MFA – UN: You should only see Russia's crimes against religion. Not ours
UN. Photo: Glavcom
It reads the following: “The Foreign Ministry's commentary on the false accusations of the UN about Ukraine's alleged restriction of religious freedoms.”
The main theses with our comments are:
1. The Foreign Ministry “rejects the UN conclusions” regarding the law on banning the UOC.
2. The law does not ban anything, but only “does not allow subordination” of religious organisations of Ukraine to centres in the Russian Federation”.
Sounds beautiful, but here's the problem – there are dozens of statements by MPs who directly say that this is exactly the law to ban the UOC. It turns out that for the internal consumer we talk about the fight against “Moscow priests”, but for the external consumer we say that there is no such fight. The Foreign Ministry also forgot to say that if such “subordination” is discovered, the organisation will be banned. And the scheme is as follows:
- First, DESS conducts an “expert examination” of the documents of the aggressor country (the Statute of the Russian Orthodox Church), after which it concludes that the UOC is subordinate to the Russian Church. At the same time, the provisions of the UOC’s Statute about its non-subordination to Moscow are ignored.
- The next stage – eparchies and communities of the UOC will be forced to break this non-existent connection.
- If you do not break this non-existent ties, you will be banned by court.
3. The Foreign Ministry reminded the UN that the Russian Federation uses religion in war.
No one argues, but what does the UOC and the law on its ban have to do with it?
4. Ukraine must protect citizens “from the destructive influence of the aggressor state, including with the use of religious organisations, which in Russia are fused with the state”.
The same question: what does the UOC have to do with it? Where is the evidence that there was such influence through it? There is not and cannot be any.
5. Russia commits religious crimes.
The same question: what does the UOC have to do with it?
6. The Foreign Ministry expects that the UN will “record Russian crimes against Ukrainian believers, religious communities and leaders, and church property”.
The final phrase is obviously missing here – and the UN will not record “Ukrainian” crimes against Ukrainian believers.
Our Foreign Ministry is counting VERY much on this.
Read also
Metropolitan Arseniy and the Kremenchuk deputy: what is common?
The example in Kremenchuk is yet another evidence of the authorities' double standards. And we have the right to say that Bishop Arseniy is in the pre-trial detention center not because he committed a crime.
On sausage and milk during the fast
The true meaning of fasting is not gastronomical but spiritual. Yet how many of us can honestly say that during the fast we pray more, refrain from judging anyone, visit hospitals and prisons, and tend to those in distress?
Orthodoxy and LGBT: Has the first domino fallen?
The Council of the Finnish Church has endorsed LGBT rights and supporters of gender ideology.
On Constantinople Patriarchate’s decision to honor head of organized crime group
The Ecumenical Patriarchate never ceases to astonish.
Opening a bust of Mazepa: A new era for Kyiv–Pechersk Lavra. Or not?
Do Zelensky, Yelensky, and the rest of the Kotliarevska cohort truly believe that, in the Lavra, prayer should be displaced by these absurd Soviet-style spectacles?
The UOC and the end of the Yermak era
The man who clearly played a major role in the processes unfolding between the authorities and the UOC has stepped down.