Autocephalous Orthodox Church splits amid charges of financial improprieties (01/19/97)

Autocephalous Orthodox Church splits amid charges of financial improprieties

by Roman Woronowycz
Kyiv Press Bureau

KYIV - Amid charges of financial improprieties, the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church in Ukraine has split again, and the patriarch has been deposed and accused of fraud by the remaining bishops.

At an extraordinary session of the Archiepiscopal Sobor of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church, held on October 18-19, 1996, which received little publicity, Patriarch Dymytrii, Bishop Ihor Isichenko of Kharkiv and his assistant, Bishop Mefodii, were dismissed.

Bishop Ioan of Rivne, one of the bishops who voted to dismiss the church leaders, told The Weekly on December 4 that Patriarch Dymytrii and Bishop Ihor were officially fired for "breaking canon law," but that they are also involved in the laundering of Church money through a "second Church" they had established, and for their involvement in the bankruptcy of the Christian Bank, which was founded by the UAOC.

[On December 24, Bishop Ioan was appointed head administrator by the newly elected locum tenens (in effect, the acting patriarch) of the UAOC, Metropolitan Vasilii, who replaced Archbishop Mykhail of Bila Tserkva, who is being investigated on separate charges of fraud.]

According to Bishop Ioan, who was speaking for Metropolitan Vasilii, Patriarch Dymytrii had resigned during the Sobor in protest against accusations of fraud and embezzlement leveled at him during the conference, but nonetheless continued to carry out the duties of the patriarch, which is against canon law. Bishop Ihor, who had worked closely with the deposed patriarch, was relieved of his post because he had visited the Lviv Eparchy without the permission of its archbishop, Petro Petrus. Bishop Mefodii was dismissed because of his close association with Bishop Ihor.

On November 26, 1996, the Church Sobor, which included hierarchy, clergy and the laity, upheld the ruling

Patriarch Dymytrii and Bishop Ihor are defending their actions and call the move by the Archiepiscopal Sobor political in nature.

At the heart of the issue is whether Patriarch Dymytrii and his close associates set up a "second Church" as Bishop Ioan has alleged. Bishop Ioan spoke for Metropolitan Vasilii, who was hospitalized and unavailable when The Weekly contacted the UAOC chancery in Kyiv. Equally at issue is what happened to Church funds invested in the Christian Bank of Kyiv. The bank, which was essentially controlled by the Church, went bankrupt in the spring of 1996.

The "second Church" issue

The controversy surrounding a "second Church" began on June 5, 1995, when Patriarch Dymytrii had the UAOC legal counsel Yurii Boyko register the Patriarchal Religious Center with the Ministry of Justice. Bishop Ihor explained that the center was the vehicle by which the UAOC was registered with the Ukrainian government and merely an administrative arm. The UAOC's earlier registration was taken by Metropolitan Filaret when he left to form the Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Kyiv Patriarchate.

"The Church itself is not considered a legal entity. We wanted to re-register after the Kyiv Patriarchate usurped our status," explained Bishop Ihor. "We decided not to register the Church as a whole, but only the administrative bodies of the Church and the statutes as such." He added, "The center is not a Church within a Church."

Bishop Ioan, however, said the Patriarchal Religious Center was never approved by the Archiepiscopal Sobor, and the reasons for the establishment of the religious center were much more shady. "All the finances of the UAOC moved through the center. Through this structure, they were able to take out personal loans." Today, explained Bishop Ioan, $1.5 million (U.S.) of UAOC property and money are not accounted for. This includes money that flowed through the center, money of the Fund of Patriarch Mstyslav, headed by Bishop Isichenko, who Bishop Ioan said "answers to nobody," and the Christian Bank.

Bishop Ioan laid the blame directly on Patriarch Dymytrii. "The patriarch always tried to do things outside the Sobor. Because of these individuals, today the whole Church is suffering."

Questions surround Christian Bank

What happened to the Christian Bank of the UAOC is an even more complicated matter. Bishop Ioan maintained that the bank's assets simply went into individual pockets. He named Oleh Zastavskyj, the chairman of the board of directors and the founding member of the bank, as the individual responsible for the bankruptcy. Today Mr. Zastavskyi sits in a Kyiv jail while the Procurator General's Office investigates the matter of the Christian Bank.

Mr. Zastavskyi's brother, Sviatoslav, who was present when The Weekly met with Bishop Ihor at Ss. Borys and Hlib Church on the outskirts of Kyiv, said it was a matter of bad investments and usurious borrowing rates.

He said the UAOC's savings in the bank were limited to about $50,000 (U.S.). His brother borrowed an amount equal to that and purchased supplies for the UAOC, mostly votive candles, explained Mr. Zastavskyi.

As for the money that Bishop Ioan alleges is missing, Sviatoslav Zastavskyi said the money might have "burned with the bankruptcy" and that when the financial mess is cleared the issue will be resolved. He also underscored that the Church, although a founding member of the bank, was not its owner.

He said the bank's real troubles began in October 1995 when its manager, Oleksander Liubyn, borrowed 8 billion karbovantsi to cover the bank's losses. That debt grew to 100 billion karbovantsi due to the usurious interest charged by the borrower, Orenda, a Kyiv financial institution. Unable to pay back notes that were due, Mr. Liubyn took a second loan for the 100 million kbv and paid off Orenda. The Christian Bank could not, however, pay off its other creditors and meet its repayment obligation on the second loan, and crashed in the spring of 1996.

Intra-confessional problems

The UAOC has had intra-confessional problems almost since it was re-established in Ukraine after the country declared independence in 1991. First, Metropolitan Filaret, who had been excommunicated by the Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Moscow Patriarchate, amid much controversy joined the UAOC as administrative director under the late Patriarch Mstyslav. More turmoil ensued when he broke with the Church to form the Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Kyiv Patriarchate.

The latest strife began when tensions between Patriarch Dymytrii and Archbishop Petro Petrus of the UAOC's Lviv Eparchy - over how much independence from the center the Lviv religious leader should have - culminated in the Lviv eparch's ouster on September 13, 1996.

According to Bishop Ihor of Kharkiv, Patriarch Dymytrii visited the Lviv Eparchy in September to try and resolve the differences. Archbishop Petro did not allow the patriarch entrance to the Lviv chancery and refused to speak with him. Upon returning to Kyiv, Patriarch Dymytrii issued the edict dismissing Archbishop Petro.

The patriarch's action convinced UAOC bishops, led by Archbishop Mykhail, to call a special Archiepiscopal Sobor.

Bishop Ioan of Rivne explained that when faced with accusations of financial improprieties, Patriarch Dymytrii resigned. However, Bishop Ihor said the patriarch simply excused himself from the conference because his edict on the dismissal of Archbishop Petro was rejected by the Sobor. As for his own dismissal, Bishop Ihor said he did not understand the reasoning. "I visited the patriarch in Lviv on his feast day on September 4, and we celebrated liturgy together," he explained. "This is what they used to remove me." In accordance with UAOC canon law, one bishop cannot visit the eparchy of another without that bishop's permission.

However, Bishop Ihor explained, for all practical purposes, by September 4 Archbishop Petro had been dismissed (although officially it did not happen for another 10 days), and Patriarch Dymytrii had assumed control of the Lviv Eparchy.

Bishop Ihor said what the Sobor did was simply bring to the surface long-simmering problems within the Church: a power struggle between UAOC bishops of eastern and western Ukraine over what should be the Church's mission.

Since Ukraine's independence, the UAOC has struggled for survival in conflicts with the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church and the other two Ukrainian Orthodox Churches. In western Ukraine, according to Bishop Ihor, the Church today remains in a battle with the Greek-Catholic Church over the right to parishes and church property freed after the Soviet Union collapsed. In the east, the confrontation is with the Moscow Patriarchate, which is competing for the allegiance of the faithful. He said also more attention is paid to reviving the Ukrainian Orthodox faith in eastern Ukraine, where the faith had virtually been lost, than in the western regions.

Bishop Ihor said differing priorities between Ukraine's east and west may be part of the reason for the split. "Throughout 1996 tensions grew. There was pressure exerted on the patriarch and on myself. I do not know why me, except that I have had continuous contacts with the Greek-Catholic Church, with the metropolitan see and with the Theological Academy [of the Greek-Catholic Church in Lviv]," explained the Kharkiv eparch.

Everything came to a head on November 29, 1996, when several cars pulled up at the Patriarchal Chancery in Kyiv carrying Patriarch Dymytrii, Bishop Ihor, Bishop Makarii, who had replaced Archbishop Petro in Lviv, and other supporters of the deposed patriarch, including two other bishops.

As with everything surrounding this controversy, there are two sides to the story.

According to Bishop Ioan, the group attempted to enter the premises and remove the financial records and statutes of the UAOC to cover a trail of fraud and embezzlement.

Bishop Ihor said that is far from the truth. His story is that the group had been holding a separate Sobor at Ss. Borys and Hlib Church when a proposal was put forward that, because the patriarch was the rightful leader of the UAOC, they should hold their convocation at the Patriarchal Chancery.

Bishop Ihor said in taking Church records they were attempting to retrieve the official seal of the patriarch, used to legitimize documents, which he accused Archbishop Mykhail of fraudulently using. When the group couldn't find it, they began taking Church documents as evidence of the seal's misuse. "We wanted all the documents because, after all, it is our Church."

The militia arrived amid a scuffle between the bishops. They ordered the boxes of documents removed from the vehicles and returned to the chancery. No one was arrested. However, the Patriarchal Chancery registered a complaint with the Procurator General's Office.

Oleksander Holovkin of the Procurator General's Office of Ukraine, who is in charge of the investigation, said on January 15 that because his work is not yet complete he could not comment on any aspect of the investigation. He said he expects to conclude the matter within two weeks.

Perhaps Bishop Ihor best summed up the problems facing the fractured UAOC: "The worst part here is that we have become such bitter enemies that we will not be able to sit across from each other to resolve our differences."

| Home Page |