Tuesday, August 2, 2022

    UOC-MP trying to avoid accountability for anti-Ukrainian work

    Well, now that’s interesting. In the third month of the Great War, the UOC of the Moscow Patriarchate “condemns the war” and appeals to the authorities of Ukraine and Russia to “continue the negotiation process to stop the bloodshed.”

    So many questions…

    How should Ukraine influence Putin, who chose the genocide of the Ukrainian people and the bombing of peaceful cities instead of negotiations? How are we supposed to “stop the bloodshed” other than to kill all those who have broken into our home?

    Why is Bucha, Irpin, Hostomel, Moshchun, Borodianka, Izium, Mariupol, Kharkiv, Kherson, Kramatorsk, and other pain points of our geography never mentioned in the Council’s resolution?

    Why did the ROC, i.e. the UOC-MP, fail to thank our brave Ukrainian defenders, the soldiers of our Armed Forces, for whom literally the whole country prays?

    However, they managed to make detailed claims to the Patriarch of Constantinople, the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, and complain about the parishes shifting away from the UOC-MP.

    The Council declared “independence and autonomy” of the UOC-MP. They made a statement – and that’s about it. Does this mean true independence? Or at least a legal one? The decision of the Council says nothing in legal terms because, in the end, it is necessary to look at the amended UOC-MP Statute.

    Fog of the UOC-MP

    The Council also “disagreed” with Kirill Gindyaev’s position on the war in Ukraine. They “disagreed,” they say. In the third month of the Great War…

    Cyril Gundyaev’s reaction

    “We have a full understanding of how the Ukrainian Orthodox Church suffers today. We understand that His Beatitude Metropolitan Onufriy and the episcopate must act as wisely as possible today so as not to complicate the lives of their faithful,” he said.

    At the same time, he prays that “no temporary external complications will ever destroy the spiritual unity of our people.”

    How about the opposite?

    How about condemning the priests who read prayers for Putin? How about condemning clergymen who helped the Russians in Donbas? How about condemning the monks who helped the invaders spot their targets?

    No remorse on the part of the UOC-MP or an admission of guilt over all these years. Apparently, they are trying to avoid accountability for promoting Russian interests and narratives in Ukraine.

    This cannot be forgotten and neither can it be forgiven

    And this should be understood by those who call “not to split society” when someone raises the issue of a bill banning any religious organization whose headquarters is located in the aggressor state.

    It is irresponsible to hope that the problem with the UOC-MP will be resolved on its own without decisive steps and willful decisions – for those who died and for those who will continue to live in Ukraine.

    Finally, I opened the address of UOC-MP’s Onufriy of February 24:

    “We also appeal to the President of Russia to end the fratricidal war immediately. The Ukrainian and Russian peoples came out of the Dnipro baptismal font, and the war between these peoples is a repetition of a sin by Cain, who enviously killed his own brother.

    Any more questions?

    Author: Inna Sovsun, MP with the Voice Party, lecturer at the Department of Political Science of NaUKMA, Vice-President of the Kyiv School of Economics.