When the "occupants" build Lavra temples while "Ukrainians" take them away
The Lavra Church of the Life-Giving Spring Icon after being seized by the authorities. Photo: OCU
“The church was rebuilt in the 1990s, adorned with towers and carved pediments. The temple was repainted, and inside, a carved gilded iconostasis was installed,” wrote the OCU.
All of this is fine, but the OCU has no relation whatsoever to the towers, pediments, or iconostasis. The Church of the Life-Giving Spring Icon was rebuilt from Soviet ruins by the efforts of the brotherhood of the Lavra and the parishioners of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC).
After the restoration, daily services were held here. Until August 2024, when the Bolshevik authorities simply expelled the community onto the street to hand over the temple to the OCU. Now it is practically always empty.
The OCU speaks of these events as follows: “This place of prayer gained special significance for Ukrainians last year when the first temple for the military opened here.”
So, you understand: according to the OCU, the church was rebuilt and adorned not by “Ukrainians” but by “Moscow occupants".” This is how the believers and the brotherhood of the Lavra are referred to in various interviews by Dumenko, Lotysh, and other OCU members.
And the Life-Giving Spring temple is a telling example of what is happening to churches both in the Lavra and throughout Ukraine. The “occupants” build and restore churches, while the “Ukrainians” seize and close them. A paradox.
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.