Софійське Братство – громадська організація
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.
On December 10, 2025, a round table titled “Dialogue between the Church, the State, and Society: Paths to Mutual Understanding” was held in Kyiv. The event was organized by the Sophia Brotherhood with the support of the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue.
Fragment of the presentation “The Ecosystem Approach as a Methodology for Shaping a Shared Proper and Dignified Future: the Place and Role of the Church,”
The first statement of Christ is: “You will hear of wars and rumors of wars…” Since I wrote a commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, I delved into the meaning of this text.
The presentation was delivered on September 17, 2025, at the Round Table “From Dispelling Myths to the Search for the Common Good: Contemporary Dialogical Initiatives
The presentation was delivered on September 17, 2025, at the Round Table “From Dispelling Myths to the Search for the Common Good: Contemporary Dialogical Initiatives
I would like to sum up, to some extent, the work carried out by the Sophia Brotherhood over the past six months, which has been devoted to “debunking the myths” of Ukrainian Orthodoxy.
On 7 September 2025, at the National Reserve “St. Sophia of Kyiv”, the public association Sophia Brotherhood, with the support of the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue (HD), held a round table entitled “From Debunking Myths to the Search for the Common Good: Contemporary Dialogue Initiatives in Ukrainian Orthodoxy and Prospects for Post-War Renewal.”
Every theologian works in two possible modes. One mode is prophetic ministry, and the other is teaching ministry.
We shouldn’t just construct random myths or ideas, like the concept of an “open Orthodoxy of a new kind.” We must construct myths that grip, that infect people.
Let’s be realistic. Option one: the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC) recognizes that Constantinople is the Mother Church.
One must become someone who has their own “autocephaly”—that is, their own head—and act accordingly. In truth, these decisions are being made at every level.
Doesn’t it seem to you that the way different jurisdictions interpret the canons, how they understand canon law and the role of the Tomos in that, actually serves not to unite, but rather to divide us?
We cannot live without myths altogether. But some myths must, and can, be dismantled.
First and foremost, I want to note that the strategy prevailing in modern ecclesiastical jurisdictional relations in Ukraine is fundamentally flawed.
A good question – what should theology be like? And should there even be theology? That’s a different question. Another question: is theology actually a form of thinking? At least, contemporary theology.
I must admit, it’s a very difficult question to answer, because we are working from the foundations of canon law and ecclesiastical governance established in the 8th century.
Today, my barber told me he wanted to become a sommelier. His friend said to him, “Zhenia, that’s very risky — you’ll end up drinking only expensive wine.” It’s the same with myths. I teach the theory of myth and understand how dangerous it is to use the word “myth” as a synonym for prejudice.
I want to remind us that the real division isn’t between communities of the so-called Ohienko and Brianchaninov traditions – it runs deeper.
The Sophia Brotherhood is a civic organization. It is not some imitation of a Church, not a new ecclesiastical structure, not a sect.
It’s important to highlight the current tendency: many have begun to treat the simultaneous existence of two or more Orthodox jurisdictions in Ukraine not as a temporary anomaly, but as a legitimate, permanent state.
That’s a very important question — about worldview and the capacity to overcome it. For me, the formula is: “For a person, it is impossible; but for God, all things are possible.”
The thing is, bishops never act unilaterally. Yes, we can meet for coffee. But these things do not get implemented simply by gathering together and deciding something. For what purpose are we forming this?
In seeking a meta-level and a meta-language, first of all, we shouldn’t fear the existence of multiple meta-languages.
What is a person to do in a situation of inter-jurisdictional dialogue or conflict? For me, everything begins with subjectivity. And if someone doesn’t understand what jurisdiction they belong to, then they have a religious question.
I’ll share from my own experience. At our Stavropegia platform, representatives from all Orthodox jurisdictions come and communicate freely. We never announce who attends or when—they know they can speak openly, including with me.
In Ukraine, as is well known, three types of media deal with religious topics: secular, jurisdictional (that is, church) media, and extra-jurisdictional religious media.
Many assume nationalism necessarily involves hatred, that it’s always “against something or someone.” But that’s not accurate. Working with century-old sources, we noted that while some claimed Ukrainian nationalism was a negative form, Ukrainians themselves rejected that—they negated the “minus”.
What is “jurisdiction”? A good question. Given that I wrote my doctoral thesis on canonical law and my mindset is not philosophical but one grounded in legal principles, I must admit that the current situation sometimes leaves me completely bewildered.
I have observed a very encouraging trend. At least today, I saw people not only reflecting (and not only the clergy, but also the laity), but also beginning to admit that not everything is perfect in our Church.
This presentation was delivered on April 29, 2025, during the Round Table “Contemporary Ukrainian Orthodoxy: Debunking Myths for the Sake of Reconciliation and Social Consolidation
I would like to begin my presentation by referring to the paper “Faith in the ‘One Church’: Myth or Reality?” presented by Dr. Sergiy Bortnyk, Professor of Theology at the Kyiv Theological Academy, during the webinar “Myths and Prejudices that Hinder the Unity of Ukrainian Orthodoxy.”
In Ukraine, religious topics are covered by three types of media: secular, jurisdictional (i.e., church-affiliated), and non-jurisdictional religious outlets. This creates two axes of contrast: between jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional religious media (both being specialized), and between secular and religious media.
Dear friends, I am glad to be among this close circle of people who are trying to comprehend the situation and find ways out of the crisis. The problems of the UOC and OCU have already been discussed, and moving to a meta-level has been noted as a unique opportunity to overcome the crisis of jurisdictional confrontation.
Before proposing “strategies for coexistence” — that is, plans for the future — I would like to briefly outline the current situation. To do this, I would like to share some figures from a survey by the Razumkov Center, published after its latest poll in October 2024.
In the classical understanding, the media is meant to reflect what exists, as seen from the outside — a neutral gaze. The principle of the mirror: it is not the mirror’s fault if the image is unappealing.
Media play an extremely important role in the process of consolidating Ukrainian Orthodoxy. This process has been under discussion for quite some time, even since my years in Kyiv—or earlier.
Within the Orthodox environment, certain historical church myths have become widespread. I believe history influences the present, and the divisions we now experience—including jurisdictional ones—are the result of historical events and persistent historical myths.
Author: Olga Mariyan The non-governmental organization Sofia Brotherhood has announced that it is developing strategies to help Ukrainian Orthodox believers find shared reference points and a
I hope that I will still live to see that complete unity, but much of that depends on you. Because you can continue to meet, to discuss, to live together in peace, and to carry out common projects in harmony. And people will see this—and they will surely join in. Perhaps not immediately, perhaps not swiftly.
Over the past 30 years of Orthodoxy’s existence in independent Ukraine, many mutual grievances, conflicts, and destructive myths have accumulated among Orthodox believers. These hinder not only peaceful coexistence among churches but also deepen conflict within Ukrainian society.
This presentation was delivered on April 29, 2025, during the Round Table “Contemporary Ukrainian Orthodoxy: Debunking Myths for the Sake of Reconciliation and Social Consolidation
The most significant event of the Easter period in Ukraine’s socio-religious life was undoubtedly the Roundtable and panel discussion within the project “Modern Ukrainian Orthodoxy: Debunking Myths for the Sake of Reconciliation Among Orthodox Christians in Ukraine and Societal Unity,” organized by the Sophia Brotherhood.
The most significant event of the Easter period in the socio-religious life of Ukraine was undoubtedly the Round Table and panel discussion within the framework of the project “The Contemporary Ukrainian Orthodoxy: Myth-Busting for the Reconciliation of Orthodox Believers in Ukraine and for the Consolidation of Ukrainian Society”, organized by the Sophia Brotherhood.
On April 29 in Kyiv, a roundtable and three panel discussions took place as part of the educational-analytical project “Modern Ukrainian Orthodoxy: Debunking Myths for the Sake of Reconciliation Among Orthodox Christians in Ukraine and the Consolidation of Ukrainian Society,” organized by the Sophia Brotherhood with the support of the Renovabis Foundation.