Was There an Alternative? Metropolitan Bishop Onuphrius and His First Steps

by Nikolay Mitrokhin, Research Center for East European Studies, Bremen

Abstract After the death of its long-serving leader, Metropolitan Bishop Volodymyr (Sabodan) of Kiev, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church – Moscow Patriarchate chose a new leader in August 2014. The election was accompanied by internal church disputes regarding the future orientation of the church, and in particular the degree of independence from Moscow. The new head of church, Metropolitan Bishop Onuphrius (Beresovsky) from Chernivtsi, is pursuing a balanced approach.

his article is based on interviews which I tocephaly.” Members of these communities Tconducted in early October 2014 with two have ceased praying liturgies to the Moscow dozen high ranking clergymen from the Ukrai- Patriarchate for two decades, and there are no nian Orthodox Church – Moscow Patriarchate plaques to be found in these churches to indi- (UOC–MP) and with a few religious experts in cate that they belong to the MP.. Part of the in- Kiev associated with the current church struc- ner circle of the former Metropolitan Bishop, ture. We essentially spoke about the current who himself had undergone a serious evolu- situation of the UOC–MP and about the first tion, having turned from Moscow’s vicar of steps of its new head, Metropolitan Bishop fictitious autonomy into an actual ideologist Onuphrius (Beresovsky), who was elected on advocating a peaceful separation from Mos- the 13th of August. Due to the fact that the in- cow, also supports these views. terviewees are in potential danger of attack, I The majority of the parishes in the central, will not cite their names or any other concrete northern, eastern, and far-western parts of the details which could compromise their ano- country (Transcarpathia) are entirely satisfied nymity. with the UOC’s current autonomous status. The former leader of the UOC–MP, Metropoli- The Church actually has full freedom in deci- tan Bishop Vladimir (Sabodan), who passed sions of internal personnel and administrative away on the 5th of July after nine months in questions; it no longer pays any church taxes a coma, has left behind an ambivalent legacy. to Moscow, and is independently building The UOC–MP is the strongest Ukrainian reli- relationships with secular authorities. In any gious organization with more than 13,000 par- case, when the Eparch of the Orthodox dio- ishes, which, in terms of numbers, dominate cese of Cherkasy (in the center of the country) the competing Orthodox churches in practical- recently emerged as a fervent proponent of ly all regions of Ukraine, to exclude three Gali- autocephaly and carried out a survey among cian regions. However, the Church appears to the priests, only slightly more than half of be divided into three pieces with regard to its them supported his position1. This is to say ideologies. nothing of the dioceses, in which the leaders Many parishes of the west and, partially, are not as strongly in support of the present central regions of Ukraine desire to form an idea. I n light of this question, Metropolitan organizational separation from the Moscow Bishop Vladimir’s position corresponded to Patriarchate composed of these three points 1 http://censor.net.ua/news/300120/upts_ of view and to attain so-called “canonical au- mp_na_cherkasschine_poslushalas_prihojan_i_ne_ pominaet_patriarha_kirilla_na_bogoslujeniyah

Euxeinos 17/ 2015 13 Nikolay Mitrokhin

the expectations of those supporting the status particularly at the conflict between the closest quo, who do not refuse autocephaly at some person to the deceased Metropolitan Bishop— indefinite point in the future. the young Metropolitan Bishop Alexander A third group of parishes, priests, and bishops (Drabinko; born in 1977), whose image was remain in categorical opposition of the schism significantly burdened by the various scan- with Moscow and the widening of autonomy. dals—and the greatest authority among those Part of this group ignores the fact that the close to Vladimir—the church administrator, Ukrainian Orthodox Church even exists, be- Metropolitan Bishop Antony (Pakanich; born lieving it to belong exclusively to the Russian in 1967), who is the second person to occupy Church. A large portion of these parishes (or the post of administrator of church affairs. priests and bishops with similar views, which Both of these figures are behind the boundar- by far are not in agreement with the senti- ies of Ukraine and little-known, because their ments of the parishioners) was in the eastern influence on church life in the UOC was only and southern regions of the country, mostly in determined within the last decade, but secular major cities. Nevertheless, ideological propo- Ukrainian journalism has not abandoned its nents of the “Russian World” or the Russian attention towards them. Orthodox Church can be met with among the Besides these personal differences, both fig- clergy in rural areas as much as in the cities. ures were divided in their approach to the The strategy of the Kiev Metropolitan Bishop future of the UOC-MP as well. Alexander had already been laid down two decades be- (Drabinko) was and remains unpopular with- fore. It was based around the binding together in the church but, along with this, he made an of all three parts of the Church in ignorance of influential impact on the few episcopates who their orientation with external political struc- were personally obligated to him. He more or tures. This was and is being achieved through less had declared himself to be a supporter of a considerable decentralization of the church autocephaly (if not now, then in the near fu- and the reconciliation of a complex balance of ture) and tried to form an image of himself at interests. One is initially left with an impres- the hands of the secular press as a Ukrainian sion of total chaos for the living representative patriot. In Moscow, amongst a small circle of of the clergy of the Russian Orthodox Church, clergy and laity concerned with Ukrainian is- who is accustomed to clear-cut discipline and sues, his name was long associated with the hierarchy, as well as external unanimity of “betrayal of church interests.” Metropolitan church “speakers” and the media. Bishop Antony, taking on a responsible and The situation became more complicated after laborious imperative, preferred to preserve the death of Metropolitan Bishop Vladimir as more normal working relationships, both a result of the fact that he had passed away with Moscow and Yanukovich’s team, saving without having nominated an evident succes- the discussion of the church’s future “for lat- sor. Those who could pretend to have the most er,” which is to say for a time when he would correct interpretation of his ideas and who, become a representative and would gain the earlier on, had held tense relations with one freedom to act. Nevertheless, the people be- another had now “broken away” and estab- longing to his circle did not hide their views, lished a public squabble, attracting state de- goals, and sympathies. They hoped that Met- partments and the secular media. I am looking ropolitan Bishop Antony would begin seri-

Euxeinos 17/2015 14 Nikolay Mitrokhin

ous and deep reforms in the UOC-MP at the tightly connected with Yanukovich’s people, very minimum, to include the further mod- retracted himself from these games and spent ernization and Ukrainization of the Church. a significant part of the year abroad. In a strug- “Heavyweights” from the old pro-Moscow gle between ideological parties, having begun guard emerged from church leadership as op- long before the death of Metropolitan Bishop ponents of the “Ukrainophiles”. These “heavy- Vladimir, no one seriously recognized the pos- weights” are established members of the Holy sibility that an independent player would ap- Synod: Metropolitan Bishop Illarion (Shu- pear. Yet church history has taught us that a kalo) of Donetsk, Metropolitan Bishop Aga- mediator possesses the greatest opportunities fangel (Savvin) of Odessa, and Metropolitan in an era of crises and heated debate. More- Bishop Pavel (Lebed‘), head of the Kiev Cave over, the death of the old representative and Monastery, where the seat of the Kiev Metro- the choices of the new one have coincided with politan Diocese is located. However, if it had the most aggravated period of political debate been possible to suggest ten or fifteen years in the meagre 25 years that Ukraine has existed ago that Moscow, garnered with the support as an independent state. However, the victory of Yanukovich, would be able to push one of of the Ukrainian revolution has paradoxically these men into the primary position of leader- had a negative impact on the possibilities of ship in the Church, then it has become clear the pro-Ukrainian party taking power in the within the last few years that this proposition UOC-MP. Journalists sympathizing with Met- could not even theoretically come to pass. The ropolitan Bishop Aleksander accused Metro- overwhelming majority of potential electoral politan Bishop Antony of collaborating with delegates were hand-picked in an already in- Yanukovych. The supporters of Metropolitan dependent Ukraine and were considered “old Bishop Antony battled with the followers of ones” (with the exception of the frequently ill, Metropolitan Bishop Aleksander, who had but relatively young Metropolitan Bishop Pav- committed many more sins from the church’s el), surviving relics of the age. This applied all point of view – so many more that Aleksander the more when the three Metropolitan Bishops decided to not run as a successor himself and had to fundamentally reconsider their conduct has decided to form a party of supporters of in the summer of 2014. Under threat of legal autocephaly under the leadership of the expe- persecution for complicity in the organiza- rienced, though provincial Metropolitan Bish- tion of mass unrest in Odessa and the escape op Simeon (Shostatsky). However, this group to Moscow of those of his helpers who had received only nine votes in the first round of been directly involved, Metropolitan Bishop elections for the new church representative. Agafangel decided to refashion himself as a The new Ukrainian authorities did not want Ukrainian patriot. Metropolitan Bishop Illari- to oppress participants of the church. on fled from the city of Donetsk, which had Metropolitan Bishop Antony’s supporters been entrusted to him, abandoning his flock in were confident of their victory long before the a difficult hour. A permanent member of the elections; the managing director has consider- Holy Synod answered my question about his able possibilities to lobby for his candidacy whereabouts as follows: “You are asking ques- in this situation. However, the first round tions that are more dangerous than if they had produced frustrating results—only 24 votes. been godless.” Metropolitan Bishop Pavel, The competitor, Metropolitan Bishop of Cher-

Euxeinos 17/2015 15 Nikolay Mitrokhin

novitsky, Onuphrius (Berezsky), received 36 ceremony held votes--one and a half times as many votes re- in the Kremlin ceived by the former. In the following round, for the annexa- supporters of Alexander and Simeon almost tion of Crimea, ubiquitously crossed over to his camp and that the Eparchy he gained a devastating victory with 48 to 25 of Crimea has votes. Antony’s supporters, judging conversa- remained a part tions I have had in Kiev, are now in a state of of the UOC, and bewilderment, wondering how this came to that, on the eve pass. of the election of Unexpectedly, Onuphrius became for many the representa- one of the key candidates immediately follow- tive of the UOC, ing the death of Vladimir, at which time they Moscow made an voted him (then the chairman of the ecclesi- effort not to exert Metropolitan Bishop Onuphrius astical court) as the new patriarchal locum. direct pressure on Source: pravoslavye.org.ua This necessity does not guarantee permanent the electoral dele- status as head of the Church and, for many gates and the discussion regarding the desired in Ukraine, as well as in the UOC, Onuphrius candidates in church media. The new Ukrai- should not have taken this office. His “pro- nian authorities made no arguments for the Moscow” background was all too apparent, interference of the electoral process, even if regarding his monkhood in the Trinity-Sergi they had wanted to. In this situation, the bish- Monastery, rigid rhetoric, and involvement in ops themselves were deciding on whom they the question of the unification of the UOC-KP required as the head of the church and, in my with Moscow. Also, to put it lightly, he ex- opinion, this was an absolutely natural choice. pressed himself in a less than eloquent fash- There are a few facts about Metropolitan Bishop ion in 2008 on the question of the Holodomor2, Onuphrius which are important for the mod- of which people have not forgotten to remind ern Ukrainian Orthodox Church: firstly, he has him in light of the coming electoral campaign. not been involved in any serious scandals, nei- Given the background of the war that Russia ther of a financial or economic nature, nor of a has unleashed on Donbass, it would appear political or sexual nature. This is a great rarity that the chances of a “pro-Moscow” candidate for the bishops of the UOC. Secondly, neither were down to zero. However, as usual, the has he been, nor is he currently a member of Church has shown that it is a special institu- a particular group; he possesses no apparent tion which lives according to its own laws and following (associates, camps, minions—call that the current political agenda has no deci- them what you will). Third, and in contrast sive meaning for it, at least in the short term. to several other members of the Holy Synod, The Moscow Patriarchate has continued to he does not suffer (at least not publicly) from conduct itself in an unexpectedly wise manner any pro-imperial illusions. As a result, his re- in this situation. I have already written that Pa- lations with the authorities, although distant, triarch Kirill did not take part in the solemn are equal and tolerant. Fourth, and perhaps

2 http://www.pravoslavie.ru/news/28395. most importantly, he is known as a strong htm housemaster, who does not relent to anyone.

Euxeinos 17/2015 16 Nikolay Mitrokhin

The UOC-MP is now faced with the question much more patriotic, independent, and (not of its preservation, which is much more impor- of the least importance) Ukrainian-speaking tant than the question of development. In the service of the UOC-MP. Friends of mine from situation of political disturbances and the war both churches have expressed their surprise with Russia, which houses the administrative that, for those who have gone through the last and spiritual center of the ROC, the UOC-MP half year since the moment of victory for the cannot permit itself any sort of reformation or Ukrainian revolution, this process hasn’t be- modernization being proposed its modernists. come a landslide. Meanwhile, no more than This will most likely provoke an ideological half a dozen parishes (as far as is known in schism; there is a hope that the modernization Kiev) have left the UOC-MP for the UOC-KP. of the UOC-MP will attract some new groups These conditions formed the experience of of believers, but this is a rather illusory hope Metropolitan Bishop Onuphrius, who man- given the current situation. The patriotic youth aged to stand up in the Ternopil oblast on be- will not go in for the “Moscow” church, and half of the UOC-MP during the early 90s for a different group of laymen is nowhere to be the largest monastery complex in Ukraine— found. The Ukrainian missionary field is satu- the Pochaevsky monastery—and afterwards, rated with much more attractive propositions. for more than two decades, successfully led The UOC-MP cannot allow itself at present to the indispensably rich, large, and multiethnic take part in an apparent campaign of “self- Chernovitsky diocese. As a result, this lone Ukrainization,” which to a large degree has al- diocese became the head of the UOC-MP. ready begun to affect many segments of Ukrai- In my eyes, Metropolitan Bishop’s first steps nian society. The specter of the establishment in his post as the new representative (and let of an ethnic Russian exarchate in Ukraine has it be remembered that the 13th of November troubled the church for already more than a makes three months since this date) confirm decade. In spite of the separate mission state- his time-proven style of leadership, which cre- ments of the radicals, none of the reliable rep- ates confusion for other church leaders. Many resentatives of the church whom I am aware expected large-scale public steps in keeping of are in favor of this idea. The creation of this with those of Patriarch Kirill: press conferenc- exarchate will give rise to too many admin- es, broad statements, relations with the public istrative problems and too large a part of the and state authorities, discussion of programs church will be lost. of reform, in short, participation in the cam- On the other side of the coin, the UOC-MP has paign for the uplifting of the UOC’s image, accepted the fact that it is being examined by which had been spoiled as a result of the col- religious competitors and, in part, by political laboration of separate church representatives forces (not necessarily radical ones) as a pie with Yanukovich. Instead, after coming into sitting out on a windowsill, ready for the tak- power and locking himself into his residence, ing, which it is at least possible to have a bite Metropolitan Bishop Onuphrius has refused of, if not divide entirely. It is difficult to pro- 99% of all possible interviews and public ac- pose a better moment than now to do so. On tivities (if not all of them) and currently main- the part of those coming to support the idea tains communications with the world through of autocephaly, this has long been an unsus- his former competitor. In the meantime, tainable situation, and the desire to join in the Metropolitan Bishop Antony has not only re-

Euxeinos 17/2015 17 Nikolay Mitrokhin

mained at his post as executive director, but, only can, but should wait, because, in this in- as before, also holds control over the dealings definite situation, every imprecisely spoken or of the Kiev Metropolitanate. Onuphrius has unfaithfully reproduced word could turn into not begun to beckon anyone from the Cherno- a large problem for the UOC-MP. vitsky diocese and his only confidant, besides What can we expect from Metropolitan Bish- Antony, is Bishop Obukhovsky Iona (Cherep- op Onuphrius in the future? How much lon- anov), whose opinions are very much in ac- ger will his “seclusion” continue and what cordance with the style leadership within the will this lead to? As I see it, there are two pos- church and its ideologies. This lively and en- sibilities: theoretically, Metropolitan Bishop ergetic monk of Russian origin (with whom I Onuphrius can take a page from the tactical had the pleasure of conversing in 1998—much book of Saint Cyrill—namely to wait a couple more vibrant than Onuphrius) successfully of years for reforms, to observe, and to pro- managed to populate a small monastery and mote his people to the necessary posts and, turn it into a famous landmark of religious life afterwards, concisely and immediately com- in Kiev. In light of this, he has come a long way mence to make those or any changes he has from a gloomy and obscure Russian monk- in mind. However, based on the opinion of hood, whose traditions were actively support- my close friends in Kiev as well as my own ed in Odessa and Donetsk3. personal impressions from long conversations In my opinion, this “withdrawal into seclu- with the bishop himself5, he is not the kind of sion” is a standard managerial path in this person who has any long-term plans for the situation. Nothing of a particularly critical na- future. He is exclusively a tactician, although ture is actually taking place within the UOC- very successful in this respect. MP. The new authorities do not have a thirst Therefore it is my opinion Metropolitan for the church’s annihilation and are not call- Bishop Onuphrius will most likely take after ing for any decisive actions from Metropoli- the strategy of Patriarch Pimen (Izvekova), tan Bishop Onuphrius. As a result, he spoke who, at the beginning of this rule, went to the all words necessary in support of the actions Trinity-Sergi Monastery, where he spent eigh- of the authorities and led a funeral proces- teen years of his life. This strategy operates sion over the voluntary centurion battalion through ignorance of political agendas or any “Aidar,” with regard to the Jonah Monastery4. church reforms made on behalf of its leader. None of the dioceses, which it had been pos- But this strategy will not change the possi- sible to influence with the path of negotiations, bilities of innovative experiments in separate plan to separate. Time is needed to understand areas of church life, implemented by church what is to be done in Kiev and with whom it is leaders of the second or third echelon. In the possible to work; this is analogous with Mos- case of obvious failures, these experiments can cow and Constantinople. And journalists not always end, and those responsible can always be relocated or reduced. In the management 3 http://religions.unian.net/ orthodoxy/577998-episkop-iona-cherepanov- 5 Interview by N. Mitrokhin with ochen-hotelos-byi-chtobyi-veter-ne-unes-moyu- Archbishop Onuphrius (Berezovsky), 05/15/1998, golovu.html in Chernivitsi. Interview With N. Mitrokhin with 4 http://www.religion.in.ua/news/ Archbishop Onufry (Berezovsky) 15.5.1998, in ukrainian_news/26703-glava-upc-mp-sovershil- Chernivtsi. A deciphering. Personal electronic otpevanie-sotnika-batalona-ajdar.html archive of the author.

Euxeinos 17/2015 18 of the church, the Synod, and its departments, About the Author they will be observing the two or three clos- Nikolay Mitrokhin, Dr. phil., Research Center est figures to the patriarch in order and piety. for East European Studies, Bremen. The aforementioned Ion (Cherepanov) and e-mail: mitrokhin [at] gmx.net the long-time assistant of Metropolitan Bishop Onuphrius, Archbishop Meletios (Egorenko), who occupied the vacant Chernovitsky office (and who is an anti-imperial Russian who maintains a good reputation both in the UOC and the ROC), may very wind up being these figures. In this situation, administrative affairs will only entrust Metropolitan Bishop Onuphrius with giving principal and most likely unoffi- cial blessings to experiments, the deciding of figures who are responsible for the regulation in times of crises, and tough negotiations with leading authorities of the Ukrainian govern- ment and Moscow. What innovations will come about in the future, where will they lead the UOC-MP, how successful will the ideas of the autocephalists prove to be, and to what de- gree will they be prepared to answer for the results of their leadership? Time will show us.

Translated by Charlie Smith

Euxeinos 17/2015 19