"Captured" raiders or How the OCU Synod calls black white
The OCU Synod adopted a Statement in which it turned everything upside down: the UOC communities were called invaders, while the raiders were called victims.
"Woe to those who call evil good and good evil,
who put darkness for light and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter" (Isa. 5:20).
On May 24, 2021, the OCU Synod adopted a Statement, the essence of which boils down to two main messages:
- supporters of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church seize the temples of the OCU;
- the leadership of the OCU peacefully urges them not to do this.
This Statement did not emerge out of nowhere. Throughout its short (since December 2018) existence, the OCU not only systematically engaged in the violent seizure of the churches of the UOC and the illegal re-registration of communities in favor of the OCU, but also quite openly asked for help from both the Ukrainian authorities and ... American diplomats. More details can be found in the article "Blessing" of patrons for further seizures of temples received?"
Calling a bandit a victim: it's ingenious!
For two and a half years, the facts of violent seizures have already reached a hundred, with corresponding photos and videos, with specific victims, with recorded beatings and statements to law enforcement agencies. At first, the OCU tried to cover up all this very unassuming church raiding activity with the streamlined word "transitions". But now this has already turned out to be insufficient, because even the supporters of the OCU ask themselves a question: what kind of “transitions” are these, in which people are smashed in blood, and women and old people are trampled in the mud? Video materials of such transitions are abundant on the Internet. So it was indeed necessary to do something, since such a picture can discredit anyone, let alone an organization that calls itself the "Christian Church". Eventually, the spokesman of the OCU Ivan (Eustratiy) Zoria did not come up with anything smarter than to accuse the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of seizing churches and expelling the communities of the OCU. Roughly speaking, Zoria called the bandit a victim and the victim a bandit. He published his "brilliant" idea on his Facebook page on May 13, 2021.
Zoria did not come up with anything smarter than to accuse the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of seizing churches and expelling the communities of the OCU. Roughly speaking, Zoria called the bandit a victim and the victim a bandit
However, Zoria’s solo efforts were not enough to ventilate the topic with accusations of the UOC of "seizures", therefore and on May 24, a whole synod of the OCU gathered and adopted the aforementioned Statement, the quintessence of which can be embedded in the following words:
“Since the moment of the Unification Council and the formation of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, there has been systemic pressure on religious communities from supporters of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine that wish to follow the Tomos of autocephaly of the OCU, to be a part of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine and fulfill their aspirations at their own general meeting in accordance with the legislation of Ukraine.
This pressure is manifested in acts of seizure of churches that belong to the OCU communities, obstruction of the use of their property and the performance of divine services by OCU communities, in informational, legal and coercive pressure of the supporters of the ROC in Ukraine on the OCU communities and their individual members, spreading lies about conflicts in which the OCU are involved by the supporters of the Moscow Patriarchate.”
First, the OCU synod denounces itself as a lie from the very first words of this quote. After all, if, according to the leadership of the OCU, “supporters of the ROC in Ukraine” have been seizing the churches of the OCU since the so-called Unification Council on December 15, 2018, then why did the OCU leadership remain silent about this for 2.5 years?! Why haven't there been any statements? However, the leadership of the OCU in this respect shows itself to be worthy students of “worthy” teachers, viz. the Patriarchate of Constantinople, which was happy for 300 years since the transfer of the Kiev Metropolis to the jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate in 1686 but then suddenly woke up to accuse the ROC of alleged violations of the terms of this transfer.
Second, the leadership of the OCU uses the terms “supporters of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine” and “supporters of the Moscow Patriarchate,” completely unaware that anything that is fits in oral discourse can be inappropriate in official documents. Perhaps someone in Ukraine considers themselves to be “supporters of the Moscow Patriarchate,” but such people are not united in any organization. In other words, as much as the leadership of the OCU would like to, there is neither the ROC in Ukraine, nor the Moscow Patriarchate as registered organizations in Ukraine. In order for these accusations to have a specific addressee, it was necessary to indicate the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in the Statement, but the OCU cannot do this, since they themselves claim this name. Therefore, the Statement of the OCU Synod with accusations is just a shot into nowhere.
As much as the leadership of the OCU would like to, there is neither the ROC in Ukraine, nor the Moscow Patriarchate as registered organizations in Ukraine.
Third, if one believes the OCU synod that supporters of the UOC are massively seizing the churches of their structure, then why are these same supporters building new churches for themselves next to those they allegedly seized? There are a lot of testimonials on how the UOC community concedes the temple building to the actual invaders from the OCU and builds a new temple for worship instead of the seized one. All this clearly shows who actually the raider is.
Fourth, anyone who reads such accusations immediately has a question – where are the facts? Where are the facts of specific seizures of specific churches of the OCU by specific supporters of the UOC? They simply do not exist in reality! So the synod of the OCU has to dodge and stuff the text with general phrases such as "seizure of the temples of the OCU communities ...", "obstruction of the use by the OCU communities of their property ...", "in informational, legal and forceful pressure ...", "spreading lies ..." and so on...
Now listen up! We give a hint to Ivan (Eustratiy) Zoria, Sergei (Epiphany) Dumenko and others how to substantiate that the “seizures” of the OCU churches by the parishioners of the UOC are still taking place. This is no-brainer. It is necessary to recall the interview of Sergei Dumenko to Radio Liberty on April 24, 2021, in which he stated that ALL Orthodox churches in Ukraine belong to the OCU.
It follows from this statement that if any community of the UOC uses any temple for worship, then it is the “invader” of the OCU temple by the above definition. There is no need to prove anything.
Another quote from the Statement of the OCU Synod: "The determination (self-determination) of the jurisdictional affiliation of the community begins from the moment the relevant decision is made by the general meeting of the religious community." Here are just the decisions of this very "general meeting of the religious community" about the transition to the OCU, an extremely small number, several dozen. In all other cases, what the OCU tries to pass off as the decision of the "general meeting of the religious community" is in fact the decision of the general meeting of the territorial community, i.e. residents of the locality. As the head of the Legal Department of the UOC, Archpriest Alexander Bakhov, explained, “Today decisions (on the transition – Ed.) are made at territorial gatherings with the participation of persons who have nothing to do with the religious community of the UOC. This suggests that there was no transition, since it was not parishioners who voted, but people who call themselves members of a religious community just because they simply live in this settlement."
In layman’s terms, Fr. Alexander called the statement of the OCU synod "the cry of a robber, from whom the loot is taken and returned to its rightful owner!"
"The statement of the OCU synod is like the cry of a robber, from whom the loot is taken and returned to its rightful owner."
Head of the Legal Department of the UOC, Archpriest Alexander Bakhov
How the Dumenko’s manipulation of Sutkovtsy was elevated to the level of the "synod"
In its Statement, the OCU Synod tried to cite a specific court decision in its favor: “On April 6, 2021, a session of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court was held to consider case No. 910/10011/19 of the legality of the change by the religious community of Sutkivtsi village of the Khmelnytsky region of their subordination – exit from the jurisdiction of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine (which calls itself the UOC) and entry into the Orthodox Church of Ukraine. Based on the results of the meeting, a decision was made on the legality of such a change in its jurisdictional status.
Thus, for the first time since the beginning of the active process of transitions of religious communities of Ukraine from the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, the Supreme Court of Ukraine adopted a decision that confirmed the possibility and legality of such transitions and rejected the objection of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine against this.”
In fact, this is nothing more than a gross manipulation, which was long ago exposed by the Legal Department of the UOC, which explained in its message that the Supreme Court did not at all make a decision that would legitimize the transfer of the UOC parishes to the OCU, it only “refused to satisfy the claim due to the plaintiff’s inappropriate way to protect its rights, not because of the legality of the re-registration of the religious community of the UOC.” The court in its decision indicated that the consideration of this category of cases belongs to economic jurisdiction and there was no "legalization" at all.
Back in early April, when the Supreme Court announced the decision to deny the UOC community to defend its rights, Sergei (Epiphany) Dumenko trumpeted a "victory" in Sutkivtsi but did not publish the text of the decision itself, which indicated the grounds for such a decision. After the text was published, everything fell into place. So the head of the Legal Department of the UOC, Archpriest Alexander Bakhov, on the basis of this text, stated that the UOC community in the village of Sutkivtsi would continue to defend its rights and would once again go to courts, considering the remarks set forth in this decision of the Supreme Court.
How embarrassing it will be for the OCU synodals when the Holy Protection community of the UOC in the village of Sutkivtsi, Khmelnytsky region, will be able to secure achieve the protection of their rights to freedom of religion in the courts! However, the OCU is used to being embarrassed.
Why did the "synodals" not condemn the seizures of the Kharkiv "hierarch" from the Kharkiv "hierarch"?
And in conclusion, I would like to ask why the OCU synod, accusing the UOC of the seizing its churches, did not say anything about the conflict in its own Kharkiv diocese, where in early April 2021 the OCU "archbishop" Afanasy Shkurupiy accused the OCU "archbishop" Mitrofan Butynsky of raider seizure of the parishes of the Kharkiv deanery and called this activity "devil's sabbath"?
“Friends, pray! Today, on the week of the Cross, before the Holy Cross, the devil arranged a Sabbath in the parishes of Sokoliv and Tsirkuniv in the Kharkiv region and with the hands of their rectors, Fr. Stanislav Ashtrafyan and Fr. Oleg Kozub, whom I temporarily removed from their office, organized a rebellion with the aim of transferring parishes to another diocese," wrote Afanasy Shkurupiy on his Facebook page and accused his “counterpart” Mitrofan Butynsky of organizing the raiding.
Why is the OCU Synod silent about these seizures? Why doesn't it blame anyone? What double standards, as I live and breathe?!
Well, and the very last quote from the Statement of the OCU Synod: "Taking this opportunity, the Holy Synod once again calls on the leadership of the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine <...> to start a constructive dialogue with the Orthodox Church of Ukraine."
This "constructive dialogue" has been on for a long while now and began with a simple appeal from the UOC to the entire OCU and to each of its members individually: "... repent of your sins and turn to God, for the Kingdom of Heaven is near" (Matthew 4:17). There has been no response yet. Moreover, judging by the actions of the schismatics, they are moving further and further away from repentance.
