A Temple or a Canvassing Station?
The current presidential campaign in Ukraine is rich in overwhelming and staggering surprises, laying bare good and bad things that have been kept away from the public eye for decades. For example, many people believe that there are few true patriots in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, especially among the parish clergy, deacons, priests, bishops, let alone the cloistered communities. This superficial and unjust view has been largely due to the overactive (if not scandalous) political activities of the UOC MP’s brotherhood leaders and certain “loudmouthed” (to quote Ivan the Terrible) religious media. But by far the most important reason is that UOC clergymen have never publicly distanced themselves from the statements and endless “religious processions” of these brotherhoods, which are often marked by anti-Ukrainianism.
Now we realize that our attitude is not entirely justified and that the divisions in Ukrainian society are not always along confessional (as well as geographic or linguistic) lines. Evidence of this is the following selection of abridged statements found on the Internet, issued by UOC believers and clergymen, who voice their attitudes toward the current situation and boldly assess the civic stand taken by their church.
One such statement was signed by dozens of UOC parish priests and parishioners (including Revs. Petro Zuyev, Bohdan Ohulchansky, Andriy Dudchenko; Yuri Chornomorets, Candidate of Theological Science; Yevhen Avramchuk, Candidate of Philosophical Science). It reads in part:
“Beloved Brothers and Sisters,
“We call on you to support your people and condemn those who are transgressing His Commandments by stealing millions of votes, spreading lies in the media, and who are even ready to violate the Commandment Thou shalt not kill. The Orthodox Church can and must support the defense of human rights and freedoms that are being ignored. Let us remember that Patriarch Paul of Serbia came out in support of his people, that Catholicos Ilia of the Orthodox Church of Georgia also supported his people despite the church’s anti-Western orientation. Peace and stability cannot be based on falsehood, violence, and bloodshed or the Lord will punish this country, its people, and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church...”
Rev. Bohdan Ohulchansky believes that establishing a resourceful reconciliatory authority is of great importance in this critical phase of Ukrainian history; this authority should remain above all confrontations, so that people representing different political platforms could appeal to it as an ethical and arbitrative authority. The Ukrainian Orthodox Church could become this authority for all confessions, considering that it is represented by over ten thousand parishes throughout Ukraine. This gives rise to a crucially important question: Are the church’s leaders capable of maintaining principled noninterference in politics and independence from political forces?
Temptation by power is one of the three temptations that Jesus overcame in the desert. In the last critical weeks of our history the church has been tempted by political forces that are playing their political games — hence the threat that the people will feel less confidence in the church. If it shows its support for either side, the church will lose its influence as well as the possibility to profess its ethical principles and its stand before the entire Ukrainian nation.
The chapter “The Church and Politics” in The Fundamentals of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church reads: “In the face of political divergences, controversies, and struggle, the church professes peace and cooperation among people who harbor various political views. It further admits the presence of various political persuasions among its bishops, parish clergy, and flock...” Further on we read this important passage: “The hierarchs and priests of the church — the church community at large — cannot take part in any political organizations or election campaigns by publicly supporting political organizations that campaign for a certain candidate, etc.”
The fact remains that the Orthodox Church has in fact been involved in the current political confrontation. Regrettably, we often substitute Gospel morals with corporate ethic rules; we support things we consider of benefit to our church community from the material standpoint or in terms of social influence. Whether designated goals are reached using ethical means is of minor importance. Even more regrettably, such goals may be reached by building up social tensions, with the opposing side refusing to accept the Orthodox Church. We must pray for peace and accord. We must not turn our temples and pulpits into battlegrounds for people with different views. Inner unity, faith, and charity are our most important tasks.
Sviatoslav Rechynsky believes that the current presidential campaign has laid bare a number of scandalous phenomena of our times. Perhaps the worst is the ease with which the powers that be have sacrificed the soul of the people and their church. The regime is trying to present the Orthodox Church as a live shield, a hostage of their survival. Another sad fact is that a number of clergymen have swallowed the bait and become involved in what they should have stayed away from by the dictates of their conscience and faith.
The official propaganda machine has introduced a series of myths into the ecclesiastical milieu, which myths are being actively promulgated by church marginals. Most of these myths may be found in various statements and messages issued by the Union of Orthodox Citizens of Ukraine (incidentally, this organization has been operating without the blessing of UOC hierarchs). Myth One: Yushchenko is a national extremist and Uniate protОgО (although he has never declared his affiliation to the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church and is Eastern Orthodox). Myth Two: If Yushchenko comes to power, the UOC will be persecuted. However, the policy of the Strength of the Nation Coalition is based precisely on building a political system in Ukraine, where no one could ever crowd out or oppress anyone. According to the third myth, which is being actively disseminated among believers, no one should vote for Yushchenko because he has been twice married. In the first place, Ukraine is a secular polity, and a second marriage can hardly be considered an obstacle on the road to presidency. Also, it’s his private life and we are electing a president, not a patriarch.
The fact that a number of pastors have fallen prey to the propaganda machine is damaging primarily to the flock, as these people will convey their distrust of such clergymen to the whole church. A great many examples of this attitude could be cited. People stop going to church because they hear canvassing speeches instead of sermons. People go to church to communicate with the Lord, not with canvassers clad in cassocks.
A group of young UOC MP activists sent an open letter to Metropolitan Volodymyr (Sabodan):
“Your Eminence,
“Your inspired and penetrating Message to the Presidential Candidates of Ukraine and to the Electorate was made public knowledge on November 14, 2004, in which the church world heard the quintessence of your pastoral stand. However, two weeks earlier, the Inter Channel broadcast your interview in which you recalled, among other things, having given your blessing only to candidate V.F. Yanukovych, and that you saw in him ‘a true Orthodox believer worthy of becoming head of state.’ Almost immediately after your interview UOC parishes became venues of canvassing efforts in support of V. F. Yanukovych...”
The open letter cites a number of irrefutable examples of church pulpits being used as campaign podiums and of believers who support opposition candidates being driven away from churches: “We are witnesses to a gruesome division of parishioners and priests, since there are people in the canonical church who have cast their ballots for the government-nominated and opposition candidates. However, portraying one as a champion of Orthodoxy and the other as a servant of the devil means only one thing: sowing the seeds of discord among people...What harm would have come to the UOC had it kept a neutral independent stand during the election campaign? Does anyone seriously believe that the church could have suffered because of its balanced position? Meanwhile, by odiously backing a single presidential candidate the church will inevitably lose its prestige and its missionary activities will suffer.”
