The last year in Ukraine turned out to be challenging and full of conflicts. The war seemed to have become an image of our life and thinking. It brought the conflicts to life, exposed the nerves, opened old wounds, triggered intolerance and the search for the enemy, made us feel angry, yet most importantly, it persuaded us that there were simple solutions to complex issues – everything seemed to be divided into two extremes: black and white, us and them. Amid this polarization of thinking, society demands maximum clarity and certainty. Any secrets, uncertainties and misconceptions, negligence and even silence that have two possible interpretations cause irritation and suspicion in the public mind. We must all stand together to defeat the Russian invaders by joint efforts.
What place does Russian culture hold in the public sphere of Ukraine? In the face of Russian aggression, society responds intensely to the presence of the Russian language and culture in the country’s public space. It becomes a trigger and is identified as a threat when it is associated symbolically with aggression in the minds of Ukrainians. The framework of using the Russian language is marked by personal life, it can be found in public space, but it becomes a challenge when the public positioning of Russian identity turns into a pretense of political significance.
How does religious symbolism fit into the public space of Ukraine? Ukrainians have no objections to any kind of religiosity and faith as a private matter – they not only speak and pray in Ukrainian, but also in Russian. A problem emerges when religious symbolism comes into conflict with socio-political symbolism. Religion is supposed to contribute to the social order, but in no way should the language of religion stir up and generate social conflict. While it is bad when the symbolic language of religion does not meet public expectations, it is most conflicting when religion shows public disrespect for civic sacredness, when it does not condemn aggression, shows no respect for the dead, expresses no mourning for mass casualties, does not help release prisoners, but rather avoids expressing a frank position regarding the war and associates itself with Russian identity.
What is the current status of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church? It has found itself in a situation in which several power lines have combined to cause conflict. In general, there is an understanding in society that thousands of communities do not want to move to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine – this is their right and they are not persecuted in Ukraine. But conflict emerges when the rhetoric of the Church’s speakers and its decisions violate the symbolic field of social harmony, when they seem provocative. An example would be the inconsistent decisions of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church Convocation of May 2022, which left the question of dependence from the Russian Orthodox Church unanswered, and thus, in times of war, such uncertainty is perceived as concealing ties with the Church of the aggressor country.
What are society’s expectations of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church? The crisis could have been resolved if the behavior of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church leaders had been clearer and more open. The society would have been more understanding of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church if its leadership had directly addressed the country, admitted its faults, told a clear truth about the prospects for relations with the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, condemned the aggressive statements of the Russian Orthodox Church speakers, and dissociated itself from the activities of outright collaborators. In contrast, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church fails to communicate with society and the authorities, and speakers who are tainted in the eyes of society by their timeserving and sympathy for the “Russian world” come to the fore.
What is the position of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church toward the state? The UOC is making a huge mistake when it presents the escalation of the conflict as revenge from the state, which allegedly decided to “take the Lavra away” out of nothing and is contributing to the “commandeering” of churches. The reality is that we are witnessing a misunderstanding between structures that have different symbolic interests in Ukraine. The main thing for the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is to preserve corporate unity, to retain all its resources and presence in all territories, thus the fate of society and the state is secondary to it. The “canonicity” narrative prevailing in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is intended to oppose the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, which is not a church for the UOC leadership. Instead, the authorities’ interest is the unity of all Orthodox Christians, who are supposed to become part of an integrated Ukraine consolidated for victory.
What is the attitude of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church toward society? The conflict between the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and civil society is the central issue. Over the past ten years, Ukrainian society has changed dramatically from a post-Soviet mentality to a European one, has gone a long way in transformations caused by the events of Revolution of Dignity and Russian aggression, while the leadership of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church remained unchanged. What we are witnessing here is basically a conflict caused by the church leadership’s lagging in response to public demands and sentiments.
What is the position of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church leadership? It is trapped in its own prejudices, which have been formed over a long period of time, based on the fear of a schism and loss of power. They firmly believe that “whoever is not with us is against us,” whoever is not in our structure is a schismatic. They claim ecclesiastical and political ideologies about “Holy Rus”, “one nation and one church” as the Gospel of Christ. Meanwhile, society does not care about structures, it values the decency and solidarity of ministers who see human suffering and are ready to make drastic decisions for the sake of God’s love and truth.
What does Ukrainian society stand for? Ukrainian society remains tolerant; it agrees with the existence of a wide variety of religious beliefs and confessions. But when it witnesses no solidarity with the people’s pain, it comes to the conclusion that the Church, which calls itself Ukrainian, is not fulfilling its direct functions in front of God. Ukrainians have a simple request for the Church’s vocation: the Orthodox Church in Ukraine should be in solidarity with the Ukrainian struggle for freedom and should not be in union with the Church of the aggressor country!
How do Orthodox believers and priests feel? Many of them are torn between their duties to the Church of Christ and to church structures. They are hurt by the position of their own leadership, and therefore they do not oppose the dialog. However, many of them still have questions: how to see the other as an equal, how to recognize another church as canonical? An existential choice is needed here: to recognize the other church as an equal one. Not to take refuge behind the precepts of tradition, not to remember grievances, but to work together for the eternal and living service of God in the conditions of war. The church has a responsibility to the present, and Christians need to take a courageous step and declare our commitment to one Christ in a unified Ukraine, but we need to achieve church unity.
Which theological position does the Ukrainian Orthodox Church take? The assessment of the situation by the Ukrainian Orthodox Church leaders is significantly influenced by their theological position. Theology is the only option to resolve the contradiction between the challenges of life and tradition. The position of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church leaders is extremely conservative; they profess theological fundamentalism and isolationism. Those who do not share the belief in their own model of ecclesiology are regarded to be schismatics. The position of theological authoritarianism is disguised in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church by the rhetoric of defending piety and fidelity to the canons. In fact, this is a hidden repressive rhetoric of power usurpation that is potentially conflict-prone.
What is the extent to which the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is ready for change? The problem lies in the fact that there may be clergy and faithful in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church who disagree with the leadership, there may be people who are willing to engage in dialogue, but this has little effect on the leadership style and decisions of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. No fundamental changes should be expected as long as it is led by the current team. They will continue to preserve and isolate the Church from society and the state, positioning themselves as victims of persecution and oppression. It is not the way to resolve the conflict.
Has the Orthodox Church of Ukraine been ready for a dialog? Having received the support of the authorities and the Tomos, the Orthodox Church of Ukraine has received a huge advance for the future. In the symbolic media field, it actively advertises that it is a people’s, Ukrainian, patriotic church, and it is perceived by the majority as a Ukrainian one because it forms the Ukrainian identity. However, the Orthodox Church of Ukraine carries a heavy burden of the past: grievances, its own corporate interests, and a desire to seize the moment and expand its influence. This is not only an ideal goal, but also a hidden interest of the institution, which to some extent benefits from the situation with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church – now it seems that there is a just retribution for decades of humiliation. It is ready to engage in a dialogue with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church on its own terms, and is trying to speed it up in order to deprive its competitor of advantages. It is crucial that the Orthodox Church of Ukraine does not make mistakes in its interaction with the authorities, that it gets out of the conflict mindset paradigm, and that it does not alienate those priests and lay people who are ready to change jurisdiction with all its statements and actions.
What does society expect from the Church? It expects both institutions to forget about corporate interests, to unite for the sake of love, to make decisions that do not contradict the will of God and conscience. For the Church means not only canons, shrines, and corporate interests. The Church stands for the light of life, peace, and love, and is a medium of communion with Christ. The Church has repeatedly chosen new paths that changed it in the course of history, and those changes did not become a betrayal of the Truth and God. In fact, changes can be the way to preserve the Truth and be faithful to God!
Hennadii Khrystokin, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor