Rewarding liars: A "church" built on deception
While talking about their "openness" towards the UOC and readiness for dialogue, Dumenko and his colleagues are not telling the truth. Why?
The leaders of the OCU constantly say that their "Church" is open and ready for dialogue with the UOC. However, in reality, we see quite the opposite: behind the words of dialogue lie the seizure of churches, insults to the believers and hierarchs of the UOC and demands for the Ukrainian authorities to ban our Church. It turns out that when Dumenko and his colleagues talk about their "openness" towards the UOC, they are not telling the truth. Why?
Does the OCU want dialogue?
Answering this question is crucial because the Ecumenical Patriarchate, in creating the OCU, may not have had all the information about the structures it decided to legitimise. Perhaps, the Phanar became a victim of deception? But by the time they realised it, it was too late to correct anything? Possibly, but the consequences of this deception continue to build up. The picture of the outrages that OCU representatives commit against the UOC seriously worries the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
We remember that one of the reasons Patriarch Bartholomew decided to grant the Tomos to the "united" Church of Ukraine was for religious peace in our country and to overcome the schism that had lasted for almost three decades.
During negotiations with Phanar representatives, Denisenko, Zoria and other UOC-KP officials promised Patriarch Bartholomew that once the Tomos was granted, the faithful of Ukraine, entire eparchies (according to Filaret), would join the new structure. As we know, this did not happen. The faithful of the UOC remained in the canonical Church, and where there were "transfers" of individual communities, in most cases, crowbars and grinders were used by the OCU.
Moreover, this was so obvious that Dumenko and Denisenko had to lie in 2019 (when the lawlessness against the UOC was significantly less than now) that everything was happening "without violence". This lie was so evident that it was even refuted by the "metropolitan" of the OCU, Simeon Shostatsky.
In July 2019, he admitted that the statements by the head of the UOC-KP, Filaret Denisenko, and the head of the OCU, Epifaniy Dumenko, about allegedly peaceful "transfers" and the absence of seizures of UOC parishes were not true. Since then, the situation has only worsened. As a result, the "hierarchs" of Dumenko's structure have not achieved peace or even visible calm in the church, which cannot but worry the Phanar.
For this reason, in 2023, the Ecumenical Patriarchate decided to send a delegation to Ukraine to, as they say, understand the situation on the ground. However, as it became known recently, this delegation did not arrive in Ukraine because Dumenko did everything to dissuade Patriarch Bartholomew from this idea. In their correspondence, which became public, there is one very important passage. Dumenko, explaining to the Ecumenical Patriarch the "danger" of the delegation's presence in Ukraine, mentioned his colleague, Yevstratiy Zoria.
The fact is that shortly before that, Zoria had visited the Phanar and had a conversation with Patriarch Bartholomew. Dumenko assured the latter that "everything conveyed to you at this meeting in writing and in conversation is relevant." In other words, Epifaniy directly told the Phanar head that he had to take Zoria's word for it.
But... Can you trust people who too often act contrary to their words? We believe not. Because there is too much evidence that OCU representatives use lie to achieve their goals. Moreover, they not only use it themselves but also encourage others to use it. To prove this statement, we will provide one of the latest examples.
Awarding a person caught in lies
Not long ago, the head of the OCU, Epifaniy Dumenko, awarded the "journalist" Sonia (or Ksenia?) Koshkina with a medal from his organisation "For Love and Sacrifice to Ukraine". One could ignore such "inside dealings" among Dumenko's associates, if not for one "but": the Church does not award people just like that. In most cases, the Church wants to emphasize specific things with its award: 1) to encourage the activities of the person awarded in relation to the Church; 2) to urge others to follow their example.
For instance, if the Church awards a business philanthropist, it not only highlights their merits but also tells other businesspeople: "Take an example from this person and do acts of mercy as they do."
And the award to Sonia Koshkina should certainly emphasize her merits before the OCU and also encourage her "colleagues in the field" to follow her example. You may ask what Koshkina does. She is engaged in slander. And this is not just our opinion but a court ruling.
Shortly before the award, the Shevchenkivskyi District Court of Kyiv found Koshkina guilty of lying and fined her 20,000 hryvnias for slandering a UOC bishop. And after this, Epifaniy awarded her. Yes, there have been cases in our Church as well where hierarchs awarded unworthy people. But this happened due to a lack of full information about these people, not after a public accusation of crimes they themselves confirmed. Epifaniy deliberately awarded an immoral person—a liar. What does this mean?
Brief background
Let's recall that on November 25, while commenting on the searches conducted by the SBU in the building of the Chernivtsi Diocese of the UOC, Koshkina accused Archimandrite Nikita (who later became the Bishop of Ivano-Frankivsk) of being close to an underage singer in the episcopal choir. She dedicated a total of seven posts that day to this fabricated situation, in which she humiliated and defamed not only the innocent cleric of the UOC but also the Church itself.
Later, on December 15, 2022, during a press conference at the Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra, Bishop Nikita of Ivano-Frankivsk and Kolomyia said that he had filed a lawsuit over the slander.
During the court proceedings, it was found that the information spread by Koshkina was not true. She herself admitted (!!!) to spreading false information, i.e. lying. Regarding the Telegram channel Sonya Koshkina (official), the journalist’s lawyer claimed that Sonia Koshkina was not its owner and had nothing to do with it. However, the court found that Koshkina was indeed the owner of the Telegram channel where the slander was published.
The court ruled that the resource "Left Bank" and Sonia Koshkina personally must retract the information they had spread. The edition was also ordered to pay Bishop Nikita 10,000 UAH in moral damages and 2,200 UAH in court fees, while Sonia Koshkina had to pay the bishop 20,000 UAH in moral damages and 2,400 UAH in court fees.
We do not know to what extent the court's orders were fulfilled by the deceitful journalist, but we do know for certain that she ruined at least one life with her malicious lies—that of the very boy whose photograph was leaked to Koshkina by her SBU handlers. And yet, despite all this, Dumenko still awarded her. Why?
What can be built on lies?
The answer to this question was given by Christ 2000 years ago. When addressing the Jews who did not believe in Him, He said: "You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies" (John 8:44).
The foundation of Christian ethics lies in the pursuit of truth. Lies are considered one of the gravest sins, repeatedly condemned not only in the New Testament but also in the Old Testament. And Dumenko’s structure has been firmly associated with this vice from the very beginning. Judge for yourselves.
Even before the "Unification Council" of 2019, Filaret Denisenko conspired with Poroshenko and Epifaniy to deceive Patriarch Bartholomew. Filaret wanted the elected "primate" of the OCU, Epifaniy Dumenko, to be a merely decorative figure, while Filaret would continue to actually lead the organisation. Dumenko and Poroshenko promised the "elder" that this would be the case, but... they deceived him.
Here are Denisenko's own words: "There were agreements between me and the President, and with Epifaniy too. And not just between the three of us, but also with the hierarchs," said Filaret. "And at the Hierarchical Council, the same agreement was in place: that I would continue to manage the Church within Ukraine together with Epifaniy, while he would represent the Church in external relations. That was our agreement... We did not sign this agreement because I had confidence in them. I trusted the President, and I trusted Epifaniy. And they deceived me."
As a result, Epifaniy decided to truly manage the OCU, and at the very first "Synod" of the OCU, he even tried to retire Filaret. But this is not the only lie in the whole series of deceptions on which the OCU is based.
Because Patriarch Bartholomew, in turn, deceived Poroshenko, Dumenko and Denisenko by granting the Tomos under conditions that left only the name of the promised "full autocephaly" and in fact subordinated it to the Phanar.
Poroshenko deceived Simeon, promising him almost the primacy in the new structure. Simeon deceived his flock, assuring them that he would not join the new church.
Drabinko and Simeon deceived Poroshenko, promising that at least 10 bishops of the UOC would come to the "Unification Council" at St. Sophia’s (none came). The "Unification Council" deceived the Greeks by electing Dumenko as the primate, who does not have a legitimate ordination.
Journalists and the media deceived everyone by claiming that Ukrainians would start massively joining the OCU. The OCU deceived the expectations of its supporters, showing a decline in the number of parishioners instead of growth.
The Phanar deceived the OCU by promising recognition by the Local Churches... The amount of lies used by representatives or supporters of the OCU towards the UOC, history or reality can be listed endlessly. But even from what has been said, it is clear that Dumenko's entire structure is permeated with deceit. So why are we surprised by Koshkina's award?
Why shouldn't liars be rewarded?
Even in the context of the above-described events, awarding Sonia Koshkina, who was found guilty of slandering a UOC bishop, looks especially cynical. Actions like these by Dumenko further undermine even the minimal trust in his organisation because lies and slander clearly contradict fundamental Christian values.
When Dumenko's "Church" awards a person who has been exposed as a liar, it prompts believers to ask legitimate questions about the moral principles of those leading the OCU. How can the faithful trust their spiritual leaders if they encourage immoral behaviour?
Even those far from the Gospel, the ordinary believers of the OCU subconsciously understand that the Church is meant to lead its followers to the Truth, that is, to Christ. Lies, on the other hand, lead to spiritual degradation and complete alienation and separation from God.
Moreover, awarding a liar who has admitted their guilt can be perceived as an open signal that the OCU outright rejects the moral principles outlined in Holy Scripture. By taking up a grinder and a crowbar, representatives of this organisation have demonstrated through their actions that the Gospel means nothing to them, and by awarding Koshkina, they have documented this attitude.
Who rewards liars?
The question of the motives and moral qualities of those who decide to reward liars deserves special attention. If the leader of a "Church" rewards a person known for their lies, it may indicate that he himself does not adhere to the principles of truth. And this is not our assumption, but a conclusion made by Epifaniy’s own colleague.
On September 21, 2019, the "hierarch" of the UOC-KP, "Metropolitan" Ioasaf Shibaev of Belgorod, stated on his Facebook page that the "primate" of the OCU, Epifaniy Dumenko, is a liar. The "metropolitan" shared his impressions of the interview given by the head of the OCU to Inna Vedernikova, a journalist for the resource "Zerkalo Nedeli” (“Mirror of the Week"): "My main impression of this interview can be summed up briefly – a liar!!! How can he, after this lie, lead the Church? After all, all the hierarchs of the Kyiv Patriarchate know that he is lying! I understand the complexity of their current situation, but how long can their silence in response to their primate’s cynical lies continue?" Filaret Denisenko has also repeatedly said of Epifaniy's pathological lies.
Moreover, awarding Koshkina may indicate Epifaniy’s complicity in spreading lies and slander against the UOC. In other words, all the filth that Ksenia (as stated in the medal document) Koshkina has poured onto the UOC over the years is something Dumenko approves of. That’s why he "appreciated" her with an OCU award.
Additionally, awarding Koshkina might be related to attempts to strengthen the significantly weakened political or social positions of the OCU, even at the expense of moral principles (if they exist). In this case, we once again have to state that the spiritual foundations of Christian life, the truths of the Gospel and the teachings of the Church Fathers come second in the OCU, yielding to political interests.
Conclusion
What do we have in the end? From a Christian perspective, the awarding of individuals like Koshkina indicates serious moral problems within Dumenko’s organisation, which is willing to encourage lies and slander in hopes of strengthening its position in Ukrainian society.
In reality, such actions only further erode trust in the OCU with the average person, clearly indicating that this organisation is not a true Church. Essentially, rewarding a slanderer can only be done by someone who does not adhere to the principles of truth and morality. The examples of lies at the foundation of the OCU's creation and operation only confirm that Koshkina's award is no accident but reflects deep problems within this structure.
Moreover, the medal awarded to a slanderer tells us that the OCU does not hesitate to use any methods in its struggle against the UOC. And if today they give medals for slander, what will they award for tomorrow?
