Back to Articles

Back to Front Page

 

Reply to Mr. Nicholas E. Denysenko on the Orthodox News Service web page.

 

Editor:

 

First of all let me complement you on your site and for printing articles and letters describing various viewpoints.  Most of our church publications ignore and / or vilify differing viewpoints, so your web-site serves as an excellent and essential point of discussion.

 

I am of Ukrainian decent and have been following the reports and letters regarding the situation of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church with a great deal of interest.  The recent letter submitted by Mr. Denysenko was particularly revealing, and in my opinion illogical.  Mr. Denysenko spent considerable time admonishing the views expressed by Mr. Nahnybida, and then condemned the “worship of national ideologies instead of our crucified Savior”.  I guess that according to Mr. Denysenko all of the ethnic Orthodox Churches in the US have it all wrong, and unless they are willing to become part of the OCA, they are ignoring the teachings of Christ. 

 

Mr. Denysenko seems to have a great deal of difficulty dealing with the desire of some Orthodox, specifically Ukrainians, to want an independent church or to be united with their mother church in their native land.  Yet he does not seem to have any difficulty dealing with the fact that the OCA was established by the Moscow Patriarch and continues to have strong ties with this mother church.  I guess Russian ethnicity is OK.   I have no problem with Mr. Denysenko feeling this way, and am glad he has found a church where he can escape the horrors of Ukrainian patriotism.  However, he should understand that not everyone believes that all US Orthodox believers should strive for “one American Orthodox Church”.  This does not make us less Christian than the members of the OCA.

 

The UOC-USA was established on certain principles, independence being foremost.  The Ukrainians that joined this church, nurtured, built, and enriched it, because it was a national church that preserved their native traditions.  On the brink of complete annihilation by the Russians, the hierarchy of the UOC was forced to flee.  Since its establishment in the US, the UOC-USA represented a Church and a people that have fought for centuries against foreign oppressors who tried to obliterate their national identity.  As a student of history, Mr. Denysenko should agree that the Russian Orthodox Church was a willingly and enthusiastically participant in this effort.  Much of the leadership and clergy of the UOC-USA were patriots and former freedom-fighters dedicated to preserving the Ukrainian identity.  This is now derided as “nationalism” in the worst sense.   These were people who defended their country and their church, not only with prayers, but with arms and sometimes their lives.  The UOC served as the torch-bearer for the Ukrainian cause and for freedom.  Patriots and national heros were honored and commemorated.  Children were taught in the Church schools, not only to preserve the cultural heritage, but with the realization that preserving the language was essential to insure the survival of the UOC for future generations. 

 

All Orthodox Churches throughout the world have an ethnic identity – they are Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Serbian Orthodox, Bulgarian Orthodox, etc., the national designation is part of their definition.  There is a reason there is a Russian Orthodox Church in Athens where there is a plethora of Greek Orthodox Churches, why there is a Russian Orthodox Church in Romania, Jerusalem, etc.  Although all celebrate the same Liturgy, each nationality has imparted unique characteristics that make their worship a personal and rich experience for that ethic group.  Does this mean that all of these churches worship “national ideologies instead of Christ”, and is Mr. Denysenko going to advocate creating a “Orthodox Church of the World” modeled after the OCA.   

 

I was amazed by Mr. Denysenko’s statement that we must obey our bishops, or else we are bad Christians.  History has shown that bishops, Orthodox and others, are not infallible.   I believe that one of the basic differences between us and the Catholics is that they believe and teach that their chief bishop, the Pope, in infallible.  The point is that bishops are human, not divine, and all humans are capable of making mistakes.  This whole reasoning leads to the concept of “pay, pray, and obey”, which I believe is foreign to Orthodox tradition.

 

Mr. Denysenko should heed the words of an extraordinary candid Saint:

"Now of the lion one need have no fear, the leopard is a gentle creature, and even the snake you are terrified by is likely to turn in flight; but there is one thing you must beware of, I assure you. Bad Bishops. Don't be over-awed by the dignity of the throne. All have dignity, yes; but not all have the Grace. Discard the outer clothing; watch for the wolf. Words do not convince me; I must have deeds." - St. Gregory Nazianzus

One last point: Mr. Denysenko repeats the Moscow snippet that Patriarch Filaret has a wife and children and that is why he was defrocked.  No mentioned of a family is made in the document published by the Blessed Bishops Council of the Russian Orthodox Church.  Patriarch Filaret was defrocked for one reason – he dared to defy Moscow.  It is interesting and telling that Patriarch Filaret’s family was “discovered” only when he started opposing Moscow’s dominance of the Ukrainian Church.  I do not believe that there is any family and condemn the standard Russian tactic of personal destruction of people that oppose them.  Shame on Mr. Denysenko for repeating this snippet.  On this same subject, there is no way Patriarch Mstyslav would uphold or recognize any defrocking or sanction by Moscow.  He knew too well their tactics, for according to Professor Meyerdorff Patriarch Mstyslav himself was also sanctioned by the Russian Church.

 

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

 

Back to Articles

Back to Front Page