LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (11/23/97)

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Religious imperialism of Moscow patriarch

Dear Editor:

Thank you for your editorial "Russia's favored religions" in the October 26 issue. For giving up religious freedoms that had been promised in the Russian Constitution of 1993, his own political child, Boris Yeltsin obtained the enthusiastic cooperation of Moscow Patriarch Aleksei II in the re-establishment of the old Soviet empire and the union of three Slavic and predominantly Orthodox nations: Russians, Belarusians and Ukrainians in particular. More is involved than simply favoring some Churches in Russia and closing down others: it is a well-thought-out imperial conspiracy hatched in Moscow's Kremlin to bring in those "uppity" Ukrainians who dared to vote for independence in 1991.

If one accepts this analysis, then Alla Heretz's blunt letter of October 5 makes sense, as a cry from the bottom of a Ukrainian Orthodox heart. Andrew F. Estocin's letter ("Focus on many faces of Orthodoxy," October 26), for all his convoluted reasoning, does not.

Surely there is something wrong with a world "Orthodox Christianity," which tolerates the religious imperialism of an Aleksei II, but invents all kinds of arguments not to recognize Filaret, the patriarch of Kyiv. Before long we will be told that the Act of Baptism of 988 took place in Moscow, though every historically literate person knows that when Kyiv was already a civilized European city, Moscow did not yet exist.

Those who want to pursue a "Ukrainian Orthodoxy ... [as] a way of life that transcends ethnic and national lines," a Ukrainian Orthodoxy without Ukrainians, so to speak, are welcome to do so. In my mind, they are chasing after a utopia that is rapidly turning into a chimera. And a dangerous chimera to boot, which is bound to split the Ukrainian American Orthodox community. Let us all beware of Greek gifts made in Moscow.

Yaroslav Bilinsky
Newark, Del.

An accusation does not equal guilt

Dear Editor:

Most of us in the United States enjoy discussing issues of the day. However, our society and our "hromadas" are losing sight of the fact that with debate and discussion, there is also responsibility. With responsibility there is also accountability. We easily slip into an accusation mode, believing that the accusation is proof of guilt.

Remember the Demjanjuk case and the years of emotional knee-jerk reactions instead of looking at the facts? Remember when Simon Wiesenthal suggested that Ukrainians are more responsible for the Jewish Holocaust than the Germans? How about Ukrainians being genetically predisposed to anti-Semitism?

Prof. Roman Koropeckyj falls into the same old format - an accusation is proof of guilt. Michael Slotznick and Leonard Grossman made the same mistake. Dr. Myron Kuropas, however, documents his facts. If he accuses, he backs it up with documentation.

Prof. Koropeckyj shows intellectual dishonesty when he states that Dr. Kuropas has a "disturbing preoccupation" with Jews. Again, define the terms and show us where Dr. Kuropas displays this tendency. Former Congressman Paul Findley also was accused of many things for writing "They Dare to Speak Out." All the accusations were disproven, and his book stands on its merits.

Missouri has a slogan: "Show Me." Prof. Koropeckyj owes the community an explanation. He also offended many of us by stating that we are "silent." If he read The Weekly more often he would have seen that we are not silent and that the forum is open to all. Even though the Jewish press in the U.S. is closed to outside opinions, The Weekly should be commended for considering all opinions. Prof. Koropeckyj, show some fortitude by explaining your accusations. Don't become "suspiciously silent."

Roman G. Golash
Schaumburg, Ill.

Metropolitan should have been identified

Dear Editor:

Were you in a state of drowsiness while editing the report (November 2) on Patriarch Bartholomew's visit to the headquarters of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in South Bound Brook, N.J.? Neither you nor the reporter noticed that while many of the guests were identified by name and title, the reader does not know the identity of the hosts (hierarchs) of the UOC of U.S.A., with the exception of Metropolitan Constantine. Since the American UOC does not have two metropolitans, Metropolitan Wasyly (identified in the photo) heads the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of what country?

Valentina Limonchenko
Arlington, Va.

Editor's note: Ms. Limonchenko is referring to a caption that accompanied a photo of Patriarch Bartholomew in which both Metropolitan Constantine and Metropolitan Wasyly of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church are pictured and identified without an accompanying identification of which metropolia each heads. Metropolitan Constantine is head of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A. and Diaspora, and Metropolitan Wasyly is head of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Canada.

Congratulations on 64th anniversary

Dear Editor:

As governor of the state of Illinois, it is my pleasure to congratulate you on the 64th anniversary of your publication, The Ukrainian Weekly.

The Ukrainian Weekly, published by the Ukrainian National Association, has provided countless Ukrainian Americans with an excellent source of national and community news. The ethnic media is a vital and integral part of our citizens' success in understanding different cultures. You can take pride in the many accomplishments that your publication has achieved.

On behalf of the citizens of Illinois, please accept my best wishes for an enjoyable anniversary and much continued success.

Jim Edgar
Springfield, Ill.

| Home Page |