In his letter
Fr. Zubritsky takes me to task for deciding “to forego any fact-finding
about
the issues raised in this opinion piece” before printing it. While he
refers to
“facts”, he neglects to mention any concrete facts in his letter, nor
does he
address any of the issues raised by Bayrachny. It appears that Fr.
Zubritsky’s
main objection is to the fact I allowed it to be printed in the first
place.
Printing an opinion piece doesn’t necessarily mean that it is the
position of a
newspaper, nor even that we agree with it. It is simply a recognition
of the
fact that the writer has addressed an issue that deserves to be aired
in a
public debate, and done so in a thoughtful manner. Basically it’s
called
freedom of expression.
Back in April,
when I reported on the issue which generated this opinion piece, namely
the
order issued by His
Eminence, The Most Rev. Metropolitan Yurij (Kalistchuk), forbidding
UOCC clergy
from meeting with His Holiness Patriarch Filaret of the Ukrainian
Orthodox
Church – Kyiv Patriarchate (UOC – KP) during his visit to Canada, I
attempted
to consult with Metropolitan Yurij to get his side of the story. I
contacted Marusia
Kaweski of the Office of Communications of the UOCC with a request for
a
statement from Metropolitan Yurij and was told to contact him
personally. I
sent an e-mail to his address and left voice messages on both his
telephone
lines, but got no response.
When Bayrachny
sent me her article, I read it and found it to be a thoughtful and
articulate
piece by a devoted believer who is deeply concerned about the direction
her
Church is heading in, particularly in respect to its relations with the
Church
in Ukraine. Also from talking with Orthodox faithful I understand that
many
others are also concerned about relations with the Church in Ukraine
and what
Bayrachny says reflects the views of a significant group. Her piece
could be
considered a plea for transparency and an open discussion of some very
serious
issues. As such, that article deserved to see the light of day.
I can
appreciate that the UOCC finds itself in a very difficult and painful
position
regarding its relationship with the Kyiv Patriarchate. I am quite
certain that
deep in their hearts, the clergy of the UOCC would like nothing better
than to
recognize the Kyiv Patriarchate as a canonical church for Ukraine and
maintain
normal relations with it. Doing so, however, goes against the position
of the
Ecumenical Patriarch in Constantinople who recognizes the Ukrainian
Orthodox
Church – Moscow Patriarchate as the only canonical church in Ukraine.
Defying
the Ecumenical Patriarch by recognizing the Kyiv Patriarchate runs the
risk of
repercussions that may even lead to the UOCC itself losing its
canonical
status.