Will those who praised the Nazis be included in Ukraine's Pantheon of Heroes?
Heroes of Ukraine according to the Institute of National Memory. Photo: Institute of National Memory
Eighty-five years ago, on June 30, 1941, the “Act of Proclamation of the Ukrainian State” was announced in Lviv. Clause 3 of the document stated:
“The Ukrainian State will work closely with National Socialist Greater Germany, which, under the leadership of its Leader Adolf Hitler, is creating a new order in Europe and the world.”
The Act glorified OUN leader Bandera and OUN founder Konovalets.
On the same day, a National Assembly was held, where UGCC Metropolitan Yosyf Slipyj and the Uniate chaplain Ivan Hrynioch delivered speeches. In addition, a greeting from Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky was read aloud containing the words:
“We welcome the victorious German Army as the liberator from the enemy.”
At the conclusion of the assembly, participants sent “greetings to the Creator and Leader of Great Germany, ADOLF HITLER, and greetings to the Glorious German Invincible Army.”
The record further noted that
“all those present especially warmly and sincerely greeted the high-ranking officers of the German army who attended the Assembly.”
On July 1, the Verkhovna Rada passed the law on the “Ukrainian National Pantheon.”
The law states that the Pantheon may commemorate, among others, individuals who made an outstanding contribution to the development of religion in Ukraine. Given the privileged position currently enjoyed by the UGCC, there is little doubt that efforts will be made to include figures such as Sheptytsky or Slipyj.
There is, however, a problem.
According to the law, the Pantheon may not commemorate persons who fall under the restrictions established by Ukraine’s laws “On the Condemnation of the Communist and National Socialist (Nazi) Totalitarian Regimes...”
As we understand it, it may be rather difficult to prove that individuals who sent greetings to Hitler and praised the Nazi army do not fall within the scope of legislation condemning Nazism.
Incidentally, this issue applies not only to Uniate bishops, but also to Bandera, Stetsko, Melnyk, Shukhevych, and others.
Still, there is a suspicion that nobody will attempt to prove anything at all.
It may be far easier simply to remain silent and pretend that none of it ever happened.
Read also
OCU in the Lavra: When a recording replaces the choir
Parishioners have been pushed out of the Lavra. The monks are barred from the churches. But there is room for a handful of OCU “monks.”
Sviatohirsk murder no one is allowed to talk about
Logic suggests that Zelensky was informed about the monk’s murder that very day.
Sviatohirsk Lavra tragedy: A confession of faith or not?
The killers came to the monastery and, after hearing the words “Glory to our Lord God” in response, began to kill. What matters is that the victims were given a choice: they could give the “right” answer and escape death.
Have the talking points on the Sviatohirsk murder already been rolled out?
Espreso gives viewers the unmistakable impression that nothing particularly terrible happened – and that no one should feel too sorry for the “Moscow Patriarchate monks.”
Why are a rabbi and an exarch pleading for corruption suspects?
The rabbi and the exarch are both highly intelligent men and cannot fail to understand that their actions are dealing a serious blow to their reputations. Yet they still went to court. Why?
The Lavra: Who is the master of the house?
Neither the authorities nor the OCU actually need Orthodox churches. What they need is to show who is in charge of them.