Can one preach in a church wearing shorts, flip-flops, and dreadlocks?
OCU Clerics. Collage: UOJ
The main Telegram channel of the OCU published a video of a “priest” and blogger of that structure, Yulian Tymchuk, from the church in Rostoky where he serves. In it, Tymchuk is speaking to children in front of the altar, wearing shorts, a T-shirt, and flip-flops. Yes, this is not a liturgy but merely a missionary meeting. Yet how appropriate is such attire for a clergyman – and that in a church?
After all, even if a random passerby were to wander into church in such a “beach” dress code, they would be asked to come next time in more suitable clothing.
And these words are not an attempt to once again “take a jab” at Epiphany’s clergy. Tymchuk, unlike many of his colleagues, does not seize churches or incite hatred against the UOC, but engages in a useful endeavor. On his Facebook, YouTube, and TikTok channels, he records missionary videos, in which, among other things, he explains to people how to behave in church. Why, then, does he allow himself to stand before the iconostasis in such attire?
Perhaps the answer can be given by another OCU blogger, Oleksandr Dediukhin, who at one point decided to serve in dreadlocks and boasted about it on Facebook. Of course, one might suppose that Dediukhin, by shocking his followers, wanted to spark their curiosity, draw them into the church, and eventually lead them to Christ.
But it seems the matter lies elsewhere. OCU clergy – even the better among them – do not take their ministry seriously; they do not feel the church to be a place of the Holy Spirit’s presence. And this is not our prudish nitpicking.
Even before receiving the Tomos, in 2018, then-President Poroshenko took Dediukhin with him to the Phanar, where they met with Patriarch Bartholomew. Can we imagine Dediukhin going to meet the Patriarch in dreadlocks? We are certain it would have been impossible – it would have caused a scandal. But why is it that for a meeting with Bartholomew Dediukhin will not allow himself dreadlocks, yet for a meeting with God – no problem? The same applies to Yulian Tymchuk. If he were invited to the Phanar, we can be absolutely sure he would not go there in shorts, a T-shirt, and flip-flops.
Every time one watches the OCU clergy seize yet another church with hatred and violence, only to immediately drop to their knees before the altar to “pray,” one cannot shake the feeling that they are playing some sort of game – that they do not feel the sacredness of the church space, do not believe that they stand under the gaze of the Creator of the universe.
And it seems that clergy in shorts and with dreadlocks do not believe either.
Read also
Can we judge those who joined the OCU from the military commissariat?
There are many known cases where priests and deacons of the UOC, detained by TRC officers, were offered a simple way to secure their release – to switch to the OCU. Most refused.
On Rivne Metropolitan's excuse for service in Jerusalem
If today we consider it possible to make excuses for concelebrating with the ROC, what will we have to justify tomorrow?
UOC isn’t banned, just ‘de-Russified’? Neither was UGCC under Stalin then
By Shevchuk’s logic, Stalin never banned the UGCC or curtailed freedom of conscience – he merely “freed” the souls of the Uniates from Bandera ideology.
A dip in the Jordan on “one – two – three”
Well-known OCU blogger in “holy orders” Oleksii Filiuk has come up with his own theological formula on the banks of the Jordan. It goes like this: “One – two – three.”
On the situation at Sviatohirsk Lavra
After the killing of Monk Varsonofiy and the attempted murder of two other monastery residents, many patriots claimed that the crime had been committed by enemy saboteurs.
You’re happy, aren’t you? Then why change anything?
The KIIS poll seems to be telling the U.S. authorities: Look, Ukrainians like living this way. They’re not just satisfied with everything – they’re happy. They don’t need peace, so why change anything?