Raider masterclass from OCU in Cherkasy on misappropriation
OCU representative Ioann Yaremenko recorded a video from Met. Theodosiy's office, showing how he uses the metropolitan’s personal belongings. What does this mean?
On 17 October 2024, a group of raiders dressed in military uniforms and wearing yellow armbands seized the cathedral of the UOC in Cherkasy beating believers and Metropolitan Theodosiy. The video of the violence orchestrated by representatives of the OCU during the "free transition" of the UOC temple to the jurisdiction of the Dumenko organization undoubtedly circulated worldwide.
Naturally, even among "patriotically-minded" individuals, a number of questions arose. First of all, how, from the point of view of the Gospel, can one justify the lawlessness that took place in and around the cathedral of the UOC in Cherkasy on 17 October? The foul language, the use of tear gas and traumatic weapons, the looting of church property and extreme brutality against ordinary parishioners who came to defend the shrine – all this appeared as wild and inexplicable rage but hardly anything resembling Christianity.
And so, apparently to explain his group’s brutality to the "patriotically-minded" public and to justify the actions of his "raiding gang", "metropolitan" Ioann Yaremenko decided to record a video with evidence of Metropolitan Theodosiy's "crimes".
According to Yaremenko, demonstrating a stack of books with the word "Russia" on their title pages should, once and for all, convince Ukrainian society that all actions against UOC believers are necessary, justified and "blessed".
But instead of convincing “evidence” of Metropolitan Theodosiy’s extremism, Yaremenko once again showed us that he is merely a representative of an ordinary band of robbers who do not shy away from others' property.
How does someone else's property become “one's own”?
Let's imagine this situation a little differently. A group of people, having beaten up the owner of the house, his wife and children, take over the dwelling. Then the leader of the bandits, who took away the person's private property, records a video in which he resents the fact that the owner of the house read the wrong books, and this, allegedly, gave him the right to take away the house.
Ridiculous, you say? But that's exactly what Yaremenko did!
It should be noted that the UOC cathedral in Cherkassy is a private property (!!!), the owner of which is not a religious community but the eparchial administration. That means that any forceful actions to change the owner are illegal and should be prosecuted by law. In other words, in any normal state, law enforcement agencies should have prosecuted Yaremenko for robbery.
On the other hand, even if we assume for a moment that the church in Cherkasy is not private property, that the UOC community voted to move to the OCU (which did not happen), and that everything occurred without violence and in accordance with the laws established under Poroshenko, meaning that the “procedure” was followed, the question arises: under what law did Metropolitan Theodosiy's personal belongings become the property of Yaremenko? What procedure were the representatives of the OCU following when they brazenly robbed the bishop's office? Because even if all procedural aspects were observed, the books in Metropolitan Theodosiy's personal office are his property, which he had every right to take with him.
The fact that he was not allowed to take his personal belongings (which include panagias, vestments, and many other items for which the bishop and his close ones paid money) indicates that no 'free' transition took place, nor could it have. It was an ordinary raider seizure, or simply – robbery.
What’s in the books?
It seems that any normal person understands that a private library is a strictly personal matter; what goes on the shelf is the owner's right. This is the case throughout the democratic world.
But Yaremenko believed that since he seized the building of the UOC eparchial administration, which housed Metropolitan Theodosiy's office, he could treat this foreign office as if it were his own home. In Yaremenko's view, the seizure gives him complete authority over the appropriated assets. Moreover, he is so confident in his impunity that he even records a video of himself using that property!
But, of course, this did not stop Yaremenko – he needed to create an image of the “fearsome” UOC, and any means, even the most absurd, would do. He should first be interested in what private property is, as well as the right to freedom of thought and speech, before discussing what books can or cannot be kept in a personal (we emphasize) library. Because while freedom of speech and thought may seem simple concepts, it appears they are not clear to everyone.
Falsification and manipulation
Another telling aspect of this entire story is how clumsily and rudely it was organized. Instead of using real seals on the books taken from the library of Vladyka Theodosiy, Yaremenko and his supporters stole the seal of St. Martyr Daniel Mliyevsky Fund, the head of which is the vicar bishop of the Cherkasy Eparchy, Bishop Antoniy.
But the trick failed: the press service of the Cherkasy Eparchy immediately exposed the deception. Dumenko's representatives were too hasty in pulling this whole thing off – as they say, they wanted to deceive everyone, but they came out on themselves.
Frankly speaking, one can marvel at the absurdity of it all. Gross falsifications and manipulations instead of real evidence. Is it really so difficult to understand that such “tricks” do no honour either the OCU or their self-appointed “metropolitans”? They only disgrace themselves and show their true face to everyone. Because it turns out that in Cherkasy, and in other cities where such “transitions” take place, there is nothing voluntary – everything is decided with the help of such ridiculous performances, pressure and force.
Where is the much-trumpeted “freedom” of religion?
Now let's talk about what resonates loudly at every turn – “free transition” from the UOC to the OCU. It would seem that, according to the same representatives of the OCU, everything that is happening is a matter of personal choice of believers.
But the reality shows that this is about seizure and manipulation rather than “freedom”. What kind of personal choice is it if people are forced to leave their temple with blows of clubs?
Unfortunately, behind the loud words about “freedom of choice”, there is a banal desire to get hold of someone else's property – and nothing else. Instead of building its church activity on the principles of spirituality, the OCU shows itself only as an organisation that tries to seize other people's property by all means. If they really cared about believers, they would act honestly, respect the right to choose and the very principles of religion and freedom.
The funny thing is, Yaremenko doesn't even seem to fully understand what he's doing. Because during his video broadcast he also managed to hint that the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) allegedly “didn't do a good job” by not finding “extremist” literature in Metropolitan Theodosiy’s possession. Yes, you heard that right: Yaremenko's actions suggest that the SBU is to blame for the fact that during numerous searches it failed to find a whole heap of books that Yaremenko had easily “discovered”.
The myth of voluntary transitions and the true face of the OCU
What remains in the end? The seizure of the UOC cathedral in Cherkasy and all these manipulations have clearly shown that there can be no talk of a “free transition”. The OCU uses pressure, seizures and manipulations to take what does not belong to them. And common people, ordinary parishioners, remain only victims in this ridiculous performance.
We can only hope that the ordinary Ukrainian people will finally see the real intentions of the OCU and realise that the basis of these “transitions” is not “voluntariness” but intimidation and deception; and behind the beautiful words about “national Ukrainian Church”, there is a thirst for profit and power.
