On denunciations to "authorities" about UOC Diaspora
UOC clergy abroad. Photo: DECR UOC website
Currently, thousands of churches in Ukraine have been seized, and tomorrow, the same could happen to any remaining active church. The only way we can be 100% certain of attending a service next Sunday is by being outside Ukraine. However, in recent times, the UOC diaspora (which now comprises around 100 churches) has come under media attacks from our "Christian brothers" in the UGCC and OCU. Two statements have emerged almost simultaneously: one from the head of the Uniates, Shevchuk, and the other from OCU cleric Kovalenko. Their message is nearly identical – Ukrainian authorities must do everything possible to ensure that UOC parishes do not exist, not only within the country but also beyond its borders.
The arguments presented are outright lies (not even manipulations):
- That these communities are established under Moscow’s orders and financed by it.
- That they promote the concept of the "Russian World".
- That UOC communities train spies and provocateurs to create unrest in Ukraine.
The conclusion drawn by these "Christian brothers" is clear – they are calling on Ukraine’s "relevant authorities" to take action. Simply put, to ban and eliminate UOC communities, as has nearly been achieved at home.
At the same time, both speakers are fully aware that they are spreading falsehoods, that the UOC diaspora has no ties to Moscow. Moreover, the ROC itself is not pleased with its emergence. The reason behind these statements is simple – both the UGCC and the OCU seek to "privatize" all emigrants (even though the OCU is prohibited from doing so by the Tomos issued by Pat. Partholomew).
During the Soviet era, some pragmatic citizens living in communal apartments would snitch on their neighbors to the authorities in hopes of acquiring their living 'square meters' after their arrest.
As the saying goes, nothing personal.
And nothing Christian.
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.