Варфоломей I пообщался с Ющенко тет-а-тет
Top Comments
All Comments (4)
-
In canonical law, it's called "apostolic continuity." On the other hand, we should ask ourselves the question whether the Moscow Patriarch should or not give independence to the Kiev Metropolitan. In my opinion it should,. Otherwise the Russian orthodox church will always be criticized for its imperialistic aspirations...
-
This is confirmed in several historical documents of the time. It's the reason why the Patriarch of Constantinople denied Yuschenko's demands to reconsider Constantinoples position. Thus, under canonical law only the Moscow Patriarchate has the authority to give independence to the Kiev Metropolitan and raise it to the rank of Patriarch. This is the reason, why most orthodox churches recognize only the Metropolitan of Kiev Volodymyr and do not recognize the Patriarch of Kiev Filaret
-
The Metropolitan of all Rus moved its see from Kiev to Vladimir in the early XIV c., at a time when Kiev was losing its importance to regional centers. Thus, Rus became a loose confederation of feudal entities. The move was approved by Constantinople at the time. Vladimir-Suzdal Principality eventually became part of Muscovy and the Metropolitan of all Rus moved its see once more, to Moscow this time. The Metropolitan of all Rus was raised to the rank of Patriarch only in 1589 (when in Moscow)
No room for the Kyivan Patriarchate. There was no Muscovite Patriarchate when Kyivan Rus was christened.
MiddletownDreamz 3 years ago 3