Romanian Orthodox Church already in Ukraine?
Ukraine is home to a large Romanian Orthodox community numbering many thousands.
The beginning of the movement for unification with Romania
On October 17, 2025, during the annual parliamentary forum in Bucharest devoted to Romanian identity and the diaspora, former UOC priest Fr. Cyprian Biletsky from Zakarpattia gave a speech that could have far-reaching consequences for Ukraine.
According to Fr. Cyprian, after the war began in March 2022, six parishes of the Solotvyno territorial community in Zakarpattia, together with their rectors and parish councils, unanimously voted to leave the jurisdiction of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. This occurred with the blessing of Metropolitan Mark of Khust. From that moment, Fr. Cyprian said, began the movement toward canonical unification with Romania.
He recalled that on February 29, 2024, the Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church in Bucharest decided to “bless, encourage, and support the initiative of the Orthodox Romanians of Ukraine to restore communion with the Mother Church – the Romanian Patriarchate – by creating a legal structure under the name ‘Romanian Orthodox Church in Ukraine.’”
According to the priest, this decision caused displeasure both in Moscow and Kyiv but became a long-awaited and joyful event for the Romanians of Zakarpattia.
Registration attempt and authorities’ refusal
Following the adoption of Ukrainian Law No. 3894 (on the ban of the UOC), the founding assembly of the Romanian Orthodox Church in Ukraine took place on August 25, 2024, in Chernivtsi. According to Fr. Cyprian, all documents were prepared strictly in accordance with Ukrainian law, the European Convention on Human Rights, bilateral agreements between Romania and Ukraine, and with the canonical consent of the Romanian Patriarchate.
He said that on August 28, 2024, a full package of documents was submitted to Kyiv for state registration of a Romanian vicariate in Ukraine, including official consent from the Romanian Patriarchate.
Under Ukrainian law, the registration of a religious organization must be reviewed within 30 days. However, by September 28, 2024, the deadline had passed without any response or explanation from the Ukrainian authorities.
On September 27, the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnopolitics and Freedom of Conscience (DESS) acknowledged that the documents were “complete and correct,” yet refused registration, citing “interstate and interconfessional considerations” and the need for “additional consultations within the country and with the Romanian side.”
Fr. Cyprian stated that this refusal has no legal basis and effectively constitutes administrative obstruction of a lawful religious organization.
The OCU’s promise and the reality
He also mentioned a promise by Epifaniy Dumenko to create a Romanian Vicariate within the OCU – a promise that was never fulfilled.
“Most Orthodox Romanians in Ukraine preferred to wait, preserving their canonical status. Thus, 121 parishes remain in the canonical captivity of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, established in 1940 and restored in 1944. Another six parishes, which I mentioned earlier, decided to leave the Moscow jurisdiction and in due course join the Romanian Patriarchate,” said the priest.
He is convinced that “the only legitimate and canonical solution found by representatives of Romanian Orthodox communities from Odesa, Chernivtsi, and Zakarpattia regions was to withdraw from the Russo-Ukrainian ecclesiastical conflict and return to communion with the Mother Church – the Romanian Patriarchate – in order to avoid, on one hand, a temporary legal vacuum, and on the other, the risk of gradual Slavic assimilation in the medium and long term.”
Position of the Romanian communities
Fr. Cyprian emphasized that “this decision is not directed against either side of the Orthodox ecclesiastical conflict – neither the Patriarchate of Constantinople nor the Patriarchate of Moscow. On the contrary, it provides an opportunity to remain in canonical and Eucharistic communion with the entire Orthodox world through the Romanian Orthodox Church.”
The priest reported that on October 25, 2024, the Romanian Patriarchate officially expressed regret over the delay in registration and announced the continuation of diplomatic efforts before the governments of Romania and Ukraine to defend the legitimate rights of Romanian Orthodox believers.
Meanwhile, representatives of the Romanian Patriarchate’s structure in Ukraine are already filing a lawsuit against the SSEFC, which, they claim, “without grounds” refuses to register the Romanian Orthodox Church in Ukraine.
Address to Romanian parliamentarians
Fr. Cyprian told Romanian parliamentarians that “most Orthodox Romanians of Ukraine wish to return to direct communion with the Mother Church – the Romanian Patriarchate – while fully respecting the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of the Ukrainian state, as well as the decisions of other Orthodox communities in Ukraine that have chosen to join canonical jurisdictions other than the Moscow Patriarchate, which itself risks being declared illegal.”
It is clear that by “jurisdictions other than the Moscow Patriarchate,” he primarily meant the OCU. Yet this statement appears paradoxical, as Fr. Cyprian says that Romanians “respect” the choice of believers who joined such jurisdictions – namely, the OCU.
Questions without answers
What is strange here? The fact that OCU representatives themselves show no such respect – they seize UOC churches by force, including those belonging to Romanian-speaking communities, as happened in Chernivtsi. The Romanian Patriarchate had earlier pointed out these incidents when responding to the Ukrainian ambassador’s demand to recognize the OCU. Why Fr. Cyprian chose to remain silent on this issue remains unclear.
Even more puzzling were his words that “all Romanian Orthodox communities in Ukraine are older than the Ukrainian Orthodox Church itself and therefore never belonged to it.” Hence, he argues, “there is no reason for them suddenly to join it now.”
But on what grounds does he claim that Romanian parishes are “older” than the UOC? And on what basis does he say that they “never belonged to it” and have no reason to “suddenly join it”?
It is evident that Romanian-speaking parishes (like all others that existed before 1990) functioned on Ukrainian territory for centuries, under various jurisdictions, before becoming part of the UOC. They arose not only in areas that historically belonged to the Moldavian principality or the Kingdom of Romania but also wherever Romanian communities lived – for instance, in Zakarpattia itself, where Fr. Cyprian comes from. So why does he make such claims?
De facto subordination to the Romanian Church?
Apparently, because in Fr. Cyprian’s view, Romanian parishes are already under the authority of the Romanian Orthodox Church and are merely awaiting official registration by DESS. All arrangements with the Romanian Patriarchate seem to have been made, since, as Biletsky claims, he has “written consent from the Romanian Patriarchate allowing the canonical presence of the new structure under its omophorion.”
Whether any such permission has been granted by His Beatitude Metropolitan Epifaniy remains unknown.
Conclusions
Formally, Fr. Cyprian was speaking about the subordination of six Zakarpattia parishes that left the UOC to the Romanian Church. But in essence, the discussion concerns all “Romanian” UOC communities, numbering about 130.
In summary, the situation is developing precisely as experts had warned. The Ukrainian authorities’ policy of banning the UOC, combined with the OCU’s aggressive church seizures, creates a dangerous precedent for ecclesiastical fragmentation. What begins as a religious schism inevitably turns into a threat to national unity.
Responsibility for this situation lies with those who deprive believers of the right to pray in their accustomed churches. And it is worth recalling one simple fact: before the adoption of anti-church laws and the onset of violent church seizures, none of the Romanian communities had even considered leaving the UOC.
