Nearly 15 years ago, I traveled to Kiev to speak during a forum with Ukrainian journalists, and a few activists, focusing on religion coverage in that already tense nation. I was there as a representative of the Oxford Centre for Religion & Public Life.

Obviously, this meant talking about the fractured state of Eastern Orthodox Christianity in Ukraine, with bitter tensions between the historic (in many ways ancient) Ukrainian Orthodox Church and new rival churches — including leaders who had previously been excommunicated from canonical Orthodoxy.

Again, let me stress that this was in 2009, during a time when the Ukrainian government was, basically, content to let global Orthodox leaders work this out — oh so slowly — as an Orthodox canon-law issue.

These conflicts were truly byzantine (small “b”) and Ukrainian journalists said it was obvious that most journalists from Europe and America knew next to nothing about the Orthodox splits and, frankly, didn’t care to learn the details.

The Holy Dormition-Kiev Caves Lavra? That’s just a historic site. End of story.

Things have changed, sort of, but for all the wrong reasons.

With Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, journalists now care about the state of Orthodoxy in this war. The question discussed during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in) is whether elite journalists have any interest in the centuries of facts behind the current Orthodox conflict. The church conflict is linked, of course, to the February 24, 2022, invasion — but also to earlier actions by leaders in the United States, the European Union, the current Ukrainian government and, last but not least, a strategic 2019 move by the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul.

Note: All of these events took place before the Russian invasion. The Orthodox schism in Ukraine predates the war — by decades.

Where to begin? Let’s start with some of what I learned, and described, 15 years ago, in a column with this title: “Religion ghosts in Ukraine.” I was describing some what would have been some important liturgical symbolism during rites marking Ukraine's Day of Remembrance for Victims of Political Repression.

It would have been big news, for example, if clergy from the giant Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) – with direct ties to Moscow – had taken part in a ceremony that featured [President Viktor] Yushchenko, who, as usual, aimed angry words to the north.

But what if the clergy were exclusively from the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Kiev Patriarchate), born after the Soviet Union's collapse in 1991 and linked to declarations of Ukrainian independence? What if there were also clergy from a third body, the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church, born early in the 20th century?

A rite featuring clergy from one or both of these newer churches also would have been symbolic. After all, these days almost anything can create tensions between Ukraine and Russia, from natural gas prices to efforts to emphasize the Ukrainian language, from exhibits of uniquely Ukrainian art to decisions about which statues are torn down (almost anything Soviet) or which statues are erected (such as one of Ivan Mazepa, labeled a traitor by Russia after his 18th century efforts to boost Ukrainian independence).

But it's hard for Ukrainian journalists to ask these kinds of questions and print what they learn when people answer them, according to a circle of journalists — secular and religious — at a Kiev forum … focusing on trends in religion news in their nation.

Why was it hard to discuss the Orthodox splits?

Everyone knew that there was the potential for violence and conflict. And, besides, why talk about religious issues when the political tensions were already so high?

In my opinion, as an Eastern Orthodox believer, the key fact that journalists need to understand is that Slavic Orthodoxy is older than the creation of the modern nations that are involved in this war. Also, the Holy Dormition-Kiev Caves Lavra plays a major role in this narrative.

The story of Orthodoxy in this region begins with the “Baptism of Rus” — the conversion of Grand Prince Vladimir and the baptism of the people of Kiev in 988.

The great monastery of the Kiev caves was founded in 1051. How important is this holy site? In the podcast, I argued that it can be seen as the Jerusalem of Slavic Orthodoxy. Long before the creation of the modern Russian state, Moscow was the city of power, St. Petersburg the city of culture and Kiev was the heart of Slavic Orthodoxy.

Now, the Ukrainian government is poised to drive the monks out of the monastery, claiming that — as a body — they are agents of Putin. The reality is much more complex than that.

Readers may want to look at the details my “On Religion” column with this headline: “Centuries of ‘Holy Rus’ church history behind the bitter Orthodox schism in Ukraine.” Also, see this very fair-minded essay published by the Carnegie Endowment for World Peace: “Why the Russian Orthodox Church Supports the War in Ukraine.”

The key is the following information about the historic Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which is currently under attack by the Ukrainian government. The monks of the Kiev Caves are part of this older church body. This large Orthodox church is, yes, linked to Moscow by canon law and history. However, since the invasion its leaders have done everything they can, within Orthodox canon law, to cut their ties to the larger Russian Orthodox Church.

Read the following carefully (I added one brief spot of bold type):

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 left all the constituent entities in the complex structure of the ROC facing a dilemma: speak out against Patriarch Kirill for his support of the war, or remain loyal to the church leadership and risk becoming seen as Kremlin agents in their own countries, with all the ensuing legal and reputational ramifications. As far as it is known, the Moscow Patriarchate has not offered any recommendations to its churches on this matter. 

Under church law, these constituent churches cannot independently separate from the ROC: they would be considered schismatics. In theory, they can arrange with the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople — the “first among equals” of the Eastern Orthodox Church — to be recognized as separate entities, but that’s far easier said than done, especially in countries where parallel jurisdictions already exist, such as Estonia and Moldova.

It is the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), of course, that finds itself in the most difficult situation. It has declared independence from the ROC, but has failed to formalize the process under canon law. Several senior clergymen have left Ukraine for Russia, and others are under investigation for treason in Ukraine, but overall, the UOC has condemned the war and stopped praying for Patriarch Kirill as its primate.

The words “in theory” are crucial. Truth is, the ecumenical patriarch cannot act unilaterally. The leaders of the besieged Ukrainian Orthodox Church — trapped between Moscow and the desires of the America-European Union alliance (backing the current Ukrainian government) — remain in Communion with most of the world’s Orthodox leaders.

What this church needs is time and global Orthodox support, as it works to completely cut its few remaining links to Moscow.

This is the context for the current police action against the monks of the Kiev Caves.

Newsrooms in America and Europe see this as a battle between Putin and Ukraine. As always, who cares about messy religious details? To see this journalism malpractice in action, consider a bizarre New York Times piece that ran the other day with this headline: “The Monks in the Middle of Russia’s war in Ukraine.”

This was not a conventional news report, but more of a slide show of photos accompanied by a short article running underneath the images. I cannot, of course, show the copyrighted photos, but we can walk through the text.

Monks from a 1,000-year-old monastery in Kyiv performed an ancient ritual this month honoring their predecessors. But a war-fueled rift between the living clerics loyal to Moscow and those loyal to Kyiv is coming to a head.

Once again, the rift is not “war fueled,” it has existed for decades — tied to earlier schisms from the historic Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

Also, the simplistic “loyal to Moscow” riff — repeated with variations throughout the Times text — indicates that the newspaper’s editors have taken zero time or effort to follow the actions of Metropolitan Onuphry and his church for the past year or more (as briefly discussed in the Carnegie essay).

Meanwhile, what does “loyal to Kyiv” mean? Metropolitan Onuphry is a native Ukrainian, as are the overwhelming majority of his priests and monks. He has condemned the Russian invasion since Day 1, calling Putin’s action “a repetition of the sin of Cain, who killed his own brother out of envy. Such a war has no justification either from God or from people.”

Later in the piece, after several more “loyal to Moscow” bytes, there is this:

Dozens of monks around Ukraine from the Moscow sect have been arrested, accused of spying for the Kremlin and even directing Russian air strikes.

“The fake and godless spirit of the ‘Russian world’ is leaving the Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra,” Metropolitan Epiphanius, the head of the church loyal to Kyiv, pictured above, said during a service early this year.

Sect? So the historic Ukrainian church is no longer truly Christian? Also, charges have been filed against some UOC priests — out of 10,000-plus clergy — and the UOC leadership has acknowledged some abuses, while also calling for clear, public discussions of the evidence. In particular, it’s important to note that pre-invasion opposition to the Ukrainian leadership’s new, and in UOC eyes schismatic, Orthodox Church of Ukraine is not the same thing as support for Russian violence.

By the way: Note that the text for this photo says that it shows “Metropolitan Epiphanius, the head of the church loyal to Kyiv.” Actually, this is a photo of Metropolitan Onuphry, surrounded by clergy and members of the older Ukrainian church. Correction please?

President Volodymyr Zelenksy has said the expulsions are needed for “spiritual independence.”

But Metropolitan Pavlo Lebid, the head of the church loyal to Moscow in Ukraine, said that his members had no intention of leaving the monastery.

“Spiritual independence”? In Orthodox law, that is an issue that will require acceptance by the world’s Orthodox patriarchs and bishops.

Oh, and “Metropolitan Pavlo Lebid, the head of the church loyal to Moscow in Ukraine”? Actually, he is the leader of the Kiev Caves monks — not the “church loyal to Moscow.” The UOC’s leader is Metropolitan Onuphry. Another correction, please?

The Kremlin has seized on the schism to bolster its propaganda campaign at home, saying that Kyiv’s crackdown is an assault on religious freedom.

Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin’s press secretary, said this month, “This proves and shows once again that everything we are doing is absolutely right.”

Actually, many religious leaders — see statements by Pope Francis and the World Council of Churches — are concerned about the government’s actions against the Lavra. Journalists may also want to see what has been said by other Orthodox prelates.

Oh, and that statement by the Kremlin? It would be condemned by Orthodox leaders around the world, including (and especially by) Metropolitan Onuphry and the leaders of the historic Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

This error-stricken Times sort-of article is an embarrassment, serving basically as a press release for the current Ukrainian government, the U.S. State Department, the European Union and NATO. The late, great editor and foreign correspondent Abe Rosenthal — who knew a thing or two about post-Communist puzzles — would be appalled.

Oh, and there is one other player in this tragic drama who would be pleased with the obvious bias in this Times report — Vladimir Putin.

This Gray Lady miscue serves his purposes, from the first line to the last, mistake after mistake.

Am I saying that, instead of being PR agents for the current Ukrainian government, the Times and other media should serve the historic Ukrainian Orthodox Church? Of course not.

What I am saying is that facts about history and Orthodox canon law matter.

The ecumenical patriarch is not a pope. The battles between the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and its West-leaning rivals began DECADES before the criminal Russian invasion. There are millions of Orthodox believers around the world who condemn Putin and his actions, while also condemning what is happening to Metropolitan Onuphry and the monks of the Kiev caves.

Here is some material from a recent statement by Metropolitan Onuphry (“Ukrainian Orthodox Church’s Appeal to President Zelensky”), words that represent a player in this drama that Western journalists continue to ignore:

After the Ukrainian state obtained independence, it started to return churches and monasteries taken away by the Soviet authorities to the Church or grant her the right to use them. Predominantly, those were destroyed, neglected and crippled buildings. Religious communities of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church rebuilt those sanctuaries and once again filled them with life due to their own efforts and at their own cost. Gold-domed churches have become a true adornment of various parts of Ukraine.

The Kiev Caves Lavra holds a special place among the revived sanctuaries. Today the Kiev Caves Lavra is a powerful religious, educational, and administrative center, as more than two hundred monks carry out their ministry on its territory, almost three hundred students of the academy and seminary are studying there, and the administrative center of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is located there.

Apart from that, powerful work on providing humanitarian aid to everybody who needs it is constantly carried out in the Lavra. For every cleric, monastic, and believer of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, the Kiev Caves Lavra is a priceless holy site, cherished with love.

I’ll end with the words of a prayer I hear, these days, every time I go to my local Orthodox church, which is part of the Orthodox Church in America. Our parish includes several families with roots in Russia and the lands on its borders, including Ukraine.

[To be inserted after the petition for the living]
Again we pray for mercy, life, peace, health, salvation, for those who are suffering, wounded, grieving, or displaced because of the war in Ukraine.

Again we pray for a cessation of the hostilities against Ukraine, and that reconciliation and peace will flourish there, we pray thee, hearken and have mercy.

Yes, the “hostilities against Ukraine.”

Enjoy the podcast, if that is possible with this painful subject, and please pass it along to others.

FIRST IMAGE: Screenshot from a documentary on the history of the Kiev Pechersk Lavra.