UAOC Press Office, NEW YORK, 12 March 2007

"The Brotherhood of St. Andrew the First-called Apostle," said His Eminence Metropolitan Mykhayil Javchak, Archbishop of New York and Diaspora Presiding Hierarch, "has displayed its lack of familiarity with ecclesiology and church discipline. While the historic Brotherhood may have the best interests of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church in their hearts, they should first become acquainted with the canonical and theological implications of their propositions." The Brotherhood is calling upon His Beatitude, Metropolitan Constantine of the United States to preside over a 'national sobor' of the UAOC in Ukraine.

According to Metropolitan Mykhayil, "This would be irregular since the revered Metropolitan is not a member of the UAOC."

According to Bishop Paul Peter Jesep, designated spokesman for Metropolitan Mefodiy in the United States, "The leaders of the Brotherhood have forgotten that in 1995, Metropolitan Constantine and his suffragan bishops signed a concordant with the Ecumenical Patriarchate, making their jurisdiction an eparchy of the Ecumenical Throne and ceasing to use the name "Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church. From that time, the jurisdiction commonly known as 'South Boundbrook' uses the name 'Ukrainian Orthodox Church in the USA' and has no ecclesial connection with the UAOC."

UAOC Diaspora leaders also pointed out that the Brotherhood's "open letter" states that current UAOC hierarchs in Ukraine have been educated according to the "synodal traditions of the Moscow Patriarchate" and are not able to exercise leadership over a national Ukrainian sobor. Metropolitan Mykhayil responded noting, "that most all of the Orthodox priests ordained in Ukraine prior to the velvet revolution, were part of the Russian Orthodox Church, the only jurisdiction allowed to function freely during the Soviet period. Patriarch Dymytriy himself was a priest of the MP for over 40 years, before he could become a clergyman of the UAOC, following its 'Third Resurrection' (1990)."

He added, "more important, the Brotherhood must realize that the 'synodal' or 'hierarchal' model of the church is the norm for ecclesiastical governance, according to Orthodox canon law. This has been made quite clear in the various changes that have taken place in the UOC-USA, since their unity with the Ecumenical Patriarchate. It is this argument over which ecclesial model to use, hierarchical or 'conciliar' that has caused many difficulties for the bishops and parishes of South Boundbrook in the United States. In these instances, the council of hierarchs of the UOC-USA have made it quite clear that their church operates on the hierarchical (synodal) model, NOT the often misconstrued ideal of 'sobornopravnist' or equal partnerships between hierarchy and laity. In fact, no jurisdiction in the United States or elsewhere, that is part of so-called canonical 'world Orthodoxy' accepts or functions according to this latter construction."

"In a characteristic style of interference in internal ecclesiastical affairs," said Bishop Paul Peter, "the Brotherhood is attempting to usurp the legitimate authority of the UAOC to further their own agenda with an appeal to Metropolitan Constantine of the USA. The push to commemorate Metropolitan Constantine, the head a different church, in the liturgical services, goes against ecclesiolgical principles."

"Metropolitan Constantine," added Metropolitan Mykhayil, "would not have any ability to 'lead the church out of the (alleged) canonical crisis' in his position as a bishop of the Ecumenical Throne, without compromising the autocephaly for which the UAOC stands. And one cannot blame the Metropolitan. Dialogue can only take place with the cooperation of the hierarchs of the UAOC, led by the Predstoyatel Metropolitan Mefodiy."
Bishop Paul Peter said that there is a "strange obsession with 'recognition' from 'world Orthodoxy.' The Brotherhood should re-visit the historical basis for the existence of the UAOC and be faithful to these principles which are founded on the idea of a national, self-governing Ukrainian church."

Metropolitan Mykhayil noted that "As Metropolitan Mefodiy has stated, a Ukrainian church cannot be Ukrainian if it is subordinate to anyone else, ecumenical or otherwise."

The views and opinions in the articles above do not necessarily reflect those of the UAOC