Back to Front Page

 

Back to Mail from Our Readers

 

Mail and Commentary from Our Readers……….January 1, 2000 through December 31, 2000

Mail from Our Readers is our latest feature where we will post e-mail messages and excerpts from the cards and letter that we receive. In all cases e-mail addresses and names will not be published in order to protect the anonymity of the sender.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Public Reply to Mr. Taras Hundak

Recently we received an e-mail from one of our readers, Mr. Taras Hundak, and he has posed a very interesting question. He states:

In a recent interview, Patriarch Filaret stated that it is the "unified churches" goal to be under the Throne of the "Great Mother Church of Constantinople" and that the Ecumenical Patriarch, Bartholomew I, will recognize this unified church by the end of the year.

If this is true, should we be supporting the "KP" with their efforts to unify with the "Great Church of Constantinople"? If yes, then what are you "saving" here in the US? If no, why not?

I'm not really that informed with church "politics", but for some reason I am unclear as to what your goal is now with all these events happening?

We responded directly to Mr. Hundak's letter but feel that this question may be on the minds of many people and that a more broader and detailed public response is necessary.

One of the deplorable activities of the Bound Brook Bishops is to exploit the situation created by the potential recognition, by the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and World Orthodoxy, of a "unified church" in Ukraine and by this exploitation justify what they perpetrated on UOC-USA.

There is a world of difference between World Orthodoxy's "recognition" and total "subordination" under the infamous "omophor". Patriarch Mstyslav, on numerous occasions going as far back as 1976, sought recognition but vehemently rejected subordination under the throne of Constantinople.

It is our strong belief that what is sought by the UOC-KP is recognition in its strictest sense.

1.      Recognition of an independent (autocephalous) Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

2.      Recognition of a Ukrainian Patriarch with all the rights and privileges enjoyed by every Patriarch in the Orthodox Christendom.

3.      The realization of Patriarch Mstyslav's lifelong labor on our behalf.

What the Bishops of Bound Brook persist in perpetrating is a litany of deceit, treachery and betrayal:

1.      On March 13, 1995 they were unilaterally elected as Greek Bishops:

Metropolitan Constantine of Eirenopolis

Archbishop Antony – Bishop of Hierapolis

Archbishop Vsevolod – Bishop of Scopelos

2.      In a recent court deposition filed by the attorneys for Archbishop Antony they finally admitted that they are NOT Bishops of UOC-USA but are Bishops of the Church of Constantinople.

3.      They unilaterally forfeited the independence (autocephaly) of UOC of USA and are trying to impose a "Synodal" administrative structure. Our church was founded based on Autocephaly and Sobornopravna principles of administration.

4.      After the fact, they deceived the Metropolitan Council and coerced the faithful at two Sobors to accept their illegal acts. The reason they were and are illegal is because they are contrary to our Church's Constitution (by-laws).

5.      They sought property control of three parishes in Civil Courts.

All of the above was done using underhanded methods that are hardly appropriate for Christians, let alone ordained Disciples of Christ.

The litany is endless, but the result remains the same – they are tearing away the UOC-USA from the Mother Church in Ukraine. We must not let them. We must reclaim the church of our fathers and save our heritage, abiding by the principles outlined in the mission statement of our organization.

Save Our UOC Committee

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received 11-27-00

I received a copy of the November 28, 2000 Rochester, NY newspaper "Democrat and Chronicle". In an article "Strife tears area church" a detailed account is provided of the current situation at St. Mary the Protectress Ukrainian Orthodox parish in Rochester, NY. What I find very disturbing and appalling is the report that the new priest, Rev. Paul Jagnisz, supported by Archbishop Antony is:

"calling couples married by Rev. Zhownirovych (previous parish priest, Ed.) to inform them that they must exchange vows again because the initial ceremony was invalid. Children baptized and chrismated, or confirmed, under Zhownirovych would also need to have those sacraments performed again, Jagnisz said."

Is this not the height of hypocrisy? Is this not pure and unadulterated stupidity on the part of Rev. Jagnisz and by extension on the part of Archbishop Antony who is really behind all of this? If those sacraments are invalid because they were performed by an un-canonical priest, then ALL of the Ukrainian Orthodox faithful in the USA and the diaspora, prior to 1995, will have to renew their vows baptize their children and be chrismated or confirmed all over again. If that is the case then every burial service will have to be done all over again. All of these religious services were performed by un-canonical priests who were part of UOC-USA that was NOT recognized by the Ecumenical Patriarch or World Orthodoxy. It was only in 1995 that UOC-USA became canonical. Does someone in Bound Brook have an answer? If we were not required to renew our vows and re-baptize our children then why should the parishioners of St. Mary the Protectress in Rochester, NY? Is there an answer to this stupidity?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Mail Received 10-19-00

We are a nation of laws. Every citizen is subject to the law and must operate under the law. Otherwise, we are "outlaws" as in a Wild West film. Everyone must obey a court order and cooperate with the court. If not, it is called contempt of court and those who are in contempt of court go to jail, or pay heavy fines or both. Those who are in contempt cast grave doubts on their credibility and motives. We need to pray for our Ukrainian Orthodox Church because we are in danger of losing it here in America and in Ukraine. May God help us.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received on 10-19-00 a Readers Observation:

Should anyone have any doubt that the Bishops of Bound Brook are bishops of a foreign church please check the web pages of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople. They are NOT bishops of UOC in USA. They were elected Bishops of the Church of Constantinople on March 12, 1995 by the Ecumenical Patriarchate Synod. Or better yet look at the September 2000, Vol. 2000 No. 7 issue of the Ukrainian Orthodox Word published by UOC in USA. On page 7 is an article written by Archbishop Vsevolod signed as Archbishop of Scopelos. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Text in Ukrainian….. Received September 20, 2000 from a reader in Dniepropetrovsk, Ukraine

If you are having problems reading text in Ukrainian do the following: On your opening screen - computer desktop - Go to Start/Settings/Control Panel. Go to Add/Remove Programs. Go to Windows Setup Tab. Scroll down to Multilanguage Support and check off box. Restart your computer.

Шановне панство Save Our UOC!

Цікаво читати Вашу докладну та актуальну інтернет-сторінку. Зворушують Ваші турботи щодо захисту і збереження Українського православного життя в Америці. Правдиво зичу мати Вам побільше спільників у цій святій та патріотичній справі.

Бавнд-бруківські владики, а особливо, даруйте за не шляхетний стиль, “Антошка”, коли заборонятиме вірним вітати і приймати духовенство з України, то остаточно втратить прихильність еміграції. Це й справді виглядає немов за тоталітарного режиму. Абсолютно не є прийнятним для суспільства, де волевиявлення людини перш над усе. А окрім того: де ж християнська любов? Де мудрість душпастиря?

Пробачте, але я обпечений на все життя тією системою в котрій пройшла моя молодість і дуже скептично ставлюся до будь-якого возвеличення. Не сприймаю догматизм у будь-який формі. І глибоко переконаний, що віра Христова аж ніяк не буде страдницею, коли наші думки не співпадатимуть з думками архієпископа Антонія. Він така ж людина як кожен з нас. І може так само помилятися, а часом більше. Це нам робили ікони з Леніна та членів Політбюро КПРС. А насправді виявилися падлюки. Христос вчить що не має Бога, окрім нього.

На тому й стою – один Бог, одна Україна. Можливо, ці мої погляди не доречні для православного. Та, здається мені, що зберігаючи традиції треба дивитися на речі тверезо.

Отож, коли ієрархи за Україну, за її народ та його культуру – я ж поважаю таких й шаную. Коли вони мудрують через корито, котре у Церкві рідко буває порожнім, то вони мені якось до лампочки.

Патріарх Філарет також грішний. Свого часу служив Москві. Але я йому не суддя. Я сам був комунякою ( себто не в душі, а мав квиток). Такий був час. А нині Філарет за Україну. Значить треба відкинути усі емоції та підтримувати його. Бо святих серед нас не знайти. Хай Вам щастить!

м. Дніпропетровськ 20-09-00

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 Received September 19, 2000

Greetings!

I've been following your web page with a great deal of interest. However, please H-E-L-P me out with some of the latest news that I haven't been able to locate on your site:

  1. Patriarch's Filaret visit to the USA starting this weekend (September 22-24). Is he coming or not?
  2. Report out of Ukraine has it that Patriarch Filaret has cancelled his trip to the USA. Can you please confirm?
  3. Also, a report out of Ukraine over the weekend states that the Ukrainian Orthodox Church-KP has been unified with the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church of Ukraine. Can you please confirm?
  4. Furthermore, the purpose of the "unification" was reported as to be recognized by Constantinople Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew. Can you please confirm?
  5. If item #4 has some validity, can you please tell me what lies ahead for all of us.

Thanking in advance for your response, which is greatly appreciated and it will allow me to better understand our Ukrainian Orthodox faith.

Sashko

Editorial Reply: We can only confirm that Patriarch Filaret's visit has been cancelled. Please stay tuned for further information as it becomes available.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received September 7, 2000

Your web site is great. Keep it up-dated to maintain continued interest. This matter affects all of us. Don't publish trash hate mail. It is easy to guess the author of your recent post. These people are sick and of no use to no one… Suggestion: translate the letter you receive in Ukrainian into English. Many readers do not undestand or read Ukrainian but are very proud of their heritage. The Bound Brook engine is fuled by SCOBA, the Greeks and their allies. Stick to your guns. Good Luck and God Bless!

Reply: Thank you for your kind words and your suggestion regarding translations. We try to keep a balance in publishing both Ukrainian and English with emphasis on English. There are a large number of elderly faithful with limited English abilities and no access to computers or the internet. We are hopeful that our supporters will print out the Ukrainian text and make copies available to those individuals within their parishes. We also suggest to our supporters to print out any article be it Ukrainian or English and distribute it within their parish.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Bigots that support the Bishops of Bound Brook

We received another piece of hate mail. Since receipt of this mail on August 12, 2000 we have been debating on whether to post it on our web site. After much discussions and soul searching we decided to post it. Many people may voice their opposition to our action saying "Why are we giving our critics a voice, a forum on our web page". Some may even accuse us of writing this hate mail ourselves in order to gain sympathy. Nothing could be more further from the truth.

Our purpose of publishing this garbage is to expose the type of people that are among the supporters of the bishops of Bound Brook, what they stand for and what they represent. We publish this garbage to show the hidden agenda that is behind the actions of the bishops of Bound Brook and their supporters. The issues here are not religion or Orthodoxy. It is not Patriarch Filaret, the Kievan-Patriarchate or a united Ukrainian Orthodox Church. THE REAL ISSUES ARE NATIONALISTICthat we are Ukrainian nationals fighting for our heritage, our culture and our church history…that we care that we are Ukrainian Orthodox …that for us UKRAINIAN and ORTHODOXY are inseparable. BIGOTRY is the hidden agenda that we wish to expose and we will publish every piece of hate mail to publicize the bigots that exist within the supporters of the bishops of Bound Brook.

The author of this mail did not hide his name. It was printed on his return e-mail address. We declined to post his name other than to identify his e-mail screen name. The letter is reprinted exactly as we received it with the exception of blanking some unsuitable words.

Received August 12, 2000 from "fixxxer52"

first I would like to say that you evil people are not the UOC. you people are a group of nationalistic a--holes who only care about the fact that you are ukrainian. do you even appreciate the fact that you are an Orthodox Christian. Obviously you don’t, because if you did you would not be doing these things.

this goes out to the people in the Clifton parish, who have done these deeds, i.e. Walter Mahouchy, John Lucheco, you are both a---holes who get it up the a---. i hope that when this is settled, you pray to God, that is if you believe in Him, that the good people can forgive you.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received August 29, 2000

With great interest I read your posted information regarding the Appellate Court denying Archbishop Antony their appeal to limit the discovery process. Not having a legal background I would like to see information provided on your web site as to what happens next. Where do the plaintiffs (Archbishop Antony and the UOC-USA Consistory) go next and what do they do since they have lost twice in their attempts to limit disclosure of pertinent information germane to the case at hand.

Another important question that comes to mind regarding all of these legal attempts and maneuverings by Archbishop Antony to limit disclosure. WHY??? This is a religious institution, a Church. What is there to hide? All books, documents, agreements, publications and information should be available to the faithful. What is there to hide from the general Church membership? There should be nothing to hide. They are our confessors, our priests and bishops. They above all should set the best of examples, but yet there is a distinct reluctance to show the faithful what goes on behind the walls of the UOC-USA Consistory. The only thing we see is the spoon-fed information provided by the Consistory every three years at the Sobors. And since the Metropolitan Council is nothing but a rubber stamp what happens during the intervening years?

Could there possibly be a scandalous mismanagement of finances such as the rumored mismanagement of the St. Sophia Seminary account of $700,000.00? Maybe Archbishop Antony is reluctant to publicize his $80,000.00 per year salary, a chauffeur driven Lincoln Towncar, and an estate size villa in Flemington, NJ. Or is he reluctant to have become public the rumored condominium that he purchased in Florida or a final confirmation of the rumored $300,000 account he set up for the Clifton lawsuit. Or maybe he is afraid of the IRS and the tax-free $500.00 to $1000.00 "gifts of love" that he receives from each parish that he visits.

Whatever it is that they do not want to make public the question begs a reply. If there is nothing to hide why are they spending thousands and thousands of dollars on legal fees to prevent disclosure and the discovery process to start? Why? Why?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received August 16, 2000

НОВИНА!

Архиєрейский собор РПЦ МП, який тепер проходить в Москві, одноголосно прийняв рішення -- канонізувати останнього царя російської імперії Ніколая ІІ та членів його родини. Народи "від молдаванина й до фіна" після 9-го січня 1905 року прозвали Ніколая "Миколою кривавим"

На соборі були присутні й голосували "раби отєчєства чужого" гієрархія т.зв. УПЦ МП з "щирим українським патріотом" митрополитом В.Сабоданом на чолі.

Що ж далі? Який наступний крок московської патріархії? Канонізувати відомого Грішку Рас-путіна?? Й, до пари, не менш відомого попа Гапона?

Цікаво -- як реагуватимуть на ці кроки московської патріархії, на цю "свистопляску", поборники так званого "чистого" православ'я, яких серед нас, православних українців, сьогодні --на жаль--не бракує?

Олександер Северин, Нью-Йорк, 16 серпень 2000 р.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

We have decided to publishing a piece of hate mail that we received in order to show the type of "people" that exist within the Ukrainian Orthodox community that "support" the bishops of Bound Brook. It is sad to learn that the person next to you in church who is "praying" and beating with their foreheads "poklony" could possibly be the author of this type of garbage.

We want to share this e-mail that we received on July 22, 2000 with our readers. It was sent via a re-mailer in order to protect the authors name and electronic address. We share this piece of hate mail to let the Ukrainian-American community and the rest of the world know that these types of people are not restricted to Harlem, Bedford-Stuyvesant area of Brooklyn or Newark, NJ. These types of people exist WITHIN the Ukrainian community, they attend Church services and "pray" next to the little old "babyshkas" in Church. They exist up in Rochester, NY where it was reported that Rev. Oleh Zhownirovych of St. Mary The Protectress parish suffered 4 slashed tires and they also exist in Clifton, NJ where a parishioner of Holy Ascension parish, since January of this year, has had 8 flat tires. These are the types of people that "support" the bishops of Bound Brook and we pray to God that they are in the minority. For if not then we are all in serious trouble, our Ukrainian Orthodox Church, our Ukrainian-American community, our heritage and our culture.

Received July 22, 2000 -HATE MAIL

"You are a bunch of paranoid freaks and, well, liars. Now that the UOC-KP may gain recognition from Istanbul, where will you go? Waco? So waste your parish’s money with your little lawsuit, ask your schizophrenic questions in your little depositions and refuse to believe the answers. Maybe some Clozaril might help. Do you really believe that you will find any "secret" dealings behind the points of agreement? If this was such a big conspiracy like you think it is, then you will NEVER learn what really happened. What a bunch of losers."

Signed…..Nobody; Sender….re-mailer

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received July 12, 2000 (in Ukrainian text)

"…чого не було! - Савка вернувся!" - репетувала, бігаючи по Семенівці, баба Паранька коли її чоловік на початку цього століття вернувся з русько-японської війни….

Чого не було! - читаючи тепер Обіжник Консисторії з дня 5 липня 2000 року тепер уважний читач коли довідається, що теперішні владики УПЦ в США теж "пахалі", вдаючи, що й вони, мовляв, докладали зусиль в напрямку щоб постала ПОМІСНА УКРАЇНСЬКА ПРАВОСЛАВНА ЦЕРКВА з українцем - Патріархом у Столиці України КИЄВІ!

Нам тепер не до байок й не до тих, які заднім числом достосовуються до серйозного процесу упорядкування Церковного українського Православного життя в нашій Батьківщині. Наше завдання - підтримати зусилля Патріотів України на цьому етапі!

Якщо ж (Баунд Брудські) владики вважають, що й вони внесли свою лепту в будову, ім'я якій Помісна Українська Православна Церква, то чому вони в 1995-му році прийняли таємні титули століттями неіснуючої Візантійської імперії?!

Олександер Северин, Нью-Йорк 12 липня 2000 року.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received July 3, 2000

Has anyone read the latest (May/June) issue of Ukrainian Orthodox Word? Pan-Orthodoxy is alive and well and is being promoted, advertised and shoved down our throats. Headlines such as "Historic Pan-Orthodox Celebration of the Sunday of Orthodoxy" and a whole page devoted to "A Pan-Orthodox Family Pilgrimage" to (of all places) the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese and St. Basil Acadamy attest to this fact. When are people going to realize that when it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck………………

Also WHY is the 2000th anniversary of the birth of Christ celebrated in of all places Pittsburgh and not Bound Brook the center of Ukrainian Orthodoxy in the USA? Also will someone please explain why is the celebration in AUGUST and not in January? Isn't January 7th, according to the Ukrainian Orthodox calendar, the actual anniversary date? There are no doubt hidden ulterior motives behind choosing the date and the location for this celebration. Eventually we will find out.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Time for the Faithful to Awake.....Some Personal Reflections

After participating in the celebration of St. Thomas's Sunday, (Providna Nedilia) and observing several unbelievable occurrences, I have had time to think and reflect about what is happening within our Church. I cannot understand how most of our Church members either don't care, or underestimate and dismiss the implications and potential outcome of what our bishops have done. Please bear with me while I try to explain how serious the situation has become.

Our bishops have placed our Church under the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarch. As everyone knows, that is very different from being recognized by him. The Russian Orthodox Church, the Serbian Church, the Rumanian Church, etc. (you can get a full list on several web sites), are all recognized by him and visa versa, but none of them are under his jurisdiction. They are all totally independent, as was our Church before the signing of the Points of Agreement in 1995. Even the Greek Orthodox Church in Greece is not under his jurisdiction. Only the Greeks in the diaspora are under his jurisdiction, in addition to the Carpatho-Russians and the Ukrainians.

There was always a Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC)under Greek jurisdiction in the USA (Bishop Vsevolod, before him Bishop Kuschak before him Bishop Bohdan Spilka). However, Vladyka Mstyslav never went under Greek jurisdiction. Our parents could have joined the UOC under the Greek jurisdiction, but didn't do so. My belief is that they didn't do so because that Church was not independent, and did not support and nurture all of the things that were important to them. In addition, the Greeks had a long and consistent history of supporting the Russian Church.

Being under the Ecumenical Patriarch's jurisdiction (or anyone else's) is against our Church Constitution. The first two article state that we are autocephalous (independent) and equal to other Orthodox Churches. Clearly we can not be equal and subordinate at the same time.

When our hierarchs state that all this was approved by the 14th and 15th Sobors, they are not stating the whole truth (or in my terminology they are being Clintonian). The 14th Sobor approved their actions but did so with specific conditions, and relied on the forthrightness of the bishops' statements regarding how this would help the Church in Ukraine. Those conditions were never acknowledged or agreed to by the Ecumenical Patriarch. And clearly this action did not help the Church in Ukraine (unless you consider the church under the Moscow Patriarch). The 15th Sobor restated those concerns and asked for answers in writing from the Patriarch. To the best of my knowledge, no answers were received. (I personally do not think that the conditions and concerns were ever presented).

Patriarch Bartholomew has stated over and over again that he recognizes the jurisdiction of Moscow over the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Ukraine. That was his position before our bishops signed the Points of Agreement, and that is his position now. His position has not changed.

Our bishops have put themselves in a position where they cannot concelebrate with bishops from Ukraine unless those bishops belong to the Moscow Patriarchate. We can not dismiss this. Remember when Patriarch Dimitri visited Bound Brook - he did not celebrate the Liturgy. (I was surprised that no one pursued this at that time). When Archbishop Vsevolod went over to 'preside' over Patriarch Dimitri's funeral, he did not concelebrate the Liturgy with the UAOC bishops, he presided at the burial service (read 'odpevanie' and 'panakhyda'). Contrast this to Vladyka Mstyslav's funeral Liturgy.

Our bishops can and do concelebrate with the Russians. A concrete example is the Sunday of Orthodoxy when Metropolitan Constantine concelebrated in NYC with Metropolitan Teodosius of the Orthodox Church of America (OCA) which was given autonomy by Moscow. Vladyka Mstyslav always considered the OCA to be created by Moscow to eliminate the national element of our church. He condemned even meetings with their clergy, let alone any concelebrating. (See letter from Metropolitan Mstyslav, March 19, 1981 to Fr. Chubenko and Fr Nakonechny). Metropolitan Teodosius, by the way, frequently travels to Ukraine, where he tells everyone that he is Ukrainian and that they should all belong to the Moscow Church, since that is the only church that is recognized by the Ecumenical Patriarch.

According to the Points of Agreement, all new bishops of our Church must be approved by the Ecumenical Patriarch.

Our bishops have Greek titles - actually they have become Greek bishops. In effect, out Church has joined Bishop Vsevolod's old Church (that was under the Ecumenical Patriarch), and not the other way around.

One of the Points of Agreement states that our Church can not get involved in any politics (read anything Ukrainian).

Our bishops have never explained Protocol 937 (other than to state that they have never seen the original), where Patriarch Bartholomew states to Patriarch Alexei of Moscow that our bishops have promised not to do anything to help the UAOC in Ukraine. (If you need a copy of Protocol 937 - please look elsewhere on this web site)

So far does any of this sound like something that Patriarch Mstyslav would either do or approve?

Our bishops keep saying that they have completed what Vladyka Mstyslav always wanted. Think about this - they are stating that Vladyka Mstyslav (a Patriarch) wanted to be under the jurisdiction of another Patriarch. This is absolute nonsense, and cannot possibly exist. In the Orthodox World the Ecumenical Patriarch is the FIRST AMONG EQUALS. Vladyka Mstyslav wanted recognition of our Church, not subjugation.

All efforts are being made to remove the 'Ukrainian' from the UOC-USA. The most recent examples are the 'blue stickers' that were given out on 'Provody'. Everything was in English. Compare this to the stickers of the past. How insulting to our older church members. Another example - the issues of The Ukrainian Orthodox Word, how many articles do you see about or concerning Ukraine but yet we get the latest news regarding Patriarch Alexij criticizing the Ukrainian Government. (See Vol. L 4, April 2000 page6). You get the picture.

Archbishop Anthony has said in public that the one goal of our Church is to 'save souls'. But that is the goal of every Church. What makes our Church unique? It is the very thing that they are turning away from - "Ukrainianism". Without this element, there is no difference between our Church and any other Orthodox Church.

I recommend that you look at the website www.saveouruoc.com. It has many articles that you will find interesting. In addition, smorodsky's website, www.smorodsky.com/holyascension, actually has posted the Clifton court case documents, where one can read what Archbishop Anthony stated about the purpose of our Church and the role that Russia has played in its history. Read this public record and make up your own mind. I found his statements unbelievable, insulting, and akin to what a Russian clergyman would state.

Many of our priests have come to me in private and have stated that they agree with what we are doing, but are 'afraid' to say or do anything. Some of them have written me supportive letters, asking that their content stay private. I have begun to be fairly 'impatient' with them reminding them that in the past the clergy were our leaders, they defended what was Ukrainian, and risked their lives not just their livelihood.

My point is that this is a real struggle for the essence of what our Church is about, and not just a case of some individuals disagreeing or one parish objecting. I believe with all my heart that if the Clifton Parish loses the court case, then a major battle will be lost to stop the pan-orthodox faction from making our church a homogenous organization, not differentiated from the OCA in any way. I will not and can not stand by silently while that happens.

I ask - what would it take for our people to wake up? A bishop from Moscow concelebrating the Holy Liturgy with Archbishop Antony in Bound Brook?

It is time to wake up.

signed.....Simon Nahnybida, Bound Brook, NJ

P.S.

It has been brought to my attention that St. Andrew's Brotherhood was responsible for providing the blue Providna Nedilia ribbons on May 7, 2000. Due to problems associated with printing of the graphics the original printer was not able to print the correct version of the ribbons. Therefore on an emergency basis St. Andrew's Brotherhood had to contract a different printer.

Signed….Simon Nahnybida

**********************************************

Received June 2, 2000

Clarity of Thought and Logic

I've been accessing your web-site for the last few months and have been following the various reports and articles with great interest. I share the amazement, expressed by one of your contributors, that most of the members and parishes of both the UOC-USA and UOC-Canada seem to be apathetic about the path taken by the hierarchy of both Churches. Specifically, I am referring to the unilateral subordination of both Churches to the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarch.

I quote from the Constitution of the UOC-USA, Section I, Paragraph 2: "The Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the United States of America keeps the Dogmas, Canons, Structure and Worship of the Holy Ecumenical Orthodox Church. It is Autocephalous (independent) in all matters of its life and government, and its rights are equal with those of other Autocephalous Orthodox Churches."

Since this section of the Constitution of the UOC-USA has not been amended or changed, whatever agreements were made by the bishops in the name of the Church can not possibly be valid. Only a change to the Constitution could eliminate the independent status and subordinate the UOC-USA to the jurisdiction of another entity, regardless who or what that entity is. I believe that the bishops could sign any agreement or agree to any other jurisdiction as individuals, but not in the name of the Church.

I would like to draw a parallel to illustrate my argument. Suppose my parish priest, who happens to be Father Estocin, decides to change his allegiance (jurisdiction) from the UOC-USA to another jurisdiction. He can do so at any time; after all we do live in a free country. However, this action would not automatically change the jurisdiction over his parish. This can be done only by changing the parish constitution. I believe that my example is pertinent for when Father Estocin came to the UOC-USA from another jurisdiction, his parish did not come over with him, nor was it in any way bound by his decisions.

So until our Church changes its constitution, the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarch remains only over the individual bishops. Only the Greek Orthodox Church outside of Greece recognizes the Ecumenical Patriarch's jurisdiction. So in reality our bishops have become bishops of the Greek Orthodox Church outside of Greece. However, they are financially supported by the Ukrainian Autocephalous Church, which is "independent and equal to any other Orthodox Church". In reality, the UOC-USA no longer has any of its own, independent bishops in the US.

If I am not mistaken, the wording of the UOC-Canada Constitution is not much different.

Now a question for the members of both UOC-USA and the UOC-Canada: Why are we supporting these "foreign" bishops, whose allegiance is to Istanbul?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received June 1, 2000

I wish it were just a farce. You notice that it's not the "Office of Ukrainian Orthodox Ed." For years, our former Bishops along with their Orthodox Jesuits, have been surreptitiously promoting "Real Orthodoxy" among those in our parishes who felt an inadequacy, and a persistent need to "grow out" of our backwater provincialism of "Ukrainian Orthodoxy" and embrace the larger truer faith of "Ecumenical Orthodoxy." This required an exorcism of Ukrainianism and a step up to a generic Orthodoxy aggressively promoted by the Russian "Orthodox Elite" in the U.S. under the guise of Orthodox Church of America(OCA). If you tracked the inventory on the shelves of our Bookstore in S. Bound Brook, you would have noticed an ever increasing number of titles published by the OCA and their leading gurus.

The UOL has been a leading proponent of integrating Orthodoxy and they have been the persistent drones for this movement. The late Patriarch Mstyslav cut a Quixotic figure as he tilted with the UOL throughout his tenure in S. Bound Brook.

This I fear is a coming out from the underground. Now we will get our marching and cleansing orders openly. No more cloak and dagger capers. They'll be able to goose-step out in the open now.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received May 29, 2000

Regarding the rebuttal to my letter of May 15. The writer of that rebuttal makes a totally illogical argument using the premise that the source of, and continuance of the problem is going to become the solution. That is Metropolitan Volodymyr (Sabodan) and the bishops in collusion with him are going to become the solution to the problem with the Church in Ukraine. About a decade ago, if these bishops had followed the lead of their Exarch and left the Russian Orthodox Church, then it is probable that the Church in Ukraine may have been treated, by the Ecumenical Patriarch, the same as the Estonian Orthodox Church. The problem is that these bishops did not follow Filaret's lead at that time, and they continue to oppose the idea of an independent Ukrainian Patriarchate.

Hostility between the Moscow Patriarch and the Ecumenical Patriarch is neither new nor surprising, as well as Moscow's ambitions to become the center of Orthodoxy. This has been going on for centuries, especially since the Doctrine of Moscow as the Third Rome was first put forward. So it would actually be helpful to Patriarch Bartholomew to have a Kyivian Patriarchate, as this would decrease the size of the Russian Orthodox Church, and therefore weaken their case to be the center of Orthodoxy. This is like a family fight between a younger and stronger brother against an older and weaker brother to determine who is the leader of the clan. The older and weaker brother will have to make concessions to the younger brother in order to hang onto power.

Let us keep in mind the reality of the current situation. If a Sunday of Orthodoxy Service were to be held in South Bound Brooke, a Russian Orthodox Cleric serving in Russian would be permitted to be at the Altar, a Ukrainian Cleric from either Patriarch Filaret's or the late Patriarch Dimitri's church, who would serve in Ukrainian, would not be allowed to serve or even to approach the altar. It is Metropolitan Constantine, under orders from Patriarch Bartholomew, who would stop the Ukrainian Cleric.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received May 27, 2000

I strongly disagree with the letter dated May 15 regarding the united stance of Patriarchs Bartholomew and Alexei on the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

The logic does not follow the course of events of the last several years. By no means are Alexei and Bartholomew on good terms. They were bitterly estranged over the church situation in Estonia and for a short time were outside of Communion. Alexei voiced his disdain over Bartholomew's acceptance of both Ukrainian churches (Canada and the USA) before Bartholomew formally accepted them. This did not stop the Ecumenical Patriarch from taking them under his protection.

The bitterness continues to be broadcast between the two patriarchates. Alexei has openly challenged the necessity of the Ecumenical Patriarchate being based in Istanbul since there are few churches there (mostly just a Synod of Metropolitans). Bartholomew uses any opportunity he can to justify his authority since he has no empire to support him, and the Ukrainian and Estonian cases are examples of this. His legitimacy (as "first among equals") is based on a disputed interpretation of Canon 28 of the Council of Chalcedon; many Orthodox believe that the "Ecumenical Patriarchate" can be based in the territory with the most Orthodox and strongest base of power. Hence, Alexei's challenge of Bartholomew's "authority."

I propose that Bartholomew is waiting for an opportune moment to "take control" in Ukraine, and establish his preferred patriarch there, under the auspices of a "Kyivan Patriarchate." Any concession he makes to Moscow is an admission, latent or open, of his own weakness. Watch carefully...Bartholomew will indeed become more involved in the Ukrainian situation, he is just waiting for the largest Ukrainian Church there (under Metropolitan Volodymyr Sabodan) to become more "friendly" to the idea of autocephaly. As long as that church is strongly loyal to Moscow, Bartholomew has no canonical leverage to operate against the wishes of Moscow.

I urge your readers and followers to follow Orthodox news more closely and carefully. This will prevent misconceptions based on a lack of information from forming.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received May 27, 2000

The following is from a communication from the UOC-USA

"A noble mission "For the unity of God's Holy Churches" in Ukraine.

On May 15 of this year, Archbishops Antony of New York and Washington, D.C., Consistory President and Archbishop Vsevolod, Eparchial Bishop of the Western Eparchy departed for Ukraine. During their 7 day visit, the Archbishops held constructive and positive initial meetings with the spiritual heads of all Ukrainian Orthodox Churches in Ukraine concerning unity and the eventual establishment and recognition of one Ukrainian Orthodox Church in independent Ukraine."

They talked with "all" spiritual heads, which implies that they talked with the UOC-Moscow Patriarchate. At that type of meeting the Moscow Patriarchate church would ask for support against an independent Ukrainian Orthodox Church and a Ukrainian Patriarch. This request would be coming from a "sister church", the Russian Orthodox Church/UOC-Moscow Patriarchate. What commitments were made on behalf of the UOC-USA by Archbishops Antony and Vsevolod? Were the parishes consulted before the bishops went to Ukraine, and the parameters of their meetings defined, as well as what commitments they could or could not make. In a Sobornapravna church it would (this) be necessary.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received May 15, 2000

RE: May 10th letter another reader asks "What is next?".

Consider the facts that the Ecumenical Patriarch and the Moscow Patriarch consider the Kyivian Patriarchates (Filaret's and Dimitri's) as uncanonical separations from Moscow, and Moscow considers the Ukrainian Churches in the diaspora (UOC-USA and Canada) as uncanonical separations from Moscow. It is no secret that Moscow has asked the Ecumenical Patriarch not to recognize either of the separations as canonical, and that they should return to the control of the Moscow Patriarchate. It is very ironic that the metropolitans of the UOC-USA and Canada, are striving to maintain a union with Patriarch Bartholomew, even though he is united with Moscow to eradicate a truly independent Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Ukraine. Only a truly naive fool or a treacherous traitor would not believe that Moscow has not already asked for the UOC-USA and Canada be transferred to the control of the Moscow Patriarchate. Bartholomew can accomplish this with one stroke of a pen. If the Patriarchate of Kyiv falls then the UOC-USA and Canada are next on the chopping block.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received May 10, 2000

I am writing your web-site, because I am starting to realize how significant and timely your battle is. My family and I have been going to Bound Brook for many years on the Sunday following Easter, observing the Ukrainian tradition of ‘Providna Nedilya’. I think this is a beautiful tradition and hope that my children will pass it down to their children, the way my parents passed it to me and my siblings. This year all of a sudden "Provody" became "St. Thomas’s Sunday at St. Andrew’s Church". Some of us that purchased the blue streamers were immediately struck by the lack of even one Ukrainian word (or symbol). What happened to "Provody", "Providna Nedilya", or the Ukrainian Orthodox Cross? An older woman came up to me with tears in her eyes and asked me why the Church was rushing to eliminate Ukrainian. She looked around the cemetery and reminded me that the reason all this existed was because the older generation treasured and valued their Ukrainian heritage. She asked a series of questions: "Where were these bishops when this was being created, built? Do they think the Greeks gave us this, or even helped us build it? This was built with donations from Ukrainians around the world. Look up the records and see how much these bishops have donated. And now they tell us how to act and pray. They have separated us from the Church in Ukraine. What is next?"

I could not answer her, but I resolved to become involved and to support your efforts. I hope and pray that others will open their eyes to what is happening.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received May 9, 2000

Primitivism at its Worst

On ‘Provody’ Sunday May 7, 2000 in Bound Brook, we witnessed what could only be described as primitive, fascist-like behavior displayed towards members of our Church family. Individuals who object to the path taken by the bishops of our Church were peacefully distributing information describing the recent events in our Church. They were not forcing themselves on anyone. Anyone curious or interested could take or refuse the offered materials. These individuals were threatened, harassed, physically jostled, and in one case almost run over by a clergyman working for the Consistory. This clergyman shouted that they were trespassing on land that ‘belonged to the clergy’. Another clergyman stated "You are distributing communist propaganda".

We live in the US, where people can have different opinions, they can meet, discuss, picket, and ‘believe it or not’ even publish different thoughts and opinions. I was amazed at this type of primitive behavior that, I am sure, recalled images of Soviet censorship and tactics. I can understand differing opinions, but resorting to this type of behavior, especially by our clergy, should bring an outcry from all of our Church members, no matter what side they support.

As for the concept of Bound Brook ‘belonging to the clergy’, I will leave the readers to form their own conclusions. Maybe this particular priest was not aware what he was yelling, since most of the bystanders reported that he appeared to be drunk. On the other hand, maybe he was verbalizing what out Church leadership thinks – that Bound Brook is theirs.

I encourage everyone that agrees with my indignation at this behavior to write / telegraph / voice their displeasure to Archbishop Anthony, President of the Consistory, PO Box 495. So Bound Brook NJ 08880.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received 5-6-2000

To our beloved Fr. John Nakonachny of St Vladimir's Parish .Parma Ohio, and members of the Metropolitan Council.

Has our UOC-USA changed since 1995 when our Church was recognized by Word Orthodoxy ?????

NOTHING HAS CHANGED WAS HIS ANSWER !!!!!!!!!!!

WE NOW HAVE TO GET PERMISSION FROM BARTOLOMEW!!!!! IS THIS WHAT HE MEANS ?????

This week, when Metropolitan of Eirenopolis meets Bartholmew of Constantinopoles (and we learn) that permission was DENIED to serve with Bishops from UKRAINE...and the two Partriarchs ALEXY OF MOSCOW AND BARTHOLMEW OF CONTANTINOPOLE WILL DECIDE THE FAITH OF OUR UKRAINIAN CHURCH IN UKRAINE.

IS THIS WHAT FR JOHN MEANS ???? (THAT NOTHING HAS CHANGED)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received April 29, 2000

As reported in the "Ukrainian New" (Українські Вісті), Sunday, April 30, 2000 No. 18 (3394) the parish of St. Michael UAOC in Adelaide, Australia has officially notified Metropolitan Constantine that they are leaving his jurisdiction and joining the Kyivan Patriarchate. The reasons stated " we do not wish to be under the jurisdiction of a foreign Patriarch and at the same time we do not wish to be under your jurisdiction that willingly is subservient to a foreign Patriarchate."

Another parish leaving the Bishops of Bound Brook. An awakening has started to occur in Canada and now in Australia. Europe and South America are not too far behind. When is Bound Brook going to wake up and hear the voice of the people, or have they dug themselves into such a hole that it is impossible for them to climb out? Is it too late to say "We made a mistake." Would that not be a sign of a great leader to admit and correct his error? Or will the Bishops of Bound Brook watch as did Nero when Rome was burning?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received April 29, 2000

The review of the Bishops' performance in Canada may prove to be extremely interesting. The Sobor's have in the past had the power to replace bishops, without a canonical deposing as bishop. That is, in essence, the ability to "fire" bishops. The examples in history: Bishop Ioann (Theodorowych) was replaced by Bishop Mstyslav, who was replaced by Bishops Ilarion, Platon (who died before his enthronement) and Michael. Perhaps the UOC-USA, if it considers itself a Sobornoprava Church, should determine if they also have the power to "fire" bishops. I believe a review of these powers is underway in Canada.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received April 27, 2000 (This e-mail was shortened in order to conserve space. Ed.)

RE: Ukrainian Orthodox in Canada are Awakening

They have been awakening for some time, at least since last August (1999). At that time I and others marched in the Toronto Bloor West Ukrainian Parade, carrying the banner of the Kyivan Patriarchate. We were very well received by the crowd, with cries of "it's about time".

Many of the faithful in Toronto are watching the outcome of the civil trial in the USA before taking any further action in Canada. Anyway the relations with the Kyivan Patriarchate is going to be a hot topic at the upcoming Sobor in Winnipeg.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received April 14, 2000

Please give us some information as to what is happening at St. Mary's parish in Rochester, NY. We hear that Archbishop Antony is trying to pull another "Uniondale". Is it true that the church locks were changed and the parishioners were locked out again by Antony's henchmen? Is it true that Antony's henchmen tried to clean out the bank account at the Ukrainian Credit Union in Rochester? What in heavens name is going on? Have those Bound Brook bishops lost their minds. Please post the latest information. We need to know what is going on and were will they strike next.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received April 13, 2000

Has anyone read the latest issue of Ukrainian Orthodox Word , March 2000 and resolution number 9 of the Metropolitan Council meeting of February 2-5, 2000? The Council members REJOICED that Patriarch Bartholomew is willing to PRAY and WORK to bring about unity and world recognition of an autocephalous Church in Ukraine. But as was reported in the magazine "BIPA" No. 3(95)-1999 by Ms. Nadia Mirchuk, Patriarch Bartolomew asked the Council delegation that visited him "Which of three Churches in Ukraine should we recognize?" Did anyone in the delegation have the nerve to remind him about his proclamation in Odessa? Did anyone have the nerve to ask him about his Protocol 937 that he wrote on July 11, 1995 to Patriarch Alexij in Moscow?

No I guess not. The Council delegation was too busy enjoying the sights of Istanbul and sailing on Patriarch Bartolomew's yacht to his residence on the Island of Halki.

And the Metropolitan Council members REJOICE ????????

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received March 7, 2000 (this e-mail was edited for clarity, Ed.)

How can Metropolitan Constantine be commemorated by the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church in Ukraine when he is a Metropolitan of the U.O.C. Ecumenical Patriarchate.in the USA? Does this not create a problem with the Russian Patriarchate, which has a Metropolitan in Ukraine?

Also how can he be the head of two churches, the U.O.C.in the United States, Ecumenical Patriarchate and the U.A.O.C.? This is impossible, one or the other!!

Something is wrong with this picture. Our Bishops would not even let the late Patriarch Dymytrij serve when they brought him here to visit, after Patriarch Filaret was here, and we all know why they brought Patriarch Dymytrij here, to get back at the Kyiv Patriarchate. That was very clear and easy to figure out. Must have been a very costly game I say. $$$$$.

Looks like we now have another question needing answered. Are we the Ukrainian Orthodox Church E.P.? or are we the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church of the United States or the U.A.O.C. in Ukraine? Maybe we need to put three church names in a hat and our bishops could pick one out.

Please take a look at the Orthodox News on the web, (www.orthodoxnews.com/stories/TASS3012000213932.html). It states there that our Metropolitan is Head of the U.O.C. Ecumenical Patriarchate and the U.A.O.C. in the Diaspora and now is being commemorated in Ukraine.

It is no wonder why our people, are so confused with all this. It's really becoming a three ring circus, and our leaders are the ringmasters, I guess. Sad, very, very sad.

THANKS, DAVE.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received March 7, 2000 (This e-mail was edited for clarity. Ed.)

I wanted to share with my fellow Orthodox Christians some of the unfortunate things that have occurred at St. Vladimir's Parish in Parma, Ohio. I am a long-standing member of the church and I’ve never been more disgusted at what has happened over the last few years and what Fr. John Nakonachny has done to help turn friends into enemies and to make the church not a place of love and peace, but of factions and animosity.

When the news of the Holy Ascension lawsuit in Clifton, NJ was first released, Fr. John was the first in line to deny that it was going on - purposely telling people that it never existed.

With reference to articles printed in "The Ukrainian Weekly" Fr. John is acting as the censor for St. Vladimir's library collection!!!! Any letter or article printed in "The Ukrainian Weekly" which rebuts Fr. John (who is a frequent letter-writer to the newspaper) is cut out. Thereafter what the library-attending parishioner sees is a paper with incomplete information. Would you like Fr. John to tell you what you should or shouldn’t read? I think not!!!! This is America!

Before the annual meeting which I attended in January, over 25 children were rushed in front of all the parishioners in a pre-planned attempt to "save" Fr. John from being kicked out of St. Vladimirs Parish - when there was never a plan to get him out in the first place. The kids shouted in Ukrainian and English "Please, don’t go! We Love Fr. John!" in a show of mercy to the parishioners. Of course, this was all a ploy by Fr. John to ensure that the parishioners didn’t vote him out of the church - something that he himself has made up.

He has become so paranoid over this during the last year that his beloved new President (and chief source of income for the church) Geoff Greenleaf, spoke at every opportunity of the "movement" to get rid of him. Fr. John was told constantly by last year’s Board president Greg Pawuk that there was and never has been a planned movement to get rid of him - but he never believed Mr. Pawuk. Fr. John even admitted that there were evil people lurking in the church and continues in this belief to this day.

Fr. John also wants nothing to do with some of the organizations in the church - including the Brotherhood. He didn’t even show up for the Brotherhood installation dinner! Fr. John is continuing his "war" against the Brotherhood even though Bill Turchyn, now a former member of St. Vladimirs, is no longer the president. It’s a sad day when the priest alienates himself from the church and the very people, which originally wanted him to be a part of St. Vladimirs. It is a shame, indeed. Most of the people that helped bring him to our parish are now considered to be "evil" people by Fr. John.

And as for how Mr. Turchyn was banned from the church? That’s another story that can only make a true Christian shake his head. Priests are supposed to invite people to church, not ban them. (Click parma.html Ed.)

There are no evil people in this church - only people unified in Christ trying to hold the church together. The only one single-handedly trying to destroy it, unfortunately, is the man who holds the cross. It is a sad day when a priest is delusional and sees conspiracies where there are none. I don’t hate him, but I shake my head at the man he is and think of the wonderful priest he could have been.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received February 25, 2000

(Some minor editing was made in order to produce clarity. Ed.)

I cannot understand what is taking place at our sister church of St. Vladimir in Parma, Ohio. Our friends who are members there, and have been for years, stated that they never saw so many people attend the meeting (annual parish meeting. Ed.) that took place last month. Many people who attended never go to church, and are supporters, of the so called Fr. John (Nakonachny) and I use the title with a sick feeling in my stomach. (The parishioners opposed to Fr. John) were outnumbered and had no chance with the "supporters" brought in by Fr. John.

We are so very tired and unhappy with the dealings of the clergy and what has taken place. It is a sad day in our Ukrainian history that we in America must face the same actions that took place so many years ago in our motherland Ukraine. The taking over of our churches by those who are of another country, ie. GREEK CHURCH! We left Ukraine, to come to a land of freedom, (but) we all can see that freedom of religion is not here nor is freedom of choice. If this was to have taken place in Ukraine, the taking over of our churches, I need not tell you how our people would have responded in Ukraine. I am sure that our so called "bishops" would only last a few minutes (before they would have been run out of our churches). Of course we do not want to be under Patriarch Filaret, we support them, but we want to continue in the United States as a "sobornopravna" church as we were from the start. I see many of our Ukrainian people in Cleveland supporting the UAOC (Sobornopravna). I have attended their liturgy and they are 100% Ukrainian, and the liturgy was all in pure Ukrainian. I was so moved (as was the entire congregation) and on Sundays I have seen many people from St. Vladimirs. Of course (Fr. John) tried to smear them.

I have spoken to Vladyka Stephan and his comments was that Metropolitan Constantine did everything he could in order to continue the Ukrainian Orthodox Church after the death of Patriarch Mstyslav, but that he was dragged into all the problems. Maybe he speaks with wisdom on this issue. Many of us did not know Vladyka Stephan but now we do and we will turn to him. Many people are supporting him and his jurisdiction in America. They are what we used to be, a real Ukrainian "sobornopravna" church. Maybe they are not the biggest but all is in order and there is a true feeling of Christ present. They also support the Kiev Patriarchate but remain "sobornopravna" in the United States of America as we have been for so many years.

God bless you.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received February 23, 2000

We received another e-mail via a re-mailer as "Anonymous". We decided to reply in public for this individual raised an interesting question regarding attorneys being used in the Holy Ascension lawsuit.

On April 2, 1999 Holy Ascension, Clifton, NJ received a letter from Russin & Vecchi L.L.P., International Legal Counsellors, located in Washington D.C. This letter stated:

"We represent Rev. Arkadi Mironko and those members of the Parish who are the lawful representatives of the Parish. As such, Rev. Arkadi and those Parish members are lawfully entitled to possession of all church property………………….

We have been advised that there could be an attempt to deny Rev. Arkadi access to and use of the church property………

In the event that such unlawful activity would occur, we would be prepared to seek an injunction against all those who participate in such interference. Those who interfere with Rev. Arkadi and the lawfully constituted parishioners also would be exposed to personal liability for damages……………."

Signed……Jonathan Russin for Russin & Vecchi L.L.P

This firm represents the Moscow Patriarchate in the United States. They have offices in Moscow, Vladivostok, Ho Chi Minh City, Hanoi, New York, etc. This firm on April 2, 1999 was retained to represent Rev. Arkadi and the dissenting parishioners at Holy Ascension in Clifton. Please explain WHY a law firm that represents Moscow Patriarchate in the USA was chosen to represent a "Ukrainian" priest who is under the jurisdiction of UOC-USA's Antony, Archbishop of Ieropolis????????????????

What does this tell you as to the origin of the influence and guidance our church is receiving? Pretty obvious we would say.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received February 15, 2000

We follow your web site with great interest and appreciate the forthrightness of the style and content. To continue the theme of the reader post of February 10, we too are flabbergasted at the attitudes of many Orthodox clergy and faithful. For a church which models its spiritual life on such Gospel parables as the current "Publican and Pharisee" example, it can certainly be the most judgmental of any sect when it comes to the "letter" rather than the "spirit" of the law. Where is the humility and unwillingness to judge that Christ would have us display? One may sign their name with "a sinner" afterwards and then "give their children a snake when they ask for a fish." Do some bishops and clergy think that they have a "monopoly" on Orthodoxy that places them above others and denies others the right to freedom of will and judgement? One tires of hearing about the "Holy Orthodox Church" instead of the Orthodox Church, the one based on the teachings of Jesus Christ.

The implicit right of the Church in Ukraine to exist in freedom and to evangelize its own with the Gospel message is disputable only to the ignorant. The Ukrainian American Church also has the right to its own self-actualization without the interference of "strangers in our midst" of Greece or Moskow or whichever.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received February 10, 2000

I am truly fascinated and at the same time flabbergasted at the venom that is directed toward Patriarch Filaret. There is no doubt that during his reign within the Moscow Patriarchate his main interest was self preservation and to maintain a status quo within that structure particularly with respect to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. But once the Soviet Empire collapsed can we not find it in our hearts, even one grain of hope, to believe that maybe, just maybe, this man IS fighting for that for which he could not fight in the past? Maybe this man with all his sins and transgressions is now truly repentant and firmly believes in what he is fighting for ……....an independent "pomisna" Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

What is most fascinating is to see that the most vicious attacks directed at Patriarch Filaret come from OUR clergy, the priests and bishops of UOC-USA. These are people who have been called to teach the Gospel, to set examples and to serve God. These are people who must teach us to love thy neighbor and to teach us to forgive. These are the people who must by example show us the way and yet they are spewing the most vicious bile against one of their own …. a man of the cloth. They above all others are forgetting "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone".

This truly is a shameful paradox.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received February 3, 2000

The following statements insulted the memory of our forefathers and the millions who have paid the ultimate sacrifice defending Ukraine and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church: 1) a denial that the Ukrainian Orthodox Church has been persecuted by the Russian Orthodox Church for some 300 years resulting in its complete destruction in Ukraine; 2) a denial that St. Andrew's Memorial Church in South Bound Brook was built to commemorate the victims of the false famine; 3) a denial that an integral reason for the establishment of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in the USA was to preserve national traditions. These are only three examples from a series of statements made by Archbishop Anthony, who lives off of the contributions and the fruits of the labor of the Ukrainians that built Bound Brook. All who are interested in all of the denials can review the actual court documents at the attorney's web site - smorodsky.com.

I urge 'saveouruoc' readers to send letters of protest, telegrams and e-mail to Archbishop Anthony's office in South Bound Brook. The mailing address is PO Box 495, South Bound Brook, NJ 08880. The e-mail address is UOCofUSA@aol.com

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received 1/22/00

The road you have embarked on is a much difficult task. I do not have the details pertaining to this shameful position that we Ukrainian Orthodox find ourselves in. It should be obvious to most that your position is that of honor and dedication to our Holy Ukrainian Orthodox Church. You are Ukrainian patriots. Do not underestimate the severity of our path to victory over evil. For you, history reserves a place of honor. God bless you.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Received 1/24/00

I cannot believe the height of hypocrisy that has been reached by high-ranking members of the UOC-USA Consistory and Metropolitan Council members. Very Rev. Frank Estocin in "The Ukrainian Weekly" and "Svoboda" and Dr. George Kryvolap in "Faith" (Vira) went to great lengths to argue that UOC-USA did not unite "with or come under the authority of any jurisdiction in Ukraine". That Patriarch Mstyslav was a "Patriarch" in Ukraine but in the USA he was "Metropolitan". The "Ukrainian Orthodox Word" devoted whole pages to this absurdity forgetting the fact that everyone including Metropolitan Constantine, Archbishop Antony, Rev. Estocin and all the clergy and faithful welcomed, honored and venerated Mstyslav as "Patriarch". In November 1999 the Consistory made an appeal for funds to establish a $1,000,000 Patriarch Mstyslav I Endowment Fund to "honor the memory of our beloved Patriarch Mstyslav I ". When money is involved he is our "Patriarch".

Bishops of Bound Brook…HYPOCRITS!

Back to Front Page

 

Back to Mail from Our Readers