Joinfo.ua - News Online Edition Independent on the Truth

On November 13, the article "UOC MP complains to the Council of Europe of "mistreatment” by the Ukrainian authorities" was published on the site http://joinfo.ua/. By the amount of false information, ignorance of the specifics of church life and general illiteracy of the text, this is material №1 in the last few months. 

Nevertheless, it has been actively reposted on Facebook and in other social networks. The UOJ editorial decided to thoroughly analyze the material in order to demonstrate the level of polemics and competence of some of the opponents of the UOC. All the more so, as they mentioned the name of our organization in their…so-called text. 

 The article starts with a fake subtitle. "Leaders of the UOC-MP complained to the Council of Europe of the mistreatment by the Ukrainian authorities," - say the authors. However, neither the Metropolitan Onufriy nor members of the Holy Synod of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, who somehow fall under the definition of leaders (for this word can hardly be applied to the church), do not appear in the text. 

 There mentioned the human rights defender Oleg Denisov, the leader of the NGO "The Forpost Association" and an activist of the association "Public Advocacy". This person really protects the rights of believers of the UOC, but has no relation to the management of the canonical Orthodox Church.  

 The authors of the article refer to a mystery "source in the diocese." Noteworthy is that the “diocese” is mentioned in the singular. Obviously, the journalists of joinfo.ua are not aware that there are 50 dioceses in the UOC! Or they hint that in each diocese they have their own "source"? Or maybe they just confused a diocese with an archdiocese? This often happens to those who have a rather vague idea about the church.  

 The journalists of joinfo.ua assert that in late October O.Denisov had several appointments "with representatives of the Council of Europe in Vienna (Austria)." And he did it, "executing instructions and with the financial support of the senior clergy of the UOC MP." Why not of Patriarch Kirill or Putin personally?  

 Denisov did visit Austria in October. It was even written on the official website of the "Public Advocacy» (http://www.protiktor.com/). Only he met there not with the representatives of the Council of Europe but the OSCE members (http://www.osce.org/odihr/188076). We wonder who screwed up this thesis and confused the Council of Europe with the OSCE - the mystery "source" or joinfo.ua?  

 Then the authors use a remarkable passage, which we cite: "During the meetings, he spread biased information about the "mistreatment of the clergy and the faithful of the UOC-MP by the authorities." To ground his position, he used thematic materials developed by journalists of the pro-Russian public organization "The Union of Orthodox Journalists" and the TV channel "The First Cossack.'"  

 For the notice of joinfo.ua: "thematic materials" for us, as well as for the colleagues from "The First Cossack", were provided by radically-minded activists of the Right Sector, who, with a wave of a wand, always appear where a raider seizure of a church is being planned. By soldiers of the battalion "Ternopil", who in Katerynivka village on camera beat peaceful believers of the UOC going with a prayer to their church. The materials were provided by a local princeling from the village of Uhryniv, who evicted the priest with minors out of his house, where he had lived for more than 17 years. By residents of Ptycha village, who took over the UOC church and made a bog house of it. 

 We just fix what is happening in the video and photo. As for the biased writing, it relates more to the article of joinfo.ua, in which there is neither truth nor understanding of the situation. 

 A perfect example of this biased approach is the following thesis. "…in passing of the UOC MP parishes under the jurisdiction of the UOC-KP, in most cases conflicts arise due to the UOC clergy showing reluctance in making a compromise solution, in particular,  the introduction of alternate service in places of worship." 

 The so-called "transition" is an illegal phenomenon. Church raiders infringe on non-owned property in most cases. They, in fact, commit a criminal offense. So, "in most cases conflicts arise," not because of " the UOC clergy showing reluctance in making a compromise solution”, but because of the criminal activities of the representatives of the UOC-KP and local authorities. 

 Regarding alternate divine service, in one of his interviews, the Chancellor of the UOC, Metropolitan Anthony gave a comprehensive answer: "Imagine that you have built a house at your own cost and expense. You spared neither effort nor time on it. One day your neighbours come to you and say that according to the general decision of the village meeting your house should go to them. You, of course, feel outraged and stand up for your rights. After a certain period of time you receive a new proposal. As a compromise, you are asked to provide alternate accommodation in your house. For example, on even days, you live in it, and on the odd ones - claiming neighbours. Will you agree to this proposal? I am sure you won’t." 

 At last, the “spiciest” detail is in the last passage: "... among the priests of the UOC the following information is disseminated - for such a" principled stand" they will receive the money reward of $20-30 thousand from the "benefactors". That is, no one pays money - simply spreads information. And this information is enough to keep the UOC priests from alternate worship. 

 Dear journalists of joinfo.ua (hope you didn’t make a bad bargain, and asked for the decent price for this ridiculous hackwork), we will open you a terrible secret. The priests of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church do not want to minister in a church on a turn-basis with the UOC-KP because the latter, in terms of the canonical Orthodox, are schismatics. That is, those who have rejected the true teaching of Mother Church for the sake of political ambitions. And no amount of money will change this fact.

Written by: Yaroslav Nivkin

Read also

Autonomy of the UOC and removal of the Donetsk Metropolitan

On October 24, 2024, the ROC Synod decided to release Metropolitan Ilarion from the see of the Donetsk Eparchy and retire him. What does this decision mean for the UOC?

What secrets about the UOJ did the SBU uncover through its agent?

Recently, UOJ staff members Andriy Ovcharenko, Valeriy Stupnytskyi, and Volodymyr Bobecko, as well as priest Serhiy Chertylin, received indictments on charges of treason.

Three mysterious synods: What was decided in relation to the UOC?

This week, sessions of three synods of different Orthodox Churches were held. What did they decide regarding the existence of the Church in Ukraine?

Cherkasy Cathedral seized, what's next?

On 17 October 2024, supporters of the OCU seized the Cathedral in Cherkasy. How can events unfold, and what could this mean for the Church?

Faith against violence: Chronicle of the UOC cathedral seizure in Cherkasy

On 17 October 2024, OCU followers seized the UOC cathedral in Cherkasy. How did it happen, and what conclusions can we draw from this event?

The arson of a UOC temple, or Once again about “free transitions” to OCU

In late September, supporters of the OCU burnt down a UOC church in Volyn. How is this arson related to the myth of “free transitions” from the UOC to the OCU?