Observations on the Sobor

by George Duravetz

I attended the 21st Sobor of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada (UOCC), held in Winnipeg on July 11-16, as a guest and was able to make a number of observations that were not mentioned in official press releases or most newspaper articles.

During the Sobor, which was attended by 324 delegates and numerous guests from across Canada and the United States, it became evident that the UOCC is facing many serious challenges.

The highlight of the Sobor was the election of Archbishop John (Stinka) of Edmonton as Primate or Metropolitan of the Church to replace His Beatitude, Metropolitan Wasyly (Fedak) who passed away last January. His election reflected the leadership crises in the UOCC: the new Metropolitan-elect is 71 years old and in failing health. A younger and more plausible candidate would have been Archbishop Yuri (Kalistchuk) of Toronto who, it is rumoured, declined the position. A third possible candidate was the Rt. Rev. Archimandrite Job (Getcha) now in Paris, France.

Another very important development was the elevation of the Very Rev. Michael Skrumeda of Winnipeg to the position of Bishop of the Episcopacy of Western Canada (Manitoba and Saskatchewan). Rev. Skrumeda is young, dynamic and exhibits leadership qualities that may make him a candidate for the position of Metropolitan in the near future. Fr. Bohdan Hladio of Hamilton was elected to the position of Chair of the Presidium of the Consistory winning over Fr. Oleh Krawchenko in a vote of 170 to 130. The election of Fr. Hladio reflected the desire for change at the grassroots.

A serious problem in the Church -- the lack of Canadian-born and educated candidates for the priesthood – was discussed at the forum. St. Andrew's College in Winnipeg graduated only one priest in 2005. The Church has addressed this problem by recruiting priests and theology students from Poland and Ukraine. While many of them have made excellent priests, some have created disastrous situations in parishes. The priests’ inadequate knowledge of English and inability to establish a rapport with young Canadian-born third- and fourth-generation church members have been their principal failings.

In addition, many aspects of the problem of declining membership were discussed. In a presentation, Fr. David Hovik noted that declared Church membership declined from 119,000 in 1961 to 11,000 in 2004. (This decline has also been felt in the Ukrainian Catholic Church whose membership dropped from 180,000 to 130,000 in the same period.)

As a result, many pioneer-built churches in farming communities across Western Canada have been closed. This issue and the division of the assets of these churches were discussed.

The consolidation of small farms into large corporate farms has led to a mass exodus of young people to large urban centres or to British Columbia and Ontario. In addition, many church members now travel to urban centres for weekly church services. As a result, many parishes are left with only a handful of elderly members. Priests now serve several parishes, visiting a church only once a month or even once every two months.

It was noticeable that the bulk of the Sobor delegates were elderly and that the use of the Ukrainian language has disappeared in the UOCC, apart from partial use in the liturgy. All presentations, discussions, press releases, communiqués were in English only.

Another disturbing phenomenon within the UOCC is the pronounced Russophile attitudes on the part of some of the clergy, along with the general negative attitude toward Ukraine.

The Sobor finally addressed the problem of relations with the Orthodox Church in Ukraine. However, the question arises: which Orthodox Church? The faithful in Ukraine belong to one of three: the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, Moscow Patriarchate (60%); the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, Kyiv Patriarchate (30%); and the independent Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (10%).

The dilemma for the UOCC hinges on the fact that his All-Holiness, Patriarch Bartholemew of Constantinople recognizes the pro-Russian Moscow Patriarchate as the only canonical Orthodox Church in Ukraine. The UOCC, having placed itself under the jurisdiction of the Patriarch in Constantinople, finds itself a "canonical brother in Christ" with the Russian Orthodox Church. (Halya Wawryshyn, in "Perspectives on Orthodoxy;" New Pathway, July 14, 2005, discusses this dilemma).

The UOCC unanimously passed a resolution on July 15 relating to this issue. Resolution 19, titled Presidential Election in Ukraine, states that: 'Whereas the Kyivan Ukrainian Metropolia existed as a separate church in 1589 when the Moscow Metropolia became a Patriarchate and as late as 1686 when it was placed under the jurisdiction of the Russian Orthodox Church and whereas the Kyivan Ukrainian lands were not part of the Moscow Patriarchate.

Subsections of the resolution state that the 21st Sobor of the UOC extends its sincere thanks to His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew for supporting the aspirations of the people of Ukraine to have a free and autocephalous Ukrainian Orthodox Church, and calls on the Moscow Patriarchate to renounce any jurisdictional claims to the territory of Ukraine, and Expresses its profound disappointment with the Moscow Patriarchate for the reprehensible and chauvinistic conduct of some of its hierarchs, clergy and faithful during the recent presidential elections in Ukraine.'

How this resolution will be received and whether it will be acted upon remains to be seen.

The future of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Canada may depend upon how it resolves its relations with the Orthodox Church in Ukraine and comes to grips with the above-mentioned issues.