About the Rock, unity and Josaphat Kuntsevich

Shevchuk finds Kuntsevich to be a symbol of the unity of Ukrainians with Catholicism. Photo: UOJ

On September 10, 2023, representatives of the UGCC in the Vatican celebrated the 400th anniversary of the 'martyrdom' of Josaphat Kuntsevich. The head of the UGCC, Sviatoslav Shevchuk, called him a 'hero capable of loving as God loves'.

It is noteworthy that Kuntsevich's anniversary coincided with the time when the authority of Catholicism and the Pope in Ukraine was seriously shaken because of the pontiff’s 'pro-Russian' statements. Uniates, led by Sviatoslav Shevchuk, are making tremendous efforts to correct the situation. Thus, the head of the UGCC decided to recall the name of the 'saint' now to persuade Ukrainians that it is necessary to maintain unity with Catholicism.

"Today, Josaphat tells us: Children of Ukraine, never listen to the voices of those who tell you to renounce that unity because our Church has survived in all historical epochs and stood before those who wanted to liquidate it thanks to being in unity with the great universal family of the Catholic Church, just as today Ukraine cannot endure this war without international help and support at all levels," Shevchuk declared.

But let us remember what Kuntsevich was and whether he really "loved as God loves".

What is Josaphat Kuntsevich?

For the UGCC, Kuntsevich is undoubtedly a saint as he contributed to the formation of this religious organization and the transfer of Orthodox communities to it. By the way, it is not excluded that in the future, the OCU will canonize those who today cut down the doors of Orthodox churches with angle grinders and drive out believers from the temples using pepper spray. However, Josaphat Kuntsevich also ended his life by violent death. Here is what the Canadian historian of Polish origin Orest Subtelny says about it: "In 1623 in Polotsk, local Greek-Catholic Archbishop Josaphat Kuntsevich, who tried to take away two churches from the Orthodox, became a victim of an enraged crowd". That is, even this secular historian, who is not seen in sympathy with Orthodoxy, testifies that the cause of J. Kuntsevich's death was his activities to raid Orthodox churches. If we consider those events in a little more detail, we get the following picture.

At the end of 1618, Josaphat Kuntsevich was appointed Archbishop of Polotsk. In those days, there were no mass media or Facebook and it was possible to conceal true information about oneself for quite a long time. And that's exactly what J. Kuntsevich did, declaring that he was not a Uniate but an Orthodox. The people kept to the Orthodox faith and considered the transition to the Union as a betrayal.

But soon the moment of truth came.

The Church of Constantinople, which at that time included the Metropolis of Kiev, knew perfectly well that all the bishops of the Metropolis, including J. Kuntsevich, had joined the Union of Brest. Therefore, it was necessary to ordain new bishops for the Metropolis. Jerusalem Patriarch Theophanes III took on this mission on the orders of the Patriarch of Constantinople, Timothy II. In 1620, in Kiev, he consecrated three bishops: Job (Boretsky) as Metropolitan of Kiev, Isaiah (Kopinsky) as Bishop of Peremyshl, and Meletius (Smotrytsky) as Archbishop of Polotsk. A year before that, in 1619, J. Kuntsevich asked the Polish King Sigismund III for a charter, according to which all Orthodox churches and monasteries in the Polotsk Eparchy were handed over to him, i.e., they were converted to Uniatism, despite the opinions of the clergy and parishioners.

In case of disagreement, the parishes were forcibly transferred to the Uniates. Orthodox priests who resisted were forbidden, under the threat of death, from approaching their own churches. Orthodox religious services essentially ceased. Infants were not baptized, and the deceased were not given proper burials. The deceased Orthodox were taken out of the town walls at night and thrown into the ditch with sewage.

Josaphat Kuntsevich acted so inhumanely and unlawfully that even the official Polish authorities took notice of that. On February 9, 1621, Chancellor (Prime Minister) of Poland Lew Sapieha, a Catholic by faith and a staunch supporter of the Union, wrote a letter to the Uniate Metropolitan of Kiev, Joseph Rutski, about Josaphat Kuntsevich: 'Not only I but others as well strongly condemn that the priest Vladyka of Polotsk has been doing too harshly in matters of faith, and he has greatly annoyed and disgusted the people in Polotsk and everywhere else. For a long time, I warned him, begged and exhorted him not to act so cruelly, but he, having his own considerations, more stubborn than well-founded, did not want to listen to our advice. May God grant that the consequences of his orders and harsh actions do not harm Rzeczpospolita (the Commonwealth). For God's sake, I beseech Your Grace to admonish him so that he may cease and abandon his severity in these matters and voluntarily return the churches to Mogilevites, not waiting for them to take them away themselves without being asked ... Please, Your Grace, keep him in check.'

In 1622, the Orthodox Bishop of Polotsk, Meletius (Smotritsky), arrived in Vitebsk and directed a document to the local authorities in which he declared himself the legitimate Orthodox Archbishop of Polotsk. This sparked a wave of popular enthusiasm. The Orthodox felt hope for the restoration of their rights. Those who had converted to the Union under pressure were returning to Orthodoxy. Consequently, J. Kuntsevich demanded a decisive intervention of the secular authorities. He wrote a complaint to Lew Sapieha with a request to punish the Orthodox.

However, L. Sapieha replied to him as follows: 'I would not like to enter into correspondence and disputes with Your Grace, but seeing the persistence with which you defend your beliefs, not heeding any arguments, I find myself compelled, against my will, to respond to your unfounded letter. I admit that I have also been concerned about the Union and that it would be unwise to leave this matter unattended. But it never occurred to me that Your Grace would make people join it by such violent measures... And with your reckless violence, you incited and, so to speak, forced the Russian people to resist and violate the oath they gave to His Majesty. It is difficult for you to deny this when complaints are filed against you by Russian subjects to Polish and Lithuanian authorities... According to the teachings of Holy Scripture, we must ensure that our zeal and desire for one faith are based on the rules of love. But you have evaded the Apostle’s instruction, and therefore, it is not surprising that those subject to you have gone out of obedience.

As for the dangers threatening your life, it can be said that each person is often the cause of their own misfortune... Instead of joy, your infamous Union has brought us so many troubles, discord, and such aversion that we would prefer to do without it. We endure so much trouble, distress, and bother by Your Grace. That is the fruit of your infamous Union! To tell the truth, it gained notoriety only through the disturbances and divisions it caused among the people and in the entire region!”

A more than exhaustive assessment of J. Kuntsevich's activity! Again, it was given not by an Orthodox man but by a Polish politician, a Catholic and a proponent of the Union.

However, after receiving such a response, Josaphat Kuntsevich did not quiet down; instead, he wrote a complaint against Lew Sapieha to the Polish King Sigismund III and to Pope Gregory XV. They were more willing to respond to the complaint. Sigismund III gave Josaphat Kuntsevich the troops, with the help of which the latter ruthlessly suppressed the resistance of the Orthodox in the Polotsk diocese.

In 1623, during a session of the Polish Sejm (parliament) in Warsaw, the Orthodox nobleman from Volhynia, Lavrenty Drevinsky, described the lawlessness that was taking place: 'In Lithuania, the Archbishop of Polotsk has been keeping the Orthodox churches of Orsha and Mogilev sealed for five years. The citizens of Polotsk and Vitebsk, who, at the archbishop's prohibition, cannot have a church or even a house in the city for their religious services, have to go out into the fields for this purpose on Sundays and holidays, and even then without a priest, as they are not allowed to have their own clergyman in the town or near the town."

“Finally, here is a terrible, incredible, barbaric and ferocious case: last year, in the same Lithuanian city of Polotsk, the apostate bishop, in order to further annoy the townspeople, deliberately ordered to dig out of the ground Christian bodies, recently buried in the church fence, and throw out of the graves to be eaten by dogs, like some carrion."
Volhynian nobleman Lavrenty Drevinsky about the actions of Josaphat Kuntsevich

If today Orthodox Christians expelled from their churches perform religious services in private homes, former stores, warehouses, or similar premises, in the 17th century, they would go out of town to conduct their services in fields and wood areas. On November 12, 1623, when J. Kuntsevich was returning from Sunday service, he encountered an Orthodox priest named Ilya, who was heading out of town to perform such an illegal religious service. J. Kuntsevich's aide, Archdeacon Dorofey, attacked him, beat him nearly to death, dragged him into the archbishop's residence and locked him in one of the rooms. This cruelty so outraged the Orthodox townspeople that they stormed J. Kuntsevich's house and, in all likelihood, killed him with an axe (at least on one of the "icons," J. Kuntsevich is depicted with an axe in his head).

This is very different from how and under what circumstances true Christian martyrs met their end. There is another difference: Christian martyrs were not avenged for their deaths, but for the death of J. Kuntsevich, they sought full revenge. Sigismund III sent troops to Vitebsk. The investigation into the case of J. Kuntsevich lasted only three days, as a result of which 19 people were beheaded, including two of the first mayors of Vitebsk and one from Polotsk; a total of 120 people were sentenced to death, their properties were confiscated, 100 people were imprisoned, and 200 were flogged. Vitebsk lost its Magdeburg rights and all privileges. The Vitebsk Town Hall was demolished, and a fine of 3079 zlotys was imposed on the town. All the bells were removed from the churches. As one researcher of these events wrote, ‘no pagan funeral was celebrated more bloodthirstily than Kuntsevich's death’.

What is unity?

Fearing the Pope's obstruction, Sviatoslav Shevchuk, on behalf of Kuntsevich, urged Ukrainians 'not to listen' to those who today call for a renunciation of unity with Catholicism. It seems to be a clear exaggeration. Such voices are precisely unheard of today. It's just the opposite.

In Ukraine, the narrative that Catholicism is something truly European, humane, democratic, civilized, and so on is increasingly implanted in society's consciousness, while Orthodoxy is seen as something Moscow-oriented, hostile, imperial, etc.

Yes, this narrative is still in its early stages of development today, with attempts to persuade Ukrainian society that there is 'correct Orthodoxy' in the form of the OCU and 'incorrect' in the form of the UOC. But the contours of the next phase of religious transformations have already been outlined – all Orthodoxy will be declared 'incorrect,' and only that which, as S. Shevchuk says, is 'in unity with the great universal family of the Catholic Church' will be considered 'correct.' Unambiguous statements are already being made about the prospects of uniting the UGCC and the OCU, with corresponding conferences, hearings, and joint prayers being organized. And if (perhaps, it's more accurate to say when) Patriarch Bartholomew agrees to unite with the Vatican, the narrative that Orthodoxy is 'Russian imperialism' will be heard everywhere. Then, the slogan that 'unity' is exclusively unity with the Vatican will dominate. Then, the J. Kuntsevich course will be pursued with renewed vigour.

But the unity of the Church is by no means unity with the Roman See; it is the unity of the entire Church, heavenly and earthly, it is unity in faith and morality, it is unity in the Holy Spirit and the Sacraments. Can Catholics today say that they believe just as the entire Church of the first millennium did? Certainly not. Besides the new dogma of 'filioque,' which they approved only in the early 11th century and made additions to the Nicene Creed, Catholics have established many other dogmas: the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary, Purgatory, and others. Therefore, when we say, 'I believe in One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church,' we mean something entirely different from what S. Shevchuk says."

What rock is the Church founded on?

And there's one more statement from the head of the UGCC that is worth considering. 'We are sons and daughters of the Universal Church because we believe that Christ founded His Church on the rock of the Apostle Peter. And this Peter continues to live, act, and serve through his successors, manifesting the divine and timeless beginning of the Church as the Body of Christ,' said S. Shevchuk.

The belief that the Church is founded on the personality of the Apostle Peter is a typical misconception of Catholics, which may, nevertheless, seem true because it is indeed stated in the Gospel: 'And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock, I will build My Church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it...' (Matthew 16:18). To prevent anyone among the Orthodox from being misled by these words, let us provide just a few quotes from the Holy Fathers who commented on this Gospel verse.

St. John Chrysostom: 'And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock - that is, on the confession of faith - I will build My Church (verse 18). With these words, the Lord shows that many will believe from now on, encourages Peter's spirit and makes him a shepherd: and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. If they do not prevail against it, much less against Me. Therefore, do not be troubled when you hear that I will be betrayed and crucified... 'On this rock.' He did not say 'on Peter,' because He built His Church not on a man but on faith. What kind of faith was this? 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God' (Matthew 16:16).

St Jerome of Stridon: 'You are Peter, and on this rock, I will build My Church. Just as He Himself gave the apostles light so that they would be called the light of the world, and other names originated from the Lord, so to Simon, who believed in the Rock or Christ, He gave the name Peter.'

St. Theophylact of Bulgaria: “Since Peter confessed Him as the Son of God, He says: this confession that you made will be the foundation of believers so that anyone who intends to build the building of faith will lay this confession as the foundation.”

As we can see, the holy fathers attributed Christ's words about the rock not to Peter himself but to the confession of faith that he had made earlier: “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?” Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” (Matthew 16:15,16). And the Holy Scripture also says that the Church is founded on the Rock, which is Christ.

"As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by humans but chosen by God and precious to him, <...> For the Scripture says, See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame" (1 Peter 2:4-6).

"For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ" (1 Cor. 3:11).

Other quotations from Scripture and the Holy Fathers could be cited, but what has been said is enough to convince us of the correctness of the Orthodox understanding of the Gospel. This means that we need to stick to the Orthodox faith, not be carried away by beautiful words and remember the testament of our Holy Father Theodosius of the Caves: "Do not partake of the Latin faith, do not adhere to their customs, avoid their communion, and avoid all their teachings and manners. Beware, my son, of heretics and all their talking, for our land too, has become filled with them. If anyone saves their soul, it is only by living in the Orthodox Faith, for there is no other faith better than our pure and holy Orthodox Faith."

Read also