Info

successor, Sylvester Kosov (1647-57), feared that the revolt would undercut the church's hard-won status within the commonwealth. On one level, his fears proved unjustified: through the initial victories and ultimate failure of the Khmelnytsky revolt, the Kiev school and Orthodox publishing ventures continued to thrive.

In other areas, he had every reason for uneasiness. When the tide of battle turned and Khmelnytsky saw no hope of winning equal rights for Ukraine and the Cossacks within the commonwealth without outside support, he turned to Orthodox Moscow. Under the terms of the Pereiaslav Agreement of 1654, the tsar agreed to extend his protection to Ukraine. From the beginning, Muscovites and Ukrainians had very different understandings of what the agreement meant. For Kosov and his successors, however, one implication was clear: the metropolitans of Kiev could expect strong pressure to shift their allegiance from the patriarch of Constantinople to Moscow, a change they were determined to resist.

The Orthodox churches in Ukraine and Russia now faced radically new conditions. Muscovite Russia increasingly dominated eastern Europe politically In the ebb and flow of the Thirteen Years War (1654-67) with Poland, its forces gained control of Ukraine east of the Dnieper. Muscovite troops and officials first appeared there in 1654 long before the truce of Andrusovo of 1667 recognised the partition of Ukraine into Left and Right Banks, under Russian and Polish rule respectively. In the same years, Ukraine fell into 'the Ruin', a period of military weakness and political instability. One hetman followed another in rapid succession, each attempting to strengthen his power and protect his community by allying with an outside power, the Polish crown (itself in crisis), Muscovite Russia or the Ottoman Empire. The Orthodox metropolitanate of Kiev was also divided in practice although not in theory. When Kosov's successor as metropolitan, Dmitrii Balaban, left Kiev for Polish-controlled territory to avoid the pressure of the tsar's officials, the Russian government and the hierarchy in Moscow chose to deal with Orthodox on the Left Bank through a local member of the hierarchy, most often Bishop Lazar Baranovych of Chernihiv. Moreover, when the Russian army occupied Belarus, the patriarch of Moscow immediately took control of the Orthodox dioceses that had been under Kiev's jurisdiction.10 Dmitrii Balaban's nightmare - Russian domination of the Orthodox Church in Ukraine - was only a step away.

10 F. E. Sysyn, 'The formation of modern Ukrainian religious culture: the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries', in Church, nation and state in Russia and Ukraine, ed. Geoffrey A. Hosking (London: Macmillan, 1991), 1-22, provides an excellent summary.

Was this article helpful?

0 0

Post a comment