On Zelensky’s statements regarding the "Moscow Patriarchate"
Piers Morgan and Volodymyr Zelensky. Photo: a screenshot from Morgan’s YouTube channel
President Volodymyr Zelensky’s interview with British journalist Piers Morgan, in which he mentioned the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), left a disturbing impression. Here’s why. Essentially, Zelensky’s comments were a response to Tucker Carlson, the well-known American journalist, who accused him of dictatorial tendencies, including the ban on the UOC. So, what does Zelensky offer in return?
1. The claim that the All-Ukrainian Council of Churches and Religious Organizations (UCCRO) excluded the "Moscow Patriarchate" from its ranks.
The President clearly confused this with UCCRO’s support for the law banning the UOC. This, in itself, is a disgraceful position for Ukraine’s religious denominations, but it does not constitute an expulsion from UCCRO. The official UCCRO website still lists Metropolitan Onuphry as "Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Ukraine." Notably, there is no mention of the "Moscow Patriarchate".
2. The claim that the entire population is against the Moscow Patriarchate, as strange as that may sound.
It is entirely unclear how Zelensky determined this. Did he derive it from the anti-church hysteria in Ukrainian media or from polls funded 90% by the controversial USAID? According to Ukraine’s State Ethnopolitics experts, the UOC has around 6 million believers and thousands of parishes. Has Zelensky simply excluded all these people from the population of Ukraine?
3. The claim that there is a legal connection between the UOC and the ROC: "The Moscow Patriarchate is being closed, there can be no legal connection. They must be a Ukrainian Church, legally in Ukrainian jurisdiction."
The only connection between the UOC and the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) is Eucharistic communion. Legally, the "Moscow Patriarchate" does not exist and never has existed in Ukraine. The UOC has always been and remains under Ukrainian jurisdiction.
This is yet another incorrect statement by the President.
4. The claim that the ban on the UOC is "all lies. That is Putin’s narrative."
But if Zelensky admits that the ban exists and even justifies it, then why does he call it a "Putin's narrative"? What does Putin have to do with this at all?
We acknowledge that the President may not be well-informed on church matters, and it is possible that he has been misled. However, he is now spreading this misinformation worldwide, while simultaneously opposing a massive portion of his own country’s population. Very sad indeed.
Read also
From sanctuary to storage: how seized UOC churches are being repurposed
In Korsun-Shevchenkivskyi, members of the OCU are reportedly using the Church of the Savior Not Made by Hands – seized from the UOC – as a storage site for clothing.
Why can a thief who stole from AFU walk out of SIZO, while Vladyka Arseniy cannot?
A man who stole food from soldiers in wartime is allowed the privilege of freedom, while a hierarch who fed hundreds of destitute refugees in the Lavra is denied even the possibility.
“There are no people persecuted for their religious beliefs in the USSR”
One of the most disgraceful phenomena in the life of Ukraine’s present-day religious community is its complicity in justifying the crackdown on the UOC.
Why people heroize those who beat TRC
Why does the head of the UGCC publicly call for war until victory, while quietly hiding draft-dodging workers in temples? Why do OCU bloggers delete posts supporting the TRC due to massive hate?
On the long-awaited statements by Oleksandr Usyk
Oleksandr Usyk has declared that he is ready to become president. The only question is – whom does he now see as his voters?
Two weeks of OCU’s “brotherhood” talk to UOC: Any fruits yet?
So this is what the OCU’s “dialogue” looks like. One hand signs “appeals” about brotherhood – the other blesses people with angle grinders.