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

Lavra as a backdrop for a name-day celebration

Any service held by Epifaniy in the Lavra is simply an off-site event organized on the principle of “everything I need, I bring with me,” where the Lavra itself is used as a backdrop, a rented venue.

What is the difference between Dumenko and "Patriarch" Nikodym?

The difference between Dumenko and Kobzar is not in having or not having apostolic succession or spiritual gifts, nor in the depth of their theological knowledge.

Admit you're a Moscow priest – get a deferment

If you declare yourself a "Moscow priest," you are (according to the authorities' assurances) classified as "critically important infrastructure" and given a deferment. If you don't admit it, they force you to renounce your priesthood and go to war.

Why, by inciting hatred against UOC, you are inciting it against Christianity

UOC representatives have long warned the “patriotic confessions” that stirring up hatred toward the Church’s faithful would, in the end, turn against those who lit the fire.

Ukrainian rule of law: Will OCU clerics be jailed only for murder?

Courts hand down sentences to UOC clergy on absurd charges, while the state will not so much as wag a finger at OCU members for open incitement to violence.

Why the Lavra’s patronal feast passed in silence

Since the Lavra was handed over to the OCU, it comes to life only when Serhiy Dumenko is on site.