Lies and wild imagination – UOC eparchy answers accusations of UGCC chaplains

The chaplains of the UGCC blamed the community of the UOC for destroying a stone sculpture of the Virgin allegedly made by Pinzel, the founder of the Lviv school of sculptors.

"It's a little strange to hear about the famous sculptor who, firstly, did not work with stone, and secondly, how the work of such an outstanding artist could be in the cemetery, while his few works are kept in the museums of Ukraine," noted in the eparchy.

What the chaplains saw the third president of Ukraine, Viktor Yushchenko, in the pictures in the temple is caused by their "wild imagination", the UOC representatives believe. They wonder: if the chaplains insist that the truth is on their side, then why does their leadership not share this opinion?

"For all the time of the conflict, about two dozen people gathered in the Annunciation Church for Greek Catholic services," the eparchy states. "Archpastors of the UGCC were not seen here at all. At the same time, the Orthodox services were regularly performed by the Bishop of Ivano-Frankivsk and Kolomyia Tikhon. Bishop Viktor of Baryshevka, a vicar of the Kyiv Metropolis, came to support the parishioners in prayer. If the truth is on the side of the Greek Catholic community, why did the bishops of this confession not express support for their flock? Is it because they realize the unlawful nature of the actions of their subordinates and, being unable to support them in public, give a tacit agreement?"

To allegations that the community of the UOC deliberately destroyed the church so that to build in its place a new one, the press service of the eparchy wrote: "This accusation attests not only to the wild imagination, but also to the legal nihilism of the representative of the UGCC. After all, Art. 84 of the Land Code of Ukraine clearly states that land under historical and cultural objects, which have a special historical and cultural value, cannot be transferred to private ownership. The Law of Ukraine "On the delineation of lands of state and municipal property" in Art. 6 also prohibits the transfer of these lands to communal ownership. So, the "destruction" of the existing church could not provide legal grounds for the religious community to build a new one on this land, because it is state property."

Read also