By Hieromonk Nikitas Pantokratorinos
An article published a few days ago referred to the appointment of an “archbishop” in Greece by the so-called “Kyiv Patriarchate.” The issue at hand is not merely the appointment itself, but the fact that this action was carried out by a schismatic structure that lacks canonical recognition. Moreover, the appointment reportedly took place in cooperation with the schismatic Old Calendarist group known as the Genuine Orthodox Christians (GOC), which operates in Greece. What is particularly striking, however, is the attempt by the author of the article to associate this development with Metropolitan Epifaniy of Kyiv and All Ukraine, the Primate of the Autocephalous Orthodox Church of Ukraine. This requires clarification.
The article correctly notes that “this is a structure that is not in communion with the official Orthodox Churches.” However, the attempt to introduce confusion and perpetuate disinformation regarding the Church situation in Ukraine becomes evident in the very next sentence, which claims that “the current Metropolitan of Kyiv, Epifaniy of the Autocephalous Church of Ukraine, emerged from it.” We therefore understand very well that this misinformation comes from some who are annoyed with the creation of the 15th Autocephalous Orthodox Church and who, of course, as opponents of it, constantly put obstacles.
History has shown that those most troubled by these developments are circles connected to the Russian Orthodox Church around the world, which, rather than demonstrating genuine interest in broader Orthodox unity, often contribute to maintaining division through the spread of such articles and narratives, in ways that align with the geopolitical interests of the Russian Federation. It is evident that any substantial unity within the Orthodox Church of Ukraine would represent a major setback for the Russian Church, which would gradually lose much of its influence in Ukraine. At the same time, it would also weaken the remaining pro-Russian religious nucleus operating in the country, particularly through the structures, hierarchs, and clergy affiliated with the Russian Church in Ukraine under Metropolitan Onufriy. Attempts were made to present this structure, headed by Metropolitan Onufriy, as having severed all ties with the Russian Orthodox Church. However, these efforts proved unconvincing.
Not all of its hierarchs ceased commemorating Patriarch Kirill of Moscow, and, moreover, this alleged separation was never officially recognized by the Russian Church itself, which continues to regard this structure as one of its constituent parts. Even Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly referred to this body as part of the Russian Church and has publicly called for its protection by organizations concerned with human rights and religious freedom. As a result, it has become increasingly evident, even to ordinary Ukrainian believers, that the narrative of a complete break with the Russian Church was largely intended to create confusion among the faithful Orthodox people of Ukraine. To this day, this structure avoids identifying itself as the “Russian Church in Ukraine,” since the term “Russian” has become deeply unacceptable to many Ukrainians after the immense destruction caused by the war. Instead, it insists on using the name “Ukrainian Orthodox Church” in an effort to remain acceptable to its remaining faithful.
So, let us see why the article’s attempt to portray Metropolitan Epifaniy of Kyiv and All Ukraine as originating from the so-called “Kyiv Patriarchate” is entirely false and misleading. The “Kyiv Patriarchate” was founded in 1992 by former Metropolitan Filaret of Kyiv following his deposition by the Russian Orthodox Church. No canonical ecclesiastical procedure was followed for its establishment and, as a result, it was considered schismatic from the outset and was not recognized by any Orthodox Autocephalous Church. Over the years, Metropolitan Filaret repeatedly appealed to the Ecumenical Patriarchate seeking recognition of his structure. However, the Ecumenical Patriarchate refrained from taking action for many years, largely in order to avoid further tensions and in the hope that the Russian Church itself would address the issue. The Church of Russia, however, never agreed to any resolution and maintained the existence of the schism without making substantial efforts toward restoring unity, so that the Orthodox Ukrainian clergy and people would not be affected by the demand for Autocephaly promoted by the Kyiv Patriarchate. After nearly two decades of patience, the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I ultimately judged that the continuation of the schism could no longer remain unresolved. Thus, on October 11, 2018, the Ecumenical Patriarchate accepted the appeal of Metropolitan Filaret, restored him canonically to his hierarchical rank, and received the faithful of this structure back into ecclesiastical communion.
The Kyiv Patriarchate itself continued to exist formally for approximately two more months, until the convening of the “Unification Council” in Kyiv on December 15, 2018. Before the proceedings began, Metropolitan Emmanuel of France (nowadays Metropolitan of Chalcedon), who presided over the Council on behalf of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, requested that the former schismatic leaders, Filaret and Makarios, officially sign the dissolution of their respective structures before the Council could proceed. This step was ultimately taken and was understood as the necessary act of repentance in cases of return to canonical order. So, on that day, the Kyiv Patriarchate was definitively and irrevocably dissolved. Metropolitan Epifaniy of Kyiv and All Ukraine, together with many of the current hierarchs of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, indeed emerged from the former structure that was formally dissolved in December 2018. They did not emerge, however, from the present-day group that now refers to itself as the “Kyiv Patriarchate,” as the article misleadingly suggests.
The background of the current self-proclaimed “Kyiv Patriarchate” is quite different. Following the Unification Council and the establishment of the new Autocephalous Church of Ukraine, Metropolitan Filaret of Kyiv was granted the status of permanent member of the Holy Synod of the new Church. However, approximately six months later, in June 2019, Filaret broke communion with Metropolitan Epifaniy and the Synod and announced that he was “restoring” the Kyiv Patriarchate. Nevertheless, such a declaration carried no canonical or legal force, particularly since Filaret himself had already signed the official dissolution of the Kyiv Patriarchate during the Unification Council six months earlier. Those who benefited from the new situation were those who were trying in every way to maintain the division and confusion within the Church of Ukraine. The Autocephalous Orthodox Church of Ukraine tolerated the activities of former Metropolitan Filaret of Kyiv, allowing him to continue serving at Saint Vladimir Cathedral in Kyiv and to reside in the metropolitan residence he had used for many years. This approach was maintained out of respect for his long contribution to the Church in Ukraine and in consideration of his advanced age. At the same time, however, the Church remained aware that Filaret’s later actions possessed no canonical authority within the life of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, and that after his repose all the buildings and properties placed at his disposal would return fully to the Church. This is precisely what occurred following the repose of Filaret in March 2026.
A particularly revealing detail is that, out of the seven hierarchs associated with this newly proclaimed structure calling itself the “Kyiv Patriarchate,” four did not even participate in the gathering convened to elect a new “Kyiv Patriarch.” The remaining three reportedly met in a hotel in Kyiv, at the very time when Filaret’s funeral service was taking place, and announced the election of “Nicodemus (Kobzar)” as the new “Kyiv Patriarch.” All the rest of the clergy (priests and deacons) who served with Filaret joined the Autocephalous Church of Ukraine. This structure has no premises and all services are performed in an apartment. Indeed, the Church of Ukraine has nothing to fear from the so-called “Kyiv Patriarchate” which is supported only by the opponents of unity and the Orthodox Church of Ukraine.
It is therefore entirely understandable that such articles are aimed at undermining Metropolitan Epifaniy of Kyiv and All Ukraine and, more broadly, the Orthodox Church of Ukraine itself. As time passes, many increasingly recognize the farsightedness of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, who granted Autocephaly to the Church of Ukraine three years before the Russian invasion. Through this decision, Orthodox Christians in Ukraine were given the possibility of belonging to their own local Orthodox Church. Had this not occurred, many Ukrainians might eventually have turned toward the Catholic or Uniate communities, since remaining Orthodox would, in practice, have meant attending churches associated with the Russian Orthodox Church, something that became unacceptable to Ukrainian society. This saved Orthodoxy in Ukraine and did not repeat what had happened in Lithuania, Latvia and Poland, which for the same reasons are now Catholic countries.
Translated by: Konstantinos Menyktas
