“An independent state needs an independent Church“
The fight for canonical independence for Ukrainian Orthodoxy. OSW COMMENTARY NUMBER 272 | 11.06.2018
The Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Kyiv Patriarchate (UOC-KP) and the Ukrainian Autocephalous
Orthodox Church (UAOC) have submitted a request to the Ecumenical Patriarch (i.e. the patriarch
of Constantinople, the supreme head of all Orthodox Churches) to grant autocephaly
to Ukrainian Orthodoxy. On 19 April the Ukrainian parliament, at the request of President
Petro Poroshenko, expressed its support for this measure. The President himself expressed his
support on 22 April. There are numerous indications that a positive decision regarding this
issue has already been made, and a relevant thomos (patriarch’s decree) will be announced
any time this year Proclamation of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Particular Orthodox Church
(Ukrayinska Pomisna Avtokefalna Pravoslavna Tserkva, UAPOC) will likely trigger a new wave
of confessional conflicts across Ukraine, including a likely schism in the Ukrainian Orthodox
Church, which recognizes the primacy of the patriarch of Moscow (UOC). It is beyond any
doubt that a certain portion of believers and clergy, which today is difficult to estimate, will
remain loyal to Moscow and that the Moscow Patriarchate will make every effort to support
Ukrainian structures of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC). The government of Ukraine, for
its part, will try to prevent the development of these structures.
From the political point of view, both the expected granting of autocephaly to Ukrainian Orthodoxy
and the likely conflicts resulting from this are favourable to President Poroshenko because
they increase both his and his party’s chances of re-election in the elections planned for 2019.
On the one hand, he will gain new trust from patriotically minded voters, on the other hand,
opponents of autocephaly will coalesce around pro-Russian parties. This in turn may help promote
a pro-Russian politician to compete with Poroshenko in the second round of presidential
voting as a weak counter-candidate whom the current president would defeat relatively easily
