LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (02/01/98)

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Orthodox leaders need our support

Dear Editor:

During the times of the former USSR, I remember hearing a sad (but true) joke that went like this: "What is the budget of the KGB for infiltrating and dividing the Ukrainian community in the diaspora?" "Zero!" "Why?" "Because the Ukrainians don't need outside help to destroy themselves."

If this is not a true example, why do we have two national bodies representing the Ukrainian community? Remember the 13th Congress of the UCCA? Now our community faces similar problems, only this time it involves the Church.

Readers' letters in The Weekly over the past few weeks have expressed various personal opinions on issues regarding the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in the U.S.A. and its relationship to Kyiv and Constantinople. In a recent letter to the editor Victor Babanskyj writes: "There is a definite movement by a large number of clergy within the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A. to remove 'Ukrainian' from the Ukrainian Orthodox Church." He also writes that "there is a definite movement to create a non-ethnic and non-nationalistic pan-American Orthodox Church."

This is absolutely absurd! I would not be wasting my time answering such a ridiculous comment were it not for concerned parishioners who have approached me about Mr. Babanskyj's letter, prompting me to believe that there may be others who have such concerns and require a reply.

For almost 20 years I have been on the Church's highest administrative body - the Metropolitan Council; I have been a member of the Consistory and spiritual advisor of the national executive board of the Ukrainian Orthodox League. Never ever has there been any discussion about changing the name of our Church. This has not even been mentioned in private discussion. Undoubtedly, there may be a few clergy who, privately, think differently, but this is most certainly not a "definite movement by a large number of clergy."

By making such a statement Mr. Babanskyj attempts to use scare tactics to frighten the faithful - especially the elderly - who have concerns about our Church's relationship with Constantinople.

I challenge Mr. Babanskyj to provide names of those clergy who want to remove the name "Ukrainian" from the Church. Let him back up his statement! If, as he states, there are a "large number of clergy," providing these names should not be difficult for him.

For anyone who is truly concerned about our Church being Ukrainian, it is an absolute fact that our Consistory in South Bound Brook, N.J., gives 100 percent support for an Autocephalous Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Ukraine. Last year alone, thousands of dollars were donated to seminaries of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Kyiv Patriarchate in Kyiv, Lviv, Lutsk and Ivano-Frankivsk. Our Church recently covered the $10,000 cost of printing the Book of Epistle Readings in Ukrainian; 3,000 books will be distributed to parishes of the Kyiv Patriarchate and the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church. Patriarch Filaret's blessing appears in the beginning of this book.

At the meeting of the Metropolitan Council held in South Bound Brook on January 16, it was resolved that our Church supports the unification of the Ukrainian Orthodox Churches in Ukraine into one Autocephalous Church, under the leadership of a patriarch of Kyiv and all Ukraine.

At that same meeting it was also decided that our Church would lead a fund-raising drive to purchase bells for the bell tower of St. Michael's Monastery, which is presently being rebuilt in Kyiv. We strongly support the move to have this monastery given to the Kyiv Patriarchate.

On the local level, my parish in Parma has donated over $15,000 for the remodeling of a building recently turned over by the Kyiv City Administration to the seminary and academy of the Kyiv Patriarchate, as well as $10,000 to provide scholarships and utility expenses for seminarians in Kyiv, Lutsk and Lviv.

Do these appear to be the actions of a Church whose hierarchs and clergy are abandoning Ukraine? Of hierarchs and clergy who are working for a non-ethnic, non-nationalistic Church?

Finally, let us again remember that the acceptance of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A. under the spiritual protection of the patriarch of Constantinople was and continues to be a major defeat for Moscow.

Just last month, an interview with Moscow's Patriarch Aleksei II was printed in the Word, the official publication of the Antiochian Orthodox Church of North America (December 1997 issue). The following was reported: "The patriarch then went on to explain the situations in the [sic] Ukraine and in Estonia saying, 'Why did Constantinople accept the Ukrainian Autocephalous Church in the United States without even consulting us? Now, we cannot enter into communion with the Ukrainians in the United States and therefore we are not in communion with part of the See of Constantinople.'"

When will a few vocal individuals begin to realize that the recognition of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A. by Constantinople was a tremendous blow to Moscow? The writing is on the wall for Moscow, and they are afraid that this will be the end of their domination in Ukraine. Moscow's fear is justified. At Archbishop Antony's 25th anniversary celebration in South Bound Brook on January 17, Metropolitan Maximos of the Greek Orthodox Church, Pittsburgh Diocese, publicly expressed his support for an Autocephalous Orthodox Church in Ukraine.

The Ukrainian Orthodox Church has finally found friends and supporters who recognize and speak openly for acceptance of the canonical right of Ukrainians to have their own Church with no ties or obligations to Moscow - people with whom we are able to sit around the table and discuss our Church's future. This certainly is a far cry from the 1960s and 1970s, when we stood around outside as spectators while others discussed and decided our fate.

I remember a visit by hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church of the former USSR to Passaic, N.J., and New York City. The Ukrainian Orthodox clergy were not allowed to participate in any of the Church discussions on Ukraine. We stood outside, held protest signs, carried a symbolic casket and served a memorial service for the victims of the Great Famine.

In contrast, today the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A. is an active participant in all aspects of Orthodox Church life. Our concerns are heard and noted. The best example of this occurred when Patriarch Bartholomew met with Patriarch Aleksei last September in Odesa, Ukraine. Archbishop Antony and I flew to Constantinople and held a lengthy meeting with Patriarch Bartholomew, during which we expressed our displeasure with his trip to Ukraine. Three weeks later Patriarch Bartholomew was making history by visiting our center in South Bound Brook, where he listened to speaker after speaker call for a canonically recognized Autocephalous Church in Ukraine. Each of these speakers was interrupted by applause and standing ovations.

This in itself is cause for great concern in the Russian Orthodox Church. Moscow would want us back on the street, where we had no voice. This is truly sad, but even sadder is the fact that some of our own Ukrainian people are assisting this attempt.

Support for the hierarchs and clergy, especially at this time, is very important for the stability of the Church, both in the U.S.A. and Ukraine. Let us not continue to divide ourselves, but to give them our full support.

Let us also remember that, in spite of all our earthly concerns about the Church, Christ is the head of the Church. Only when we put Him first and pray to Him for guidance will the Church truly find peace and unity.

The Rev. John R. Nakonachny
Parma, Ohio

The writer is pastor of St. Vladimir's Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral.

Kudos for content of January 4 issue

Dear Editor:

Every issue of The Weekly is informative and interesting. However, my hat is off to the editorial staff for the January 4 issue. The content was superb, and I hope it will generate letters to the editor from our readers. The stories in this issue will impact how our communities will evolve into the 21st century - a topic that is worth discussing.

Jerry Dutkewych has done a great job with the Peace Corps in Ukraine. The front-page article points out the initial frustrations, but also the successes. This is crucial grass-roots type work that will have an eventual major impact in Ukraine. Having been to Ukraine with the military, I can appreciate the challenges. At the same time, we have to keep in context historical facts. It is not correct that "Ukraine was a former U.S. enemy"; Russia and the USSR were the enemy. We are still not sure about Russia. Ukraine, having been an occupied country, had no say in the matter.

The Ukrainian American Bar Association has done a great deal for the community. The organization has grown, and the article by Bohdanna Pochoday showed how our legal eagles are confronted with changes both in Ukraine and in the U.S. One key point made was the fact that "... Ukrainians in the diaspora no longer have anti-communism to cement their ties." Au contraire, communism is alive and well in Ukraine. This is obvious from the military side and, in my opinion, opposing forces are now fighting for the soul of Ukraine - all based on the use of the Ukrainian language. The Communists are currently using covert methods, but they may change tactics in the future.

Finally, you have to give Dr. Myron B. Kuropas credit for not being intimidated by the comments made in the recent past. His story about Canada's poor decision to hire Neal Sher to "hunt" Nazi war criminals is an excellent exposé. The OSI has been discredited in the U.S., but its efforts continue. How interesting that no one is concerned about crimes committed by Communists, especially during the Ukrainian holocaust - the Great Famine of 1932-1933. Perhaps some day people will learn to practice historical inclusion and will cease to practice historical revisionism. We must remember the past for the sake of the children

Roman G. Golash
Schaumburg, Ill.

IMF bailout's effects on Ukraine

Dear Editor:

The proposed IMF rescue package in response to Asia's current corrective recession appears to benefit basically secure economies at cost to the truly needy, like Ukraine.

Last summer, when the struggling new republic of Ukraine hastily passed an austere and politically unpopular budget after pleas by its president to meet IMF conditions, the International Monetary Fund and the U.S. Congress continued to withhold funding. The rationale was that the austerity program was insincere and that further measures and additional budgetary changes needed to be made to prove the country's commitment. Needed aid was delayed since the nation's economic and political value was reduced with the fall of the Soviet Union.

Congress and the IMF will most likely go forward with an Asian bail-out, even though microeconomic adjustments through domestic initiatives may be what is necessary for correction.

American funding of IMF was originally intended to help needy nations to stabilize. Now it is being directed towards maintaining viable economies. This in itself would not be bad. However, when new republics like Ukraine still need outside help to maintain the struggle for democracy, the $20 million request to Congress should be more logically prioritized.

Paul Thomas Rabchenuk
Marblehead, Mass.

Stop focusing on Oksana Baiul

Dear Editor:

I especially enjoyed the "1997: Year In Review" issue of The Weekly. However, I wish that The Weekly and all Ukrainians would stop providing support and press coverage for Oksana Baiul. She repeatedly refers to herself as being Russian. She does this on national television and in the print media.

I say to all Ukrainian media outlets: do not give her the time of day! We have plenty of good role models who are proud of their heritage. Let's give them the coverage they deserve. Even the world class Russian skater Oksana Grishuk recently changed her first name to "Pasha" so as not to be mistakenly identified as Ms. Baiul. I wonder why?

Let's stop trying to convince Ms. Baiul what is right. We should act as if she doesn't exist. If she is so proud to be a Russian, then she should relocate to Russia and enjoy the quality of life there.

Chrystyna Wynnyk-Wilson
Austin, Texas

Note from the editor:

The Ukrainian Weekly welcomes letters to the editor and commentaries on a variety of topics of concern to the Ukrainian American and Ukrainian Canadian communities. Opinions expressed by columnists, commentators and letter-writers are their own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of either The Weekly editorial staff or its publisher, the Ukrainian National Association.

| Home Page |