The priest with the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, Yuriy Boyko, criticized the recent interview of the archbishop of the Lviv Roman Catholic Church, Mechyslav Mokshytsky, about the situation in Ukraine.
“It is impossible not to note the political and ideological theses, which are easily read between the lines and which I’d like to highlight to the readers, who take everything for word,” said the priest.
According to the cleric, the interview in the original language (Italian) was polished very delicately and diplomatically, so that it was not possible to find any flaws.
“However, those who read carefully will see the following Russian narratives,” writes Yuriy Boyko.
1) “Ukraine could take Switzerland as an example, where there are even four official languages”:
This thesis voiced amid the war is an attempt to resolve the old topic of discord between Ukrainians – the topic of the Russian language, on which pro-Russian circles in Ukraine speculated for almost 30 years of independence. The archbishop is in favor of recognizing Russian as state language. That is, the narrative stirs up the language issue and immediately offers an “old” solution.
2) “Russian remains the “Church of the people”, if it can be referred to this way. After hearing the words of Patriarch Kirill of Moscow, who married Putin’s war, communities in Ukraine distanced themselves from him:
This statement clearly delineates the personal responsibility of Patriarch Kirill for supporting the war in Ukraine and the Orthodox Church, which he heads. The reader involuntarily concludes that only the Moscow patriarch remains responsible, not everyone else. At the same time, he manipulates the truth, which cannot be unknown to him, namely, the fact that many hierarchs and clergy of the UOC MP or Russian Orthodox Church deliberately cooperated with Russian occupiers. At least the latest raids targeting high-ranking hierarchs of the UOC MP testify to this.
3) After the conflict began, some transitions of believers to the Autocephalous Orthodox Church (OCU – ed.) were recorded:
One gets the impression that the Archbishop does not want to recognize not only the fact of numerous transitions of communities from the UOC MP to the OCU, but also the importance of the OCU itself.
4) “Pointing a finger at the language or the Church can become a source of even greater pain for the people and fuel divisions that are unnecessary for Ukraine”:
The statement suggests to forget the topic of the Russian language and Church in Ukraine, because there may lead to bad consequences. In a word, a kind of warning-blackmail.
5) “I feel a certain deafness on the part of the head of the Kremlin, whose only goal remains the conquest of Ukraine”:
With this statement, Archbishop Mokshitsky puts the responsibility for the war personally on Putin, without mentioning the fact that this war is supported by the vast majority of the Russian population. This is evidenced by both sociological surveys and public calls for war and the destruction of Ukraine by ordinary Russians. Behind this statement is also an attempt to whitewash the Russian people from collective responsibility for the war that will come sooner or later.
6) “Rest is necessary. The war deprived people of smiles: just look at the faces on the street. Sorrow multiplies”:
Behind this expression lies a political call for something alike the Minsk negotiations. However, what the “respite” in relations with Russia leads to is what all Ukrainians experience every day, starting from February 24.
7) “People demand justice and Ukraine, which will keep all its territories, including Crimea. This is why we want to think about mercy. Christ himself asks us to love the enemy, our aggressor. And to forgive: we repeat this every time we say the Our Father”:
At first glance, wonderful gospel words about mercy, devoid of justice and truth. At the same time, a call to start a dialogue with the enemy is read between the lines.
