On December 10, 2025, a round table titled “Dialogue of Church, State and Society: Paths to Mutual Understanding” was held in Kyiv. The event was organized by the Sofia Brotherhood with the support of the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue. It brought together representatives of Churches from different jurisdictions, state institutions, the expert community, media, and civil society. Participants from various regions of Ukraine also joined the discussion online.
The aim of the meeting was to create a platform for an honest and professional discussion of complex issues in church–state relations in the context of war, and to explore practical ways of fostering mutual understanding within Ukrainian communities.
The participants were welcomed by the moderator of the meeting, Marina Burdeina, a member of the Brotherhood’s board, who emphasized the importance of the gathering as a space for dialogue. The Chairman of the Board, Fr. Oleksandr Sorokin, noted that today there is a particular need for formats that allow not only to speak, but also to truly hear one another.
Panel 1. Law and the State in the Sphere of Religious Relations
The first panel was moderated by religious journalist Tetiana Derkach, who outlined the multi-layered nature of current church–state relations. She stressed that the full-scale war has sharply intensified issues of religious freedom, public trust, and mutual responsibility, and warned against losing the value foundations of Ukrainian society.
Bishop Mykhail, Exarch of the Ecumenical Patriarch in Ukraine, emphasized the need for a clear distinction between the competences of the Church and the state. Excessive interference of one institution in the sphere of another has historically led to conflicts and today may only deepen division and societal vulnerability. He stressed that the Church should not respond to war with radicalization, but must preserve moral maturity and care for people.
Vita Tytarenko, advisor to the Deputy Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, highlighted the moral and ethical dimension of state decisions in the religious sphere. According to her, in the context of war it is important to avoid “collective responsibility” and not to turn security measures into instruments of pressure on believers. Those who have become carriers of hostile narratives need time for education; otherwise, they may retreat into “catacombs” and lose any possibility of dialogue with the state.
Viktor Yelenskyi, Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnopolitics and Freedom of Conscience, stressed that the state must simultaneously protect national security and guarantee freedom of conscience. The law on affiliation is not directed against believers, but against institutional dependence on a center in an aggressor state. The state should not interfere in theological matters, but has the right to demand transparency and compliance with the legal framework.
Maksym Vasin, member of the expert council of the State Service and Director for International Advocacy at IRF, focused on international standards and legal risks. He emphasized the importance of avoiding radical decisions that could lead to isolation or the underground existence of certain communities, which would only deepen the crisis and create opportunities for external manipulation.
Panel 2. Society, Church, and Communities: Practical Paths to Mutual Understanding
The second panel was moderated by Prof. Hennadii Khrystokin, Doctor of Philosophy, who emphasized that it was dedicated to developing practical mechanisms for dialogue and peaceful coexistence in communities.
Viacheslav Horshkov, Head of the Department for Religious Affairs at the State Service, stressed that the state must ensure equal conditions for all religious organizations and act strategically rather than punitively. He warned that direct bans only push groups into the “underground,” where the possibility of dialogue disappears.
Prof. Andrii Smyrnov, Doctor of Historical Sciences at the National University of Ostroh Academy, pointed to the absence of an official inter-jurisdictional dialogue and proposed for discussion an alternative to the Exarchate of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Ukraine—a model of an Orthodox metropolis under dual subordination to Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and Metropolitan Epiphanius of Kyiv. He also addressed the question of who could serve as an arbiter in complex inter-Orthodox processes in Ukraine, emphasizing that the state cannot and should not “solve all problems” between Churches, as this represents an ineffective paternalistic approach.
Fr. Rostyslav Khrupchyk, member of the Board of the Sofia Brotherhood, spoke about the responsibility of clergy. In his view, peaceful coexistence cannot be imposed from above—it is born within parishes, through the daily conduct of clergy. When communities become alienated or go underground, the space of trust and mutual influence disappears.
Ilona Sokolovska, editor-in-chief of the YouTube channel “Viche,” highlighted the role of media in reducing tensions. Media can either support a culture of dialogue or fuel conflicts, especially when local incidents are presented as nationwide crises. It is important to create explanatory formats and avoid sensationalism.
Key Conclusions of the Meeting
- Dialogue is key to preserving social unity in times of war.
- The state must act with restraint, maintaining a balance between security and religious freedom.
- The Church bears a special responsibility to prevent radicalization and to witness Christian values.
- Local initiatives are the most effective mechanism for building peace between communities.
- Media should remain a platform for honest conversation, not a tool for escalation.
The Sofia Brotherhood expresses its gratitude to all participants for their constructive discussion and support. The dialogue continues.
