Archpriest Serhii Prokopchuk, Director of the Office of the Brotherhood of Saint Sophia
It is usually accepted to defend the corporate interests of the community you belong to; this is called “corporate solidarity.” People also say: “Don’t air your dirty laundry in public.”
But when this corporate solidarity leads to the destruction of the Church that is your spiritual home and provokes even greater aggression from a country that seeks to annihilate us, a question arises: “Should we remain in solidarity with those whose actions or inactions provoke this destruction?”
The principle of conciliarity was embedded in the Church from the beginning to prevent the sinful will of any one person from dominating the life of the Church. All people are weak and subject to mistakes and negative influences, so it is dangerous to rely solely on the will of a single person. The foundation of the Church is the will of God, which is revealed to us through the conciliar wisdom of the Church. That is why adherence to the principles of conciliarity minimizes the negative consequences of autocratic forms of church governance. This applies to all levels of church life: parish, diocese, and metropolia. Departing from the principles of conciliarity in church life — especially during a time of severe trials — can lead to catastrophic consequences.
Today, the entire UOC community is deeply concerned about the imperfection of its canonical status, relations with the Local Churches, their attitude toward our status, relations between the Church, society, and the state, and many other issues. These matters require deep reflection, discussion, and the adoption of appropriate decisions — not by a single person or a small circle in the Metropolia, but by the fullness of the Church.
On May 27, 2025, on the third anniversary of the Feofania Council, the faithful, clergy, and episcopate expected at least an episcopal council to be convened — to hear each ruling bishop share the situation in their diocese, to express their vision of ongoing processes, and to make a collective decision regarding the future of the UOC. Instead, we got a secret meeting of bishops at which some were allowed to speak while others were silenced.
We received a detailed account of what happened at this secret meeting. And the format of this highly important gathering cannot help but outrage the clergy, faithful, and bishops of our Church.
By the will of Metropolitan Onufriy, who presided over the meeting, it turned into a pietistic monologue by the infamous Metropolitan Feodosiy of Cherkasy, while bishops who wanted to present alternative views or suggestions were rudely silenced.
Two respected hierarchs of the UOC tried to ask Metropolitan Onufriy about the possibility of restoring contact — and, in the future, Eucharistic communion — with the Ecumenical Patriarch and other Local Churches with which it had been severed. They were not even allowed to fully voice their thoughts and ask about what truly worries thousands of priests and faithful of the UOC, namely:
How can we hope for the “moral support” of the Local Churches if we are in Eucharistic rupture with four of them?
Why is the issue of restoring communion with them not even on the agenda?
Who will grant us autocephaly if we really desire it, when Moscow refuses, and we don’t even appeal to the other Churches?
The meeting of bishops apparently did not anticipate the possibility of open and frank discussion. But by silencing ruling bishops, the meeting’s leader effectively silenced the clergy and faithful of their dioceses as well. This is unacceptable at a time when people in every parish are asking thousands of questions for which we cannot find answers.
“Your Beatitude, please explain why we cannot even try to establish relations with the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Local Churches?” asked one participant at the meeting. According to witnesses, bishops who raised such questions were rudely cut off and even mocked by the Primate and other bishops.
In our Church, all open discussion of urgent issues is deliberately blocked.
Instead, the “voice of the Church” becomes dead pieces of paper on the UOC website or infamous bishops who openly defend maintaining ties with the ROC.
“If the Local Churches want to hear our voice, our aspirations, let them read our website — everything is written there,” was roughly the answer given to some bishops. And also: “We have no right by protocol to contact the primates of the Local Churches, because only patriarchs address patriarchs, and metropolitans address metropolitans. That’s not our level of communication. His Beatitude is not the primate of a Local Church.” That, more or less, was the response given by the person who was graciously given the floor by His Beatitude that day to present the position.
It is already known that some UOC bishops refused to travel to the “meeting” in Feofania. Some who did attend were publicly rebuked and mocked. After the infamous Feofania-2, even more clergy and faithful of the UOC came to understand that today, for the UOC, conciliarity is nothing but a fiction, and the care of the Mother Church for them is a dream that may never come true.
The Church will stand, for its foundation is Christ. But will the UOC survive, when its foundation is authoritarianism and deceit?
Conciliarity Under Siege
Archpriest Serhii Prokopchuk, Director of the Office of the Brotherhood of Saint Sophia
It is usually accepted to defend the corporate interests of the community you belong to; this is called “corporate solidarity.” People also say: “Don’t air your dirty laundry in public.”
But when this corporate solidarity leads to the destruction of the Church that is your spiritual home and provokes even greater aggression from a country that seeks to annihilate us, a question arises: “Should we remain in solidarity with those whose actions or inactions provoke this destruction?”
The principle of conciliarity was embedded in the Church from the beginning to prevent the sinful will of any one person from dominating the life of the Church. All people are weak and subject to mistakes and negative influences, so it is dangerous to rely solely on the will of a single person. The foundation of the Church is the will of God, which is revealed to us through the conciliar wisdom of the Church. That is why adherence to the principles of conciliarity minimizes the negative consequences of autocratic forms of church governance. This applies to all levels of church life: parish, diocese, and metropolia. Departing from the principles of conciliarity in church life — especially during a time of severe trials — can lead to catastrophic consequences.
Today, the entire UOC community is deeply concerned about the imperfection of its canonical status, relations with the Local Churches, their attitude toward our status, relations between the Church, society, and the state, and many other issues. These matters require deep reflection, discussion, and the adoption of appropriate decisions — not by a single person or a small circle in the Metropolia, but by the fullness of the Church.
On May 27, 2025, on the third anniversary of the Feofania Council, the faithful, clergy, and episcopate expected at least an episcopal council to be convened — to hear each ruling bishop share the situation in their diocese, to express their vision of ongoing processes, and to make a collective decision regarding the future of the UOC. Instead, we got a secret meeting of bishops at which some were allowed to speak while others were silenced.
We received a detailed account of what happened at this secret meeting. And the format of this highly important gathering cannot help but outrage the clergy, faithful, and bishops of our Church.
By the will of Metropolitan Onufriy, who presided over the meeting, it turned into a pietistic monologue by the infamous Metropolitan Feodosiy of Cherkasy, while bishops who wanted to present alternative views or suggestions were rudely silenced.
Two respected hierarchs of the UOC tried to ask Metropolitan Onufriy about the possibility of restoring contact — and, in the future, Eucharistic communion — with the Ecumenical Patriarch and other Local Churches with which it had been severed. They were not even allowed to fully voice their thoughts and ask about what truly worries thousands of priests and faithful of the UOC, namely:
How can we hope for the “moral support” of the Local Churches if we are in Eucharistic rupture with four of them?
Why is the issue of restoring communion with them not even on the agenda?
Who will grant us autocephaly if we really desire it, when Moscow refuses, and we don’t even appeal to the other Churches?
The meeting of bishops apparently did not anticipate the possibility of open and frank discussion. But by silencing ruling bishops, the meeting’s leader effectively silenced the clergy and faithful of their dioceses as well. This is unacceptable at a time when people in every parish are asking thousands of questions for which we cannot find answers.
“Your Beatitude, please explain why we cannot even try to establish relations with the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Local Churches?” asked one participant at the meeting. According to witnesses, bishops who raised such questions were rudely cut off and even mocked by the Primate and other bishops.
In our Church, all open discussion of urgent issues is deliberately blocked.
Instead, the “voice of the Church” becomes dead pieces of paper on the UOC website or infamous bishops who openly defend maintaining ties with the ROC.
“If the Local Churches want to hear our voice, our aspirations, let them read our website — everything is written there,” was roughly the answer given to some bishops. And also: “We have no right by protocol to contact the primates of the Local Churches, because only patriarchs address patriarchs, and metropolitans address metropolitans. That’s not our level of communication. His Beatitude is not the primate of a Local Church.” That, more or less, was the response given by the person who was graciously given the floor by His Beatitude that day to present the position.
It is already known that some UOC bishops refused to travel to the “meeting” in Feofania. Some who did attend were publicly rebuked and mocked. After the infamous Feofania-2, even more clergy and faithful of the UOC came to understand that today, for the UOC, conciliarity is nothing but a fiction, and the care of the Mother Church for them is a dream that may never come true.
The Church will stand, for its foundation is Christ. But will the UOC survive, when its foundation is authoritarianism and deceit?