>Russian imperialism
If China tore cascadia and half of the midwest out of USA, kept propping up broken democracies and oligarchs that sell off their country's assets for pennies and whenever things go bad just do a revolution (color or armed), would you consider the desire to retake that land as "imperialism"?

@Smackface regardless on how you feel on the Ukraine/Russia situation, Bartholomew has overstepped his boundaries and wants to commune with outright schismatics for (((ecumenism)))

Yea, bart's off his rocker. All that CIA support won't buy him the approval of other patriarchs, not just Russian. The "ecumenical" council of Crete is the proof of that.

I'm just hoping archbishop Demetrios of goarch jumps ship and declares anathema on bart

One can only hope

So I live under a Dwayne Johnson so forgive me, but what did bart do?

Is it about the 2nd marriage for priests thing

It's about Ukraine

Bart wants to install a patriarch for Ukraine effectively usurping the Russian patriarch's authority. And he is giving the privilege to schismatic who want autocephally purely because of political tension between Russia and Ukraine @󠀂 󠀂

Wait a minute. Does Ukraine want their own Patriarch?

I thought due to the autocephalous nature of Orthodox churches, Constantinople doesn't get to exercise such authority like that?

It sounds to me like a situation where autocephaly for a church is only recognized by 1 other church

Indeed, thus has been roundly condemned not just Russia

Yeah I understand why the rest of the patriarchs would not be happy

And it would be bad enough had it just been only between patriarchs but take a look at this

REEE

Yeah this is some pozz shit

That's John McCain and there is the would be Ukraine patriarch

Yeah fuck Bart

Thing is I am thinking bout joining a church that is under Constantinople's jurisdiction

Welp

I mean I'm already in one and besides we are all still one holy Catholic and apostolic church

Hopefully Bart will be removed and the See of Constantinople will have a real patriarch

Just remember that even if the patriarch is a heretic, that doesn't mean every bishop and priest under him is. Their sacraments are still valid

^

@Daniil to be honest I view it more as an American revolution/War of 1812 situation, Ukraine ethnogenesized

Similar anyways

Nowhere near the same

Second Ecumenical Council Canon 2; Council of Trullo Canon 20; Council of Antioch Canon 13; and Council of Sardica Canons 3, 11 and 12

```The bishops are not to go beyond their dioceses to churches lying outside of their bounds, nor bring confusion on the churches; but let the Bishop of Alexandria, according to the canons, alone administer the affairs of Egypt; and let the bishops of the East manage the East alone, the privileges of the Church in Antioch, which are mentioned in the canons of Nice, being preserved; and let the bishops of the Asian Diocese administer the Asian affairs only; and the Pontic bishops only Pontic matters; and the Thracian bishops only Thracian affairs.```

```It shall not be lawful for a bishop to teach publicly in any city which does not belong to him. If any shall have been observed doing this, let him cease from his episcopate, but let him discharge the office of a presbyter.```

```No bishop shall presume to pass from one province to another, and ordain persons to the dignity of the ministry in the Church, not even should he have others with him, unless he should go at the written invitation of the metropolitan and bishops into whose country he goes. ```

Sardica:

```Canon 3. And it is necessary to add this too, that no Bishop may cross from his own diocese or province into another province in which there happen to be Bishops, unless he be called or invited by some of the brethren therein, lest we seem to be shutting the gates of love.```

```Canon 11. Whenever a Bishop goes from one city to another city, or from one province to another province, for the sake of vaunt with a view to having eulogies bestowed upon him, or to appearing to be devoted to the religion, and desires to stay there too long a time, and the Bishop of that city is not an experienced teacher, we decree that he shall not treat the latter scornfully, and deliver sermons too continuously, and thereby endeavor to bring disgrace and ignominy upon the Bishop of that place. ```

Canon 12 doesn't seem to be relevant

https://orthodoxwiki.org/Responses_to_OCA_autocephaly#Canonical_arguments

All these discussions apply also.

If Ukraine was in any way legitimate, coherent or united as the CSA, they'd be at least as well off as the rest of the post-soviet space. But despite being the largest post-soviet country in Eastern Europe (apart from Russia), they were doing horribly even before the revolution. Ukraine isnt a country, it's a meme forged first by catholics and then re-spun by the bolsheviks to pit Russians against each other.

"granting autocephally will open the floodgates to corruption"
How were other Churches not subject to corruption when they asked to be autocephalous ?
I mean, how is that different ?

Ukraine is historically tied with Russia, I'd even say that Ukraine is more Russian than Russia, but they've been tied to the West far more than Russia and their demand is quite legitimate, especially considering the attitude of the Russians towards their clergy. They do as if it was a colony of them instead of treating them as brothers.

Even if you don't like the idea of Ukraine as a country it has its own unique rite and theology which characterises it as unique/worthy of recognition. The issue here is uncanonical interference not Ukrainian autocephaly

Kiev is the first Russian patriarchate and then that became the Moscow patriarchate under the Muscovite rule so yeah it's sort of more Russian than Russia

tbh I really don't get non-Russians that are very anti-Ukraine/pro-Russia

I'm just against the EP acting uncanonically I think Ukraine should be autocephalous but not this way because it's a long-standing issue in Orthodoxy, that the EP will claim to have jurisdiction in other churches