Russian terrorist leader Putin, in a telephone conversation with Pope Leo XIV on 4 June 2025, complained about Ukraine and defended the UOC (which claims not to be part the Moscow Patriarchate), complaining about ‘the Kyiv authorities’ efforts to liquidate the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church’, as reported by the official Kremlin website, Kremlin.ru.
This marks the second official statement by the Russian authorities conserning the UOC (MP), following the Istanbul ‘memorandum’ (or rather ultimatum). This indicates that this issue is becoming one of the key meaning in the Kremlin’s tactics in its war against Ukraine.
Thus, on 2 June 2025, during negotiations in Istanbul, the Russian delegation presented a set of conditions for suspending the war. These included Ukraine’s complete renunciation of the Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, Luhansk regions and Crimea, as well as limitations on the size of its Armed Forces and weapons. Among these demands—which effectively threaten the loss of Ukraine’s sovereignty—was a separate paragraph (No. 11) in the so-called memorandum, demanding protection for the UOC (MP).
So, as predicted, the Kremlin regime is trying to use the “UOC case” in a package with the status of the occupied territories and other “conditions” that are extremely unfavourable for Ukraine. If Ukraine does not agree to such demands, Moscow continues to threaten to kill Ukrainian civilians and destroy peaceful Ukrainian cities – this is blackmail. Meanwhile, the Russian Federation is actively destroying the churches of the UOC (MP) and completely eliminating the structures of the UOC (MP) in the occupied territories, which it is allegedly trying to “protect”.
And now, just two days later, Putin personally raises the UOC (MP) issue again…
The Synod of the UOC should have issued an urgent statement declaring its categorical protest and disagreement with the use of their church in such manipulations by the Kremlin, confirming its complete severance of any ties with the Moscow Patriarchate. But this is only if the Synod is truly Ukrainian, independent and has no relations with religious or other bodies in the aggressor state. After all, being used in conjunction with territorial claims is disgraseful and unacceptable for the Ukrainian church.
However, there has been no protest from the leadership of the UOC (MP) so far…
I heard from some UOC (MP) hierarchs two years ago that they were awaiting for peace talks, where the UOC (MP) would be the major discussion point. And when I asked why the UOC had not severed canonical ties with the ROC-MP, they responded that there was no need for this, that such ties guaranteed their continued existence. ‘There is no need to rush, we should wait, there will be negotiations and things will return to how they were,’ they said.
It seems they were not waiting in vain. Their ‘star’ moment has come. However, naturally, the result will have the opposite effect in Ukrainian society. After all, it will work as a clear marker of who is on the side of Ukraine in the war and who is not… After all, this is the fourth year of a full-scale war… Scince 24.02.2022, there can be no excuse or illusion about remaining under the ROC MP.
Once again, the rhetorical question arises: is the UOC (MP) leadership content to be a ‘bargaining chip’ in these sordid Kremlin manipulations traided for blood and the lives of tens of thousands of Ukrainians? If the Synod of the UOC (MP) does not express its protest and disagreement with their involvement in this anti-Ukrainian campaign, does that imply its agreement with it? Or even deliberately participates in it?
“Here are the official site Kremlin.ru reports on Putin’s conversation with the Roman pontiff:…”: “The Kyiv regime is escalating the conflict and carriyng out sabotage…. To achieve a final, just and comprehensive resolution of the crisis, it is necessary to eliminate its root causes…. In connection with the well-known line of the Kiev authorities towards the liquidation of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church, it is hoped that the Holy See will be more active in supporting freedom of religion in Ukraine…. At the request of Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia, Vladimir Putin conveyed to Pope Leo XIV his wishes for success in his pastoral mission”.
As we see, the demagoguery about eliminating the war`s ‘root causes’ (in fact, the demand for the denationalisation of Ukraine and the abolition of its state sovereignty) and the ‘UOC case’ are once again bundled together, as in the Istanbul ‘memorandum’ of 2 June 2025. Since it also conveys the wishes of “Putin’s altar boy”, Kirill Gundyaev, it is quite clear that Putin and Kirill had carefully discussed this with each other before the call. But if the UOC had really separated from the ROC-MP, would the Moscow Patriarch and the Kremlin dictator have asked to intercede for the ‘schismatics’? Is it possible to imagine Kirill or Putin interceding for the OCU? Or for the former head of the UOC, Metropolitan Filaret (Denisenko), or for Metropolitan Simeon (Shostatsky) and Metropolitan Oleksandr (Drabynko), who genuinely left the Moscow Patriarchate?
I wonder who within the UOC (MP) is asking the Russian authorities for protection? If the UOC has truly severed ties with Moscow, then what business does the latter have with a church organisation that is independent of it? For some reason, the Kremlin shows no interest in the fate of either Ukrainian Protestants or Catholics, or the OCU or the Old Believers. Nor is it interested in the fate of, say, Romanian Orthodox communities in Ukraine. But they put the ‘case of the UOC’ on a par with territorial claims…
This is also one of the indicators. But the most glaring sign is the absence of protests from the leadership of the UOC (MP) against their use in these dirty manipulations and bargaining by the Kremlin. ‘Silence is a sign of consent’. And then they wonder why Ukrainian society and the authorities viev them as a ‘fifth column’?
Obviously, this is a matter of national security. The latest ultimatums and statements of the Kremlin terrorists regarding the UOC (MP) confirm this.
So will there be any reaction from the Synod of the supposedly ‘independent’ UOC? Many believers and ordinary priests of the UOC still hope for such decisive action from their church leadership. There has even been another appeal to Metropolitan Onufriy by a group of UOC (MP) clergy. But will there be a response? So far, there has been no response to any of the previous appeals of the signatory priests from the UOC (MP)…
Dr. Serhii Shumylo,
Director of the International Institute of the Athonite Legacy;
Research Fellow in the Department of Classics, Ancient History, Religion and Theology, University of Exeter (UK);
Research fellow of the Institute of History of Ukraine, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
