“Neither Bucharest nor Constantinople has the right to claim”: 12 theses on the canonicity of the Moldavian Orthodox Church have been published
The official website of the Balti-Falesti diocese published 12 theses on the canonicity of the Moldavian Orthodox Church, which enjoys autonomous status within the Moscow Patriarchate.
We present them in full.
1. The Republic of Moldova is an independent and sovereign country, therefore the Church in this country enjoys autonomy on the basis of internal self-government rights granted by the Russian Orthodox Church.
2. According to public opinion polls conducted over the years, the majority of Moldovan citizens oppose unification with Romania . Therefore, since Moldova's independence has been affirmed by its citizens, it is entirely logical that church autonomy should be preserved in the status proposed by the Russian Orthodox Church – the Orthodox Church of Moldova.
3. Analyzing the argument that a significant portion of citizens hold Romanian citizenship, it is absolutely wrong to conclude that they desire "unification" and "national reunification." It is well known that acquiring citizenship is done only for the purpose of receiving EU benefits, employment, wages, etc., and in no way for the purpose of "national reunification."
4. The so-called “church of the nation”, as a concept, promotes a heresy condemned by the Patriarchate of Constantinople in the 19th century, namely ethnophyletism.
5. The canonical territory of Moldova was under the control of the Patriarchate of Constantinople until 1812, after which it was transferred to the Russian Orthodox Church. The Romanian Patriarchate did not even exist at that time , having been formed just over a hundred years earlier. Therefore, the argument that the transfer of the Moldovan Metropolis to the control of the Romanian Patriarchate would constitute a reunification of the canonical territory is incorrect. Moreover, even the Patriarchate of Constantinople cannot lay claim to this territory, since the statute of limitations for resolving canonical territorial disputes is a maximum of 30 years.
6. In analyzing the "war" argument, it's important to note that the Canons of the Church permit the interruption of commemoration ONLY in the event of a violation of the dogmas of the Orthodox Church. Throughout history, there have been numerous wars, but not once did the Fathers of the Church mention a "heresy of war" that violated any dogmas.
7. It is important to ask a question about an important point: during the Second World War, on which side did the Romanian army fight and with the blessing of which Patriarch did Romanian soldiers come with machine guns to our land?
8. Back in the 20th century, an attempt to create a Bessarabian Metropolis proved a near-failure. It is well known that Christians chose not to join the Church rather than unite with the Romanian Patriarchate, as this would be a schism that could not be washed away even by the blood of martyrs.
9. The "new calendar" used by the Romanian Church and the Patriarchate of Constantinople are both obstacles, as there is a significant number of Christians who do not accept this fact. However, even if the Romanian Patriarchate offers us the opportunity to continue services according to the old calendar, there will certainly be many invitations to serve in Romania that we will not be able to refuse if we are part of the Romanian Patriarchate, where we will be forced to serve according to the "new calendar."
10. According to the Canons of the Church, unification with the Romanian Patriarchate is forbidden without the permission of the Mother Church—the Russian Orthodox Church—because it would create a schism that threatens the salvation of souls . If this were to happen, schisms would arise among the people of the Church, creating chaos and destroying the unity of the Church. The unity of the Orthodox Church is an ontological characteristic of the Church that must be preserved even at the cost of life.
11. If the initiative to transfer to the Romanian Patriarchate was based on concern for the Church and did not have a political background , it would be appropriate to adopt the Law on Recession and the return to the Orthodox Church of Moldova of the land, premises, and utensils that the Orthodox Church owned over time, as the Romanian State did with the Romanian Patriarchate.
12. The so-called Metropolitan Peter Paduraru, the leader of the “Bessarabian Schism,” is forbidden to conduct divine services, and consequently, uniting with him in divine services is strictly prohibited.
English version :: Read in English "Neither Bucharest nor Constantinople has the right to claim": 12 theses on the canonicity of the Moldovan Orthodox Church have been published