LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (06/24/01)

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Faithful have right to greet pontiff

Dear Editor:

On the eve of Pope John Paul II's visit to Ukraine there has been a lot in the national and international press about Ukraine being an "Orthodox" country and the pope having no right to visit without permission from the Moscow patriarch. The originators of this media spin are the Russian Orthodox Church, part of which is masquerading as the Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Moscow Patriarchate, and the Russian government.

The Moscow Patriarchate decries its loss of western regions of Ukraine to Catholicism. It is a significant loss because this small region of the former Soviet empire used to provide one-third of the income for the Russian Orthodox Church.

On the Russian government side, newly appointed Russian Ambassador to Ukraine Viktor Chernomyrdin proclaims: "The pope's visit is Ukraine's affair, but maybe it's not very good and not very right. We are Slav Orthodox [people]. I don't think there should be cracks in our spirituality." Exactly what kind of spirituality he has in mind is never explained.

This well-orchestrated Russian media blitz has been picked up and is being carried uncritically by the Western media. "Ukrainian Orthodox protest pope visit," cry headlines in the Western press. The fact that there are three Orthodox Churches in Ukraine, and that only one of those three - the one under the direct jurisdiction of the Moscow patriarch - does all the protesting is never mentioned.

Even such usually well-informed sources on Eastern European affairs as Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty have swallowed this Russian spin - hook, line and sinker. Writes Askold Krushelnycky (RFE/RL, June 13) about Catholics in Ukraine: "Comprising both Greek and Roman Catholics, they are concentrated in western Ukraine and make up just 10 percent of the country's religious believers, who are predominantly Orthodox Christian."

How this writer has determined that Catholics comprise only 10 percent of the country's religious believers and that the country is composed predominantly of Orthodox Christian believers is never explained.

With all this media hype about the pope's visit to Ukraine, it is time for a reality check, specifically how "predominantly Orthodox" Ukraine really is. If one tries to address this question honestly, one learns very quickly that there are really no objective criteria for determining whether Ukraine is predominantly atheist, Orthodox or Catholic.

Considering its Communist past, I am inclined to agree with Myron B. Kuropas (The Ukrainian Weekly, June 10): "Taken as a whole, Ukraine today is a nation of non-believers." How many Orthodox or Catholic believers there are today in Ukraine nobody knows. And then there is the question of how one defines "believer." Is a person who declares himself/herself to be Orthodox or Catholic but has never been inside a church a "believer?"

The fact remains that the present-day population of Ukraine comprises a diverse and pluralistic society both in its ethnic and religious composition, and that no one - and that includes the Moscow patriarch - has the right to interfere with the people's right to practice religious beliefs of their own choosing. And that includes greeting their spiritual leader, the pope of Rome, on his visit to Ukraine.

Ihor Lysyj
Austin, Texas

Not all Orthodox against papal visit

Dear Editor:

As a Ukrainian American conservative Republican, I generally enjoy Dr. Myron Kuropas' column, particularly when he skewers liberals and their unrealistic notions. However, as an Orthodox Ukrainian, I was dismayed to read his latest diatribe, "Polish pope, Russian patriarch."

First of all, the title suggests that the patriarch of the Muscovite Church is equivalent in stature to the pope of the Roman Catholic Church. The pope is the undisputed leader of every Catholic Church in the world (as far as I know). The patriarch, on the other hand, is merely the head of one branch of Orthodoxy, which is in the midst of a losing battle to control Ukrainian Christians, concurrent with Moscow's losing battle to control Ukraine politically.

The article does not mention the fact that there are two branches of Ukrainian Orthodoxy completely independent of Moscow. There is the Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Kyiv Patriarchate and the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church. Both of these are patriotic and are holding discussions on possible unification (excluding the Muscovites from these talks). Both support the pope's visit, realizing that strong Ukrainian Churches will naturally reduce Moscow's influence over Ukrainian Christians.

This column missed a golden opportunity to show Ukrainians supporting each other against their oppressor; instead it gave legitimacy to the oppressor. The author used the unfortunate choice of words "even Ukrainian Orthodox Patriarch Filaret, declared 'non-canonical' by Aleksei II, has ... agreed to meet with the pope." First, the word "even" suggests that this is a surprise, whereas to us younger Ukrainian Orthodox, it would be expected - a no-brainer. Second, who cares what the Moscow patriarch thinks of our patriarch?

Orthodoxy was central to the identity of the Ukrainian Kozaks, whose battles with Polish forces are all that kept Ukraine (especially western Ukraine) from becoming completely Polonized. After Ukrainian Orthodoxy was suppressed (not "annihilated," which suggests its death), the Ukrainian Catholic Church was at the forefront of the Ukrainian independence movement, especially in the 20th century. Therefore, both religions have a right to be proud of their heritage, and both should be respected by all Ukrainian patriots.

It is a shame that some of our older generation are still relatively ignorant of the Church to which they do not belong (Catholic vs. Orthodox). Fortunately, the younger generation is more enlightened and tends to work together. The best examples of this are joint Catholic-Orthodox liturgies in Cleveland, and participation in each other's Easter liturgies by Chicago clergy.

At the end of the article, Dr. Kuropas gives the reader an unpleasant choice - a "Polish pope" or a "Russian patriarch." With this he betrays an unfortunate resignation to let outsiders control us. Dr. Kuropas fails to mention a third choice - best and most obvious one: a Ukrainian Church run by Ukrainians! Wild concept, huh? Don't laugh, it could happen in your lifetime!

Andrew Kosowsky
Schaumburg, Ill.

Preservation group must define mission

Dear Editor:

I read your article about the proposed demapping of Taras Shevchenko Place with great interest not only as a member of the East Village Community since birth and an attorney with an East Village practice for the past 18 plus years, but as a former member of the original so-called Taras Shevchenko Preservation Committee. In reading your paper's lengthy article, I failed to spot any sort of specific mission statement for this organization. It is, in fact, this failure to articulate a specific purpose or set of goals that led me to resign from what I assumed from the name to be an ad hoc committee dedicated to maintaining a New York street in the name of Ukraine's great 19th century bard.

Unfortunately, the committee seems to have wandered far from its original purpose. While its first fliers called upon all to try to save Shevchenko Place, the fliers calling attention to the community meeting at the Cooper Union of May 29 (at least the ones I saw) made no mention of Shevchenko but referred to The Cooper Union's plans to build a hotel and an office building off Third Avenue and, if my memory is correct, talked about the loss of parking spaces.

Now, is the goal of the committee to stop The Cooper Union, a university that gives each student a full scholarship and that has educated dozens of young immigrants and their offspring (many of them Ukrainian) from building a hotel? Or is the goal to prevent the demapping of Taras Shevchenko Place?

For those who are not well-acquainted with the East Village, Taras Shevchenko Place is the former Ale Place, which is a small 200-foot mid-block street cutting across from Seventh to Sixth Streets between Second and Third avenues near McSorely's Old Ale House. Hence, its previous name. It has the distinction of being one of the few streets in the City of New York that has no address attached to it. All too often, when the bathrooms at McSorely's become too crowded, it is used for less lofty purposes than originally intended.

Unfortunately, because of an often endemic lack of focus in New York's Ukrainian community and its "establishment," this street was the grand prize awarded the Ukrainian community by the city fathers for more than 100 years of substantial contribution to New York's cultural and economic life. Other past gifts to the neighborhood have included a shelter for over 2,000 homeless and often mentally ill men with a history of substance abuse, a number of methadone clinics and half-way houses and, of course, the well-known flop houses of the Bowery, which is an extension of Third Avenue.

The possibility that this recognition, however humble and insignificant, might be taken away obviously does touch and should touch a raw nerve in the Ukrainian community. However, this should not blind us to the fact that the street itself in its present condition does nothing to enhance St. George Ukrainian Church and its school, which both border on it. Every day dozens of children pour out of St. George and because of the narrowness of Taras Shevchenko Place spill out onto the street as they have been doing for decades, and as many of the readers themselves did in the 1950s and 1960s notwithstanding the best efforts of nuns and our waiting parents. Why it took us as a community over 20 years to finally pay attention to what is happening on this street is a mystery.

Now that our community's attention has finally been focused on this sorry-looking place, let's not waste our collective time and energy on what is clearly not a Ukrainian community issue, specifically the building of yet another New York hotel and office building. Personally, I would rather be stopped by a starry-eyed tourist looking for directions to The Ukrainian Museum or Veselka than by a mentally ill former drug addict off medication looking for a handout. To whom would we rather showcase our culture and achievements?

Of course some people are deeply opposed to gentrification, and that's certainly their fight. But the sole purpose of a Ukrainian community-sponsored group should be Ukrainian issues. At the last meeting of the committee I was told by one person that the issue is high rent. Later another person said The Cooper Union was not entitled to special deference, because so many of its students come from out of town. Then I was told that we need to preserve parking spots for Ukrainians visiting the neighborhood. Imagine. Its become frightening to open up an American newspaper for fear of what the latest report on Ukraine might say. Membership in Ukrainian organizations over here is plummeting, Svoboda became a weekly, Soyuzivka may be forced to close, but we should be worried about parking spots!

In short, if you are going to be speaking on behalf of the Ukrainian community or soliciting its support for your activities, then please tell us what you stand for and against. I think as a community we have matured beyond the point of giving our representatives carte blanche.

We need to ask: Where does the Taras Shevchenko Preservation Committee stand? And for that we need a mission statement.

Zenon B. Masnyj
New York

Of street demapping and a compromise

Dear Editor:

I am very worried by the proposal to demap Taras Shevchenko Place in New York's East Village. In my opinion, this important part of the community's identity should not be undermined in such a way.

There are choices that ought to be discussed, and I have a concrete proposal. In exchange for Taras Shevchenko Place, which is a short pathway between Sixth and Seventh streets, let's rename The Cooper Union as Taras Shevchenko University. Sounds like a good compromise to me!

This way the university gets the street, and we get to keep the name of Taras Shevchenko in our neighborhood.

Serge Polishchuk
Jersey City, N.J.

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 |