LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (04/26/98)

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Bound Brook should respond to concerns

Dear Editor:

I would like to take this opportunity to thank The Weekly for printing the letters to the editor and commentaries regarding our Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Since Patriarch Bartholomew's statements in Odesa, this issue, once swept under the carpet, has come to the forefront. This issue is not a Orthodox one - it is one of the most pressing issues that Ukraine and Ukrainians face today and is another example of Moscow rearing its ugly head.

It was, therefore, with great interest that I read the Rev. John Nakonachny's response to the letters regarding this important issue.

As a past member of Father Nakonachny's former parish in Maplewood, I can attest that, contrary to his characterization of himself, the Rev. Nakonachny, was not, and is not a "simple priest." Father John, as he lifted my daughter up to God at the altar during her christening, in what was one of the most spiritually uplifting ceremonies I had ever witnessed, was by no means, a simple priest, but one who inspired great love and respect. It was evident to all in the parish, that he would go far.

But I am a "simple" parishioner who could stay silent no longer - a member of the Church who has felt much pain and remorse over the recent events that now threaten to divide us - a situation that was brought on, not by "external" forces, but by our hierarchs themselves, unwittingly or wittingly.

The Rev. Nakonachny's characterization of Victor Rud and other faithful as manipulators and liars for presenting the facts and voicing their genuine concern is very disturbing. As Shakespeare, so aptly put it; "Me thinks the lady doth protest too much."

Over the past three years I have come to the realization that not all that was presented by Bound Brook at the time of our "union" with Constantinople is as it was presented. And I, as I am sure many others, discovered this independently of any influence from the "troublemakers."

The Rev. Nakonachny asks: "Why, only now have people come forth, three years after the Sobor?" Perhaps because they were like me - fully trusting in the decisions our hierarchs make, never questioning their motives or their ability to make the right decisions about our Church's future both here and in Ukraine.

I am embarrassed to admit that, caught up in the daily rigors of my own family life, I wasn't even particularly interested in the events surrounding our Church's decision to join Constantinople. Our hierarchs obviously have the best interests of the faithful at heart; perhaps Constantinople would indeed help us gain independence for our Ukrainian Church - I bought Bound Brook's presentation hook, line and sinker. After all, I was cautious about having our diaspora church assets somehow being taken over by Ukraine. Maybe this was indeed, the best solution, I thought. How wrong I was.

Sometime later, while doing research on the Internet, I came across the letter from Patriarch Bartholomew to Moscow's Patriarch Aleksei in which the ecumenical patriarch reassures Moscow that he has taken care of the Ukrainian problem to their (Moscow's) benefit, and that the Ukrainian hierarchs in the diaspora have given up supporting autocephaly for Ukraine. I stared at the screen in disbelief. How could this be? What should I do? How could our hierarchs do this!? At the time I didn't know this was the infamous Protocol No. 937.

I started earnestly searching, researching, questioning - and requestioning. I surfed the net for official documents from France, Turkey, Greece, the U.S. I began reading all I could get my hands on about the relationship between the Greeks and Bartholomew, Moscow and Bartholomew, etc. The information available was enormous: the attempt of the bishops of SCOBA to form an autocephalous generic American Church, Archbishop Spyridon's denunciation of nationalism in the Church, Bartholomew's empty coffers and his need for money - and slowly it began making sense. It was all there, laid out for anyone who had the time or inclination to investigate. I was increasingly convinced we, the faithful, had been duped. Nonetheless, I still had no idea how to proceed. A lone sheep will never be heard...

The facts, unfortunately were undeniable and we had been misled. The politics of Constantinople and Moscow prevailed and seemed to guarantee that Ukraine would not have an independent Ukrainian Autocephalous Church. Whether we believe in the sincerity of their motives or not, our hierarchs had committed themselves to this action. Patriarch Bartholomew had repeatedly stated that only Moscow would have authority over Ukraine. And, the fact that our hierarchs agreed not to support autocephaly for Ukraine and the Kyiv patriarch (the "schismatics," as Bartholomew calls them), was, and is, in my "simple" assessment, "zrada" (betrayal).

The rhetoric about Bound Brook's support for the Kyiv Patriarchate, the money collected by the parishioners are all moot points. As a banker, I know the bottom line is what is important, and the bottom line here is that Protocol No. 937 has negated it all. Whatever surface support there is, officially, on paper, Bound Brook had foresaken Ukraine. The ramifications of our hierarchs' actions, in the mind of this simple parishioner, is of grandiose proportions. Once Ukraine and its 35 million faithful Orthodox give up their "souls" and "spirituality" to "big brother Russia," can the other aspects of life be far behind?

What were the motives? The more I learn about the struggle the other ethnic churches under Constantinople are having, the clearer this becomes. Examples abound. Recently, the Albanians physically ejected the new hierarchs appointed by Constantinople from their country because they were not Albanian. Does this await us?

Greeks in the U.S. also have taken issue with their hierarchs as Constantinople attempts to obtain more direct control over individual churches and diffuse the influence of laypeople: priests have been fired the Constitution is expected to be changed at the next Sobor with purported changes that will transfer individual church assets to Constantinople and diminish the power of the elected lay council. After all, Patriarch Bartholomew needs cash. His coffers were empty before he arrived in the US. The Hellenic Press reports that he collected $32 million in cash and pledges from the faithful here. How much, I wonder, of this amount was from us, Ukrainians? And what do we get in exchange?

The way this "simple" parishioner sees it, Moscow has won in Ukraine and the Ukrainian diaspora will soon lose even more of its independence. Our church assets will ultimately belong to the Turks - and we will become a generic American Church. I, for one, am not prepared to do all this for some sort of "canonical" recognition. The losses far outweigh the benefits.

I believed our hierarchs had somehow been duped into this precarious position - and had unwittingly played into the hands of Moscow. I still would like to believe that.

I look forward to hearing from Bound Brook - not in the form of calling people who question their actions liars and manipulators - but in real answers to the issues that Protocol No. 937 raises. Unfortunately, due to the surprising vehemence of our church leaders' reaction to any questioning of their actions, it is apparent that we may never know the true story.

I would like to add that these recent articles have prompted much discussion and positive feedback - regardless of which side one takes on this issue, and I applaud The Weekly for allowing the issue to be raised. Recently, while in Chicago, I was amazed by the number of people expressing their gratitude that what had been whispered about in the parish halls was now coming to the surface.

Sometimes we forget what an important information source The Weekly is - especially for those communities far removed from the mainstream Ukrainian community. We on the East Coast are so close to each other that communication between individual hromadas is easy: word of mouth, large gatherings, meetings, telephone, etc.

One gentleman from Indiana said it best when he expressed how important the Svoboda daily and The Weekly are to his community. He added that many of us forget that for communities like his The Weekly and Svoboda are the only source of information about other Ukrainian hromadas. They provide a valuable forum to discuss issues that touch all of us Ukrainians today.

Roma Lisovich
South Orange, N.J.

Do we suffer from feelings of inferiority?

Dear Editor:

Perhaps the Ukrainian Orthodox can learn something from our Catholic brothers and sisters in Houston.

Many members of the Ukrainian Cultural Club of Houston are not fluent in Ukrainian. Some do not know the language at all.Since the majority of the club's members are Catholics who attend the Pokrova Ukrainian Catholic Church, the Rev. Andrij Dwulit asked the club's opinion if the use of English should be increased during liturgies and suggested several options.

During the discussions, the older members, who know Ukrainian well, were willing to comply. Maybe some felt like the Rev. John Nakonachny: in the 21st century, all the old folks will be dead and everything will become English, American or whatever ("ne vtrachaite kume syly ta spuskaites na dno"). Then came a vote. To my amazement, all the young parishioners opted for no change. Obviously, they felt pride in their heritage and were unwilling to diminish it by yielding an inch.

It seems to me that those who force English into the Ukrainian Orthodox Church lack such pride. More bluntly, they suffer a feeling of inferiority. I have heard of a parish that switched to English, but the number of parishioners did not increase even by one. How sad!

A comment about a related matter: the debate over the union with Constantinople once was interesting and informative. It ceased being either when letter writers began to submit endless tirades, rather than getting to the point.

Ihor Koszman
Houston

Thanks for providing information on UOC

Dear Editor:

Congratulations for taking the bull by the horns in giving the coverage that you have concerning the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

In addition to the obvious consequences for the Ukrainian Church here, the greatest impact remains the stranglehold that Moscow continues to exhibit over Ukraine.

I am particularly stunned to read the disclosures in Victor Rud's commentary and think he should reply to the wave of accusations that resulted from his piece. I cannot believe that on so critical and sensitive an issue, from which he obviously has nothing to gain personally, he would expose himself to such charges if there was no substance to his commentary.

I, for one, am particularly grateful for his openness, as he finally discloses what many have long suspected.

Stephan Kasyanenko
Maplewood, N.J.