A civilized approach
The rift in Ukraine’s Orthodox community remains a topical and painful social problem. In fact, the problem lies not so much in this schism as the fact that a considerable number of Ukrainians have found themselves under the influence of the Moscow church, and this influence is spreading far beyond the boundaries of church life. This was eloquently attested during the last elections, when some churches turned into pro-Moscow canvassing stations. This influence remains high today; for example, we know that UOC MP brotherhoods are preparing for the next election campaign, for their struggle “for Holy Rus’.” Certain political parties in Ukraine have launched strenuous efforts to exploit Ukrainian citizens’ religious devotion by displaying the holy remains (!) of Orthodox saints as a campaign stunt, which can be referred to as latter-day campaign technologies.
This time I would like to acquaint readers with statements made recently by a UOC MP adherent (called the Author, for the time being).
To begin with, the Author believes that Kyiv must not have any religions and confessions other than those of the Moscow Orthodox church. The Author further maintains that their presence is “the betrayal of the memory of our great ancestors.” (Reader should remember that there has not been a single period in Ukrainian history, this country being on the crossroads between Western and Eastern Europe, when people of different creeds did not live in Kyiv). The Author mainly blames the current Ukrainian leadership for this, specifically, President Yushchenko “who claims to be an Orthodox adherent, but allows confessions that are not traditional in this country to reign supreme in Kyiv, in the heart of Ukrainian and Old Rus’ Orthodoxy.” (So what are we supposed to do about such Ukrainian citizens? Exile them or force them to convert?) The Author’s “broad range” of outlooks, religious “tolerance,” and “respect” for other religions leave one with the almost mystical impression that the Author is living not in the 21st century but in the Middle Ages. Another interesting aspect is that the Author categorically accuses the president of Ukraine, who only recently occupied his seat, of “betraying our ancestors.”
The Author is extremely displeased by the transfer of the residence of the head of the UGCC (the “Uniates”) to Kyiv, which is “the homeland and part of the East Slavic civilization, and [by the fact that] we are being drawn into the Roman, Latin, system of civilization, which is alien to Ukraine.” (The Author ought to be reminded that the UGCC has retained the Byzantine rite for over 400 years, and that there are 100% Ukrainians among Uniates). It is especially amazing to hear such allegations at a time when there is a great deal of resettlement all over the world, with people moving to different places, along with their religions “civilized systems.” The Author, however, is convinced that Ukraine must be forever fenced off from the rest of the world and remain out of contact with other “civilized systems,” except, of course, Eastern (e.g., Muscovite) “civilization.”
The Author is shocked by the intention of some Orthodox bishops to set up a representation (affiliate) of the Church of Constantinople of Ukraine. At this point, it should be noted that such representations have long existed in the Orthodox world; for example, affiliates of several other Orthodox churches are located in Moscow. Yet the esteemed Author claims that “setting up such affiliates is a political act, a new type of sabotage (!) against canonical Ukrainian Orthodoxy in order to oppose here the Constantinople church, which expresses discontent (what a sophisticated ‘theological’ lexicon) with the ROC and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate). They are thus attempting to cunningly unite modern Orthodox Kyiv with Constantinople.” (Meaning what?). But what is wrong with restoring spiritual links between Kyivan Orthodoxy and the Church of Constantinople, thanks to which Christianity came to Kyiv and ancient Rus’?
Further on the Author acerbically, “eloquently,” and “correctly” claims: “The Constantinople Patriarchy today is a ‘cadre-formatted regiment’ with a very small flock...They must have decided to fatten up a little at the expense of communities in Ukraine. If they end up having two parishes here, then the money collected in Ukraine will also flow to the Patriarch of Constantinople... (that will definitely make the universal patriarch rich). If they (obviously, the Constantinople affiliates) become stronger here, they will sever (!) parishes from Ukrainian Orthodoxy (Moscow Patriarchate) and take them under their omophorion [vestment symbolizing ‘lost sheep’].” Here, the Author clearly indicates the fears of the Moscow Patriarchate whose political orders he is diligently and mellifluously carrying out (everyone has his own style). The style and lexicons corresponds to the topic: “regiment, “fatten up,” “the money will flow,” and “sever.” What a subtle signature of an intelligent person, who mulls the lofty topics of religion and the Church.
The Author’s main thesis is found in the following passage: “There is no one to unite in Ukraine (the Author is obviously referring to the possible unification of the three Orthodox churches). There is the 1,000-year-old canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church, and there are the schismatics, who broke away from it. The latter must repent and return to the lap of the Mother Church.” In other words, they must return to the Moscow Patriarchate and Muscovite Orthodoxy, the same church that in the mid-15th century broke away from the Mother Church — the Kyiv metropoly — and which must not return empty-handed but with Ukraine in tow.
The Author’s list of accusations and grievances includes the entire set of views currently espoused by those Ukrainian citizens who were raised in the “general educational” system of the Orthodox brotherhoods of the UOC MP-as a strike force column of the pro-Moscow Orthodox community. So, when I came across this material, I was perfectly sure that the author is one of those rank-and-file parishioners of the UOC MP, who has fallen under the influence of “fraternal” pro-Russian propaganda and doesn’t mince words, historical analogies, or logical thoughts where the “schismatics” and “Uniates” are concerned.
Imagine my shock when I discovered that the author of this work, barbaric in terms of both style and content, is none other than Petro Tolochko, the Ukrainian historian, Member of Parliament, academician, and former vice president of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences.
Gentlemen, what is happening in our society?
