Will Kyiv Lavra be renamed too after renaming Lavrska Street?
Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra. Photo: Katarin Tour
They argue that the Soviets sought to destroy the Church as an institution, while they do not. Instead, they claim to support the Church – but not the "Moscow" one, only the Ukrainian one.
Let’s set aside the dancing and shows in the Lavra, film screenings in the Chernihiv Cathedral, and so on. Instead, let’s focus on their latest initiative.
Twenty-five members of parliament have demanded that Vitali Klitschko rename Lavrska Street to Mazepa Street.
“Yanukovych has long fled to Russia, the activities of the ROC in Ukraine are banned. Yet the decision imposed by them on the city community is still in effect. This is abnormal and unacceptable,” stated Volodymyr Viatrovych.
To recap, in 2007, Kyiv City Council renamed January Uprising Street to Mazepa Street. However, in 2010, a section of the street (where the Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra is located) was renamed Lavrska Street. Now, MPs want to reverse this decision.
Their argument is that Mazepa funded the construction of the All Saints Church in the Lavra, as well as the restoration of the Trinity Gate Church, the Dormition Cathedral, and more.
But where’s the logic? Suppose Mazepa was a great benefactor to the Lavra. Why destroy the street named after it, especially since the street practically consists only of the Lavra? What’s more important here – Mazepa or the Lavra? This is like proposing to rename Kyiv to Mazepa. Or better yet – the entire country of Ukraine. Why not? He did so much good for the nation!
On a serious note, this initiative clearly shows that our authorities are not fighting "Moscow priests" but rather the Church of Christ itself. They’ve already allowed the OCU into the Upper Lavra, monks are about to be evicted from the Lower Lavra, and access to the caves and relics of the saints has been closed off to the faithful. Isn’t that a "victory"?
But no, that’s not enough. The street must also be "canceled" so that even the memory of it is erased from the people.
Here’s a suggestion for Viatrovych’s next logical step: rename the Lavra to “Museum Town”. That’s exactly what the Bolsheviks did in their time. Why bother coming up with something new when you’re already following their blueprint to the letter?
Read also
A hint at a new demographic reality?
It appears that we are facing a mass influx of migrants from the poorest countries of Africa and other regions. And the absolute majority of them will profess Islam.
On the seizure of a UGCC сhurch in Tokmak
Statements by the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church about “blasphemy” are not the cry of a persecuted Church. They are a textbook example of double standards.
On Budanov's statement regarding UOC
For Yelensky and his the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience (DESS), Budanov's statement was very untimely.
Why does OCU still celebrate Easter “with Moskals”?
On social media, “patriots” are again asking in exasperation: why are we still celebrating Easter with Moscow? How much longer?
Did Patriarch Bartholomew really mourn Filaret’s death?
Constantinople has never recognized Filaret as a patriarch – not “His Holiness,” not “honorary,” not under any title whatsoever. That alone makes the line in the Ukrainian presidential press service’s report sound astonishingly implausible.
Why did Dumenko sit in Metropolitan Onufriy’s chair?
The head of the OCU has his own residence – and Filaret’s residence as well. But what he needs is the Lavra, Metropolitan Onufriy’s office and chair.