Recently, the controversial Bishop Vincent Berg (Vikenty Chekalin) claimed in an interview that he took part in the ordination of the first bishops of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (UAOC) in 1990. The UAOC, together with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Kyivan Patriarchate (UOC KP), is a forerunner of the current Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU), which was established in 2018 by the Ecumenical Patriarchate. According to Chekalin, he was invited to Ukraine in 1990 by Ioann Bodnarchuk (who had voluntarily left the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) in 1989).
On January 5-6, 2019, Metropolitan Andriy Abramchuk of Galicia concelebrated with Patriarch Bartholomew and the other Phanar bishops as part of the official delegation of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU) at the ceremony of the Tomos bestowal at the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul. The Metropolitan was ordained in 1990 by the renowned Victor (Vikenty) Chekalin.
On the anniversary of the Tomos’ bestowal, Patriarch Bartholomew presided over a holy liturgy with Makary Maletich, the now-former Primate of the UAOC “restored” by Vikenty Chekalin. The latter was consecrated by the “Chekalin succession” hierarchs Dimitry Yarema, Ihor Isichenko, and Methodius Kudryakov, a former UOC KP bishop. Some of the UAOC Bishops who joined OCU in 2018 also entered the “Chekalin Succession” through priestly and bishopric ordinations by Andriy Abramchuk, Makary Maletich, and others.
Although the OCU and its supporters’ stance towards initial UAOC hierarchy ordinations is unclear, for example, Serhii Shumylo, Director of the International Institute of the Athonite Legacy in Ukraine, has advocated for an exhaustive study of Apostolic succession of this part of the OCU episcopate, bishop Vincent Berg outspokenly proclaimed his role in restoring the autonomous Ukrainian Church and emphasized the historical significance of these events in the struggle against Russian nationalist ideology.
Related Posts
Serhii Shumylo noted the need to discuss the issue of “Chekalin Succession” in the OCU hierarchy and, with the blessing of the Metropolitan Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia, submitted to patriarch Bartholomew a report entitled “The self-avowed “bishop” Vikenty Chekalin and his participation in the first UAOC ordinations in March of 1990.”
The documents, evidence, and facts presented in the survey, including those from previously unknown sources, confirm that the first UAOC ordination on March 31, 1990, in Mikhailevychi village in Lviv Oblast was conducted by only two people: Ioann Bodnarchuk, who had been defrocked on November 13, 1989, and Victor Chekalin.
Furthermore, according to the published certificate, Chekalin presided over this “ordination,” even though he has never been ordained as a bishop, monk, or priest.
Additionally, Shumylo studied articles published in August-September 2019 on the Ukrainian site Cerkvarium.org and the Greek sites Phanarion.blogspot.com and Romfea.gr claiming that Vikenty Chekalin’s bishopric ordination was genuine.
In order to comprehend the reasons of the key persons, the historian also examined the memories of Archbishop Eulogius Smirnov, Abbot of Danilov Monastery in Moscow, and archival papers and correspondence, according to which Chekalin was not even ordained as a monk.
The testimony of Ioann Bodnarchuk and Victor Chekalin from various dates about the latter’s bishopric ordination were also contrasted. For example, Chekalin’s evidence before the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) Synod in July 1989 – January 1990 demonstrates that Ioann Bodnarchuk did not participate in his ordination. The other two bishops who allegedly ordained Chekalin, Metropolitan Alexei Konoplev of Kalinin and Kashin and bishop of the Catacomb Church Vladimir Abramov, had already died at the time, and no evidence of their participation in the sacrament ceremony was discovered.
About the first UAOC ordination on March 31, 1990, it’s worth noting that the signature of Archbishop Varlaam (Ilyushchenko) of Simferopol and Crimea of the ROC was appended to Vasyl Bodnarchuk’s Certificate of Ordination after the Archbishop’s death. According to the recorded testimony of Archbishop Varlaam’s chauffeur and archdeacon, he did not leave his diocese on that day and performed divine services in the Simferopol Cathedral.
Furthermore, as a member of the ROC Synod, Varlaam personally signed the Moscow Synod’s determination of November 14, 1989, depriving Ioann Bodnarchuk of his episcopal status, and “no way could secretly ordain new bishops with him four months later,” Shumylo adds.
This issue, including historical records signed by Ioann Bodnarchuk, was detailed in a work by Fr. Rostislav Yarema (an English translation is available here).
Therefore, Shumylo came to the conclusion that the first UAOC hierarch’s ordinations were, sad to say, carried out by a man without the Apostolic succession. This was a breach of the first Apostolic Canon, which states that a bishop should be ordained by two or three bishops. The historian also recalled that both Mstyslav Skrypnyk and Filaret Denisenko questioned the consecrations of the “Chekalin succession” hierarchy. Nonetheless, many of those ordained in this manner were convinced of the legitimacy of their dignity and declined to be reordained. Thus, the “Chekalin succession” remains in the UAOC and UOC-KP to some extent. It is exactly the capacity, in which numerous clerics and hierarchs were admitted into communion by the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew.
Taking into account that copies of the Certificate of Ordination and the evidence discussed in the media were given to the Phanar and could serve as a basis for the Patriarchate’s Synod to recognize the UAOC hierarchy in their “current dignity” without reordination in October 2018, Shumylo expresses his concern about the Ecumenical Patriarchate making a decision based on forged documents and recommends conducting a thorough investigation into the matter.
