahead with a court case that is going to cost $15,000 per day for 15 days, then surely it can afford to fight the battle for the Kanonical EP on the naming of the bishop.
O. Litwin
No comments:
Post a Comment
Keep your remarks in line and in response to the body of the above letter. Be mindful and respectful. Please be diligent in providing sources to support your response. The aim is to educate one another.