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
The devolution of Metropolitan Simeon
According to Shostatsky, “we know that where the majority is, there is the truth – not where the minority is.”
On how the OCU scorns its own rent-a-crowd
According to Zoria, the OCU looks down on staged crowds – for them, “what matters is truth, not the number” of parishioners. And yet, for every one of Epifaniy Dumenko’s traveling services, people are bused in by the coachload.
Persecution of UOC and liquidation of UGCC in 1946: Are there parallels?
After the defeat of Nazi Germany and the liberation of Western Ukraine, the leadership of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (UGCC) initiated negotiations with Soviet authorities concerning the future of its ecclesiastical structure.
On the mobilization of a priest as a sniper
A man who has chosen the path of the priesthood has no right to join the army and take up a weapon. And the very idea of killing another human being is all the more absurd.
On statistics: how many Orthodox, Muslims and Jews we have
Trust in the Razumkov Center's research methods on the topic of Orthodoxy is minimal.
Why helping children with cancer is a threat to state security
We should have long got used to the antics of some MPs, especially those who furiously hate the UOC. But they don't stop surprising us.