Who is behind attempts to revive the idea of creating a Phanar Exarchate for the UOC?

As the complete ban on the UOC approaches, there are increasing calls for the creation of an Exarchate of the Patriarchate of Constantinople for those who, after the defeat of the canonical Church in its rights, do not want to transfer to the OCU. It is characteristic that this topic is raised, in most cases, not within the UOC, but by those who have openly lobbied for the interests of the OCU over the past few years. In general, the idea is not new, and has even been forgotten. However, someone is trying to breathe life into it, obviously feeling a faint hope: what if it works? In this case, we see the following group of interested parties: the current exarch of Phanar in Ukraine, Bishop Mykhailo of Komana, the “Sophia Brotherhood” (read: OCU), and a separate part of the UOC.

The exarch who dreams of becoming a bishop

It has long been clear that Bishop Mykhail of Komana has his own ambitions. Of course! He is the representative of the Patriarchate of Constantinople in Ukraine! A beautiful and resounding title. But the title does not correspond to reality. “Komana” is not Kyiv, not Chernihiv, and not even Korsun. There is no cathedra. The only church that has been provided for use has to be shared with the state. Compared to, for example, the African Exarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church, the Phanar Exarchate in Ukraine looks like the Polish consulate in Lviv.

The worst thing is that there is a request, because clergymen of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church have repeatedly appealed to Anischenko. However, this hope remains unanswered, apparently due to Patriarch Bartholomew’s unyielding position on this issue. At the same time, isn’t the head of Phanar the master of his own word? He gave it today, he can take it away tomorrow. With this in mind, Bishop Komansky is actively working against the idea of driving the entire UOC into the OCU. In early 2025, one of the pro-Phanar websites even published an article stating that Anishchenko regularly complains to Patriarch Bartholomew about the head of the OCU, Epiphany Dumenko, and in general about everything that the OCU does with regard to the UOC. They say, “Your Holiness, you gave them the task of ‘uniting’, but they are doing the opposite — dividing even more.”

This information is entirely true. According to our information, a whole pool of dozens of UOC priests has long formed around Anishchenko, who, either individually or collectively, send tearful letters and appeals to the Phanar with a request to listen to their pleas and provide a canonical alternative, at least for a while. The patriarch’s heart is not a stone, so perhaps it will melt. And, according to our sources, the ice has begun to melt, albeit imperceptibly. In addition, Anischenko and his associates have gained serious support in the person of Elpidophoros, head of the Phanar Archdiocese in the United States, who is simultaneously resolving his own issues by attempting to weaken the influence of the elderly Metropolitan Emmanuel of Chalcedon on Bartholomew.

Thus, if Anischenko’s venture succeeds, he will be able to become not a nominal, but a real exarch with TWO OR THREE HUNDRED parishes of the banned UOC. It is quite likely that individual members of the OCU, who are fed up with Dumenko’s leadership, will also join this union. The main argument in favor of this version may be the difficult situation in which the UOC will find itself in the event of a complete ban. The Phanar has already realized that the OCU has turned into a kind of “monkey with a grenade” and is difficult to control. It remains only to wait and see whether they will react to this as Bishop Komansky and his Ukrainian friends expect.

“Sophia Brotherhood”: The OCU that does not want to be in the OCU

As we have written many times, it is from within this organization, represented mainly by former priests of the UOC who have transferred to the OCU, that calls for the creation of an Exarchate for the banned UOC are increasingly being heard. This is not surprising, since most members of this organization are well aware of the vulnerable canonical status of the OCU, and over the past few years, Dumenko has built such a reputation that it is unlikely that even one Local Church will recognize the Ukrainian schism.

During the broadcast, the host mentioned OCU cleric Andriy Kovalyov, whose role in discrediting Epiphany Dumenko we have already written about. It was Kovalyov who previously stated that the OCU could have its Tomos revoked until the Ukrainian church crisis is resolved. He also recently gave an interview in which he called for a canonical alternative to be provided to the UOC.

In other words, in addition to internal strife within the UOC, the tasks of the “Sophia Brotherhood” now include destabilizing the OCU. It is unlikely that Epiphany Dumenko will be thrilled if the plan with the Phanar Exarchate for the UOC is successfully implemented.

The Exarchate for the UOC as a way to weather the storm

It is only natural that within the UOC itself there are also supporters of the idea of a “lifeline” in the form of an exarchate after the complete ban on the Church. This group cannot be called organized. It is more situational. That is, at the moment, they have one desire — to get out of the blow with the least losses. They do not want to go to the OCU, because people will turn away from them, but they also do not want to quarrel with the state, since the loss of registration and real estate will significantly complicate their already difficult existence.

In this regard, the option of an exarchate, if it is offered, would suit them perfectly. Why not? Moscow did not protect them. Other Local Churches are not allowed to enter the territory of Ukraine. There are questions about Constantinople, but they can be overlooked if it helps to preserve their subjectivity. Thus, they are unlikely to refuse the idea of joining the Phanar exarchate if such an opportunity arises. It is difficult to say how many such bishops and priests there will be. Many of those who are now “beating their breasts” may well reconsider their attitude to this issue, because one’s point of view is often determined by one’s seat.

“Your Holiness, do you need it?”

This question is probably asked regularly to Patriarch Bartholomew by his advisor, the elder Metropolitan Emmanuel of Chalcedon. Being an experienced church politician and lobbyist for the interests of Epiphany Dumenko at the Phanar, he most likely outlines all the possible risks to His Holiness in case the Exarchate for the UOC is granted.

First of all, there is the loss of reputation. Granting the Exarchate to the UOC means admitting that the Tomos did not help heal the schism in Ukrainian Orthodoxy, which was the original intention. On the other hand, this is obvious, because the UOC is not just some diocese in Zanzibar. Millions of Ukrainian citizens are effectively shouting “OXI” to Patriarch Bartholomew’s actions in Ukraine. And they have every reason to!

Second, canonical conflicts. One can only imagine how the OCU and the Phanar Exarchate will divide power on the territory of Ukraine. It will turn out that any average OCU clergyman, if he does not like something, will be able to jump to the Phanar Exarchate, which will be several orders of magnitude higher in status in terms of reputation and canon. At the same time, Bartholomew already has experience of “dividing efforts” on the territory of another Local Church. The dioceses of Phanar in Greece are clear proof of this. And no Jerome can tell him what to do there! So why would he suddenly be afraid of Epiphany? Couldn’t hold on to the parish? That’s your problem!

In addition, the idea of an exarchate on the territory of Ukraine has its advantages, because in fact we are talking about hundreds of parishes and monasteries that will fall under the direct jurisdiction of Constantinople. These are both financial and property assets. In this context, the information recently announced by Ukrainian political scientist Konstantin Bondarenko, who stated that preparations were underway to transfer the Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra and other religious properties to the Phanar, does not seem so incredible. How else could this be done other than through an exarchate?

Considering all the pros and cons, we assess the probability of the creation of a Phanar Exarchate for the UOC after the complete ban on the Church as high.