The two most influential Orthodox Churches - one by number, the other by reputation - Ruska The Orthodox Church (RPC) and the Ecumenical Patriarchate are today in a serious conflict that shakes the entire Orthodox world. The most painful and complex situation exists in Ukraine. The Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UPC), which is (was) canonically linked to the RPC, and the Orthodox Church currently operate there. Ukraine (PCU), created after the Constantinople Patriarch Bartholomew issued a tomos on autocephaly in 2018. Former members of non-canonical churches were also included in the new church structure, which caused a strong shock in the Orthodox world, both in terms of method and consequences. Even today, the majority of local Orthodox Churches do not recognize the PCU.
Since the beginning of the war, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church has distanced itself from Moscow. At the Parliament held on May 27, 2022, the UPC made changes to its Constitution, changing the name itself: the addition "Moscow Patriarchate" was removed from it. Relations with the Ecumenical Patriarchate were severed in 2018, and that decision was confirmed in 2022. At the same time, the Ukrainian authorities apply, to put it mildly, discriminatory measures to the UPC - their temples are taken away, and normal church life is seriously hampered.
How to get out of such a position? Is there a resolution to this deep crucifixion? Within the UPC itself, there are different attitudes and visions of possible exits. We talk about this and, in general, about nuances that we cannot see from the outside, with Archbishop Sylvester (Stoychev), rector of the Kyiv Spiritual Academy.
"WEATHER" What does your daily life look like today and how does the Ukrainian Orthodox Church function as a whole, and especially the Kyiv Theological Academy?
ARCHBISHOP SYLVESTER STOYCHEV: Christ's Church is called to bring the Good News to this world, regardless of external circumstances. That is why the UPC strives to fulfill its mission, despite the extremely difficult conditions of the war. Divine services are held in our temples, new priests are ordained, monastic rites are performed in monasteries and spiritual schools. We see many believers who come with sincere prayer. It is clear that man, when he is faced with difficult trials, turns to God. We strive to provide people with spiritual support.
As the rector of the Kyiv Spiritual Academy, I can say that even in the Academy, life does not stop. The teaching process, scientific work and publishing activity continue. Throughout the war years, young people regularly enrolled in the Academy. Of course, there is less interest now than before the (full) Russian attack started, but every year we have more applications than we can take, which is encouraging.
If we talk about everyday life, it has been significantly and profoundly different during the last four years. Tragic changes took place in the lives of all Ukrainians. And the Church bears the same burden that is on the shoulders of our compatriots - constant rocket and drone attacks, power, water and heating outages lasting several hours...
However, I believe that we must, as much as possible, preserve the teaching process alive. The personal presence of students and their direct contact with professors, as well as personal participation in worship, is particularly important for spiritual education. We don't just impart knowledge, we shape future pastors. That is why we switch to online classes only in extreme situations, as was the case in January 2026, during the brutal attacks on the energy infrastructure of Ukraine.
I don't know how accurate it is even possible to have accurate data, but how many believers does UPC have today??
To begin with, there are no official statistics on the number of members of certain religious communities in Ukraine. This question is not asked during the population census, which is a practice that dates back to the Soviet period. And therefore, anyone who presents precise numbers today is actually manipulating. Second, there are state statistics on the number of registered religious communities, which are published by the State Service for Ethnopolitics and Freedom of Conscience. However, even these data are not complete, because during the war it is not possible to collect reliable information from the occupied territories, primarily from parts of the Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, as well as from the Crimea. Third, during the war there were numerous transfers of parishes from the UPC to the PCU, but many of these cases were actually violent takeovers of temples. On paper, a new community is registered, while the UPC community actually continues to exist. All this makes it almost impossible to reliably determine the real number of Orthodox communities in Ukraine.
According to the last pre-war report from 2022, there were 12.069 UPC communities and 6.981 PCU communities operating in Ukraine. UPC had 215 monasteries with 4.681 monks, while PCU had 79 monasteries with only 233 monks. From 2022 to 2025, according to state data, 1.754 communities switched from UPC to PCU. However, in most cases these were de facto divisions rather than actual transitions. Part of the faithful, most often with a priest, remained in the UPC, but they were not allowed to register again. Therefore, for example, in some western regions of Ukraine, not a single UPC community is registered today. But at the same time, our believers and priests continue to live there, gather and perform services at home. It is clear that no one can say how many such communities actually exist. So the situation is extremely difficult. It cannot fit into the dry numbers of statistical reports…
photo: private archive...
What are the current relations between UPC and PCU?
Very complex. There is no official dialogue between us. At the same time, of course, in some cases there is informal communication.
The main problem that burdens our relations is violence on religious grounds. Since the founding of the PCU, and especially after the beginning of the full scale of Russian military aggression, we have witnessed numerous cases of violent takeover of the temples of our Church, in which representatives of the PCU directly participated. On the Internet, one can easily find videos of the taking of temples in Ivano-Frankivsk, Khmelnytskyi, Cherkasy and other places. They recorded obvious acts of violence against our clergy and believers. At the same time, the leadership of the PCU did not give an appropriate assessment of these events, nor did any priest of the PCU who directly participated in the violence bear canonical sanctions. All of this puts a serious strain on our relations and makes official dialogue practically impossible...
And what are the relations with the Moscow Patriarchate, and on the other hand, with the Ecumenical Patriarchate?
Today, UPC does not have any contacts with Moscow, but at the same time we do not have any contacts with the Church of Constantinople. I personally think that this is a very dangerous situation, because we are threatened with gradual self-isolation. This must not be allowed under any circumstances. That is why I have already said publicly several times that our Church could very well start an ecclesiastical-diplomatic dialogue with the Church of Constantinople, so that we could at least learn to hear and understand each other, and begin the search for a way out of this impasse. I believe that the church's attitude towards complex ecclesiastical-canonical issues consists in seeking a way out of divisions, not in deepening and cementing them.
How do you see the specific resolution?
First of all, it is obvious to me that in our relations with the Moscow Patriarchate we have already passed the "point of no return" and there can be no question of the return of our Church under the jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate. One does not need to be a prophet to understand that the PRC, by supporting the war against Ukraine, has lost respect in the eyes of Ukrainians. And if so, then, secondly, I believe that UPC, as an independent Church, must think about building a new type of relationship with other local Churches. There is simply no other way.
Today our Church exists as a completely independent one. We independently open dioceses and ordain bishops, we independently prepare holy myrrh, we open parishes abroad, where millions of Ukrainians have found themselves today. We already have the experience of independently solving all issues of internal church life. It is only necessary that other local Churches recognize this independence.
It is clear that there is a serious problem here, since the Church of Constantinople, as well as several other local Churches, believe that there is already an autocephalous Church in Ukraine - PCU. But precisely because of this, in order to find a sustainable form of existence of Orthodoxy in Ukraine in the future, it is necessary to start a calm and open discussion on this issue with other local Churches. The longer we all collectively refuse such a conversation, the more complex it will be to solve this problem in the future.
Are there different currents or internal divisions within the UPC itself??
I think that in every local Church there are different currents of ideas and different groups among bishops, clergy, monks and believers. This is a normal situation, and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is not an exception in this regard. Even during the time of the blessed Metropolitan Vladimir, who passed away in 2014, as well as during the time of the current head, Metropolitan Onufri, there were always internal discussions in our Church. It is very important that supporters of different views can express their opinions openly.
Recently, in the fall of 2025, a public discussion developed within our Church about our current canonical status and the future directions of the development of the UPC. The bishops expressed their views in interviews, in texts, as well as on social networks. During that polemic, it became clear that among the bishops of the UPC there are very different views on the future of our Church. On the one hand, there are those who no longer see our Church as part of the Moscow Patriarchate. On the other hand, there are those who insist that even today we remain part of the Russian Orthodox Church and that all decisions made at the UPC Assembly in May 2022 have no legal force. However, that group is, in my opinion, significantly smaller than the first. I want to emphasize that this is not about any kind of schism. We are all members of the same Church and partake of the same Chalice. But there is an open discussion between us, and that is extremely important. I am absolutely convinced that the very existence of the discussion is a testimony to the increased interest in this topic among the clergy and the faithful. It is simply impossible to start a broad discussion if there is no resonance for it among believers. Unfortunately, we know examples from the life of other local Churches where every open discussion is stifled at the very beginning. Fortunately, in our UPC, even in the most difficult conditions of the war, there is no "conspiratorial noise". We have preserved the ability to openly express our opinions and conduct dialogue.
Opet, UPC is suffering today not only because of Russian military aggression, but also due to the pressures of the Ukrainian state.
Indeed, during the war years, the relations of our Church with the Ukrainian state became significantly complicated. The visible deterioration of those relations began in the fall of 2022, and reached its peak with the adoption of the law "On the Protection of the Constitutional Order in the Area of Activities of Religious Organizations" in August 2024. Journalists often refer to that law as the "law on banning UPC", but that is not true. This law prohibits the operation of the RPC in Ukraine, but at the same time establishes a procedure for banning the operation of those religious organizations that are connected to the RPC and that are subordinate to it or are an integral part of it. This is precisely where the views of state authorities and the UPC diverge significantly.
The State Service for Ethnopolitics and Freedom of Conscience insists that UPC is still part of the Russian Orthodox Church today. However, UPC itself does not agree with that. That is the main subject of our conflict with the state. The State Service for Ethnopolitics and Freedom of Conscience has already submitted a lawsuit to the court for the liquidation of the Kyiv Metropolis UPC. It should be clarified here that the Kyiv Metropolitanate is a legal-administrative body to which all dioceses of the UPC are subordinated. If the metropolitanate were abolished, it would make the work of all dioceses, monasteries and spiritual educational institutions of the UPC much more difficult, although this would not automatically mean the abolition of all parishes.
Therefore, the conflict between our Church and the state exists. However, I personally do not think that it is possible to talk about the persecution of the UPC under the direction of the state. The notion of persecution takes us back to the Soviet period, when the state openly declared its atheistic character and aimed to destroy the Church and religion itself, while priests were physically exterminated as a social group. The modern Ukrainian state does not conduct atheistic propaganda or prohibit the profession of religion. However, in the current situation of strained relations between the UPC and the state, as well as due to the formation of a negative image of the UPC in part of the public, for which certain political forces are responsible, one can speak of discrimination against the UPC. I myself have already said that I believe that further subordination of the UPC to the Moscow Patriarchate has become simply impossible. This is why I personally believe that our Church should seek consensus with the state.
Unfortunately, in addition to the problems caused by the adoption of this law, there are also numerous examples in which local authorities in different regions of Ukraine directly participate in organizing the violent occupation of the churches of our Church and in the illegal re-registration of parishes. Basically, in such cases there is legal lawlessness. There are numerous examples of police inaction during acts of violence against UPC communities. Another painful problem is cases of mobilization and sending priests of our Church to the front. A priest who has taken the canonical oath cannot take up arms and shed blood (see: Apostolic Canons 59 and 66; Ecumenical Council, Canon 7; Council of Truls, Canon 83). Today, however, there is no legal mechanism that would protect the right of UPC priests not to carry weapons. And this is often used as a means of pressure from the local authorities on the priests, so that they leave the UPC and switch to the PCU, since its clerics are not mobilized.
Therefore, there are many open and difficult questions in the relations between our Church and the state. Nevertheless, I want to emphasize once again that we should not seek confrontation, but ways to mutual understanding, although communication with state officials is often extremely difficult and tense.
How do you see the state of Orthodoxy today??
It seems to me that the system of world Orthodoxy today is going through a serious test of its inner solidity. Within the family of local Orthodox Churches there are a number of conflicts that require thoughtful discussion and carefully measured solutions. In the history of the Church, such conflicts were resolved at councils. Unfortunately, it seems to me that today in modern Orthodoxy we are witnessing a deep crisis of congregational consciousness. Sometimes we get the impression that we no longer see ourselves as One Church. We live as if each local Church is self-sufficient. This is precisely why it is extremely difficult to organize a truly parliamentary discussion of problems that threaten the unity of Orthodoxy. I have already said that the lack of communication leads local churches to self-isolation. And that must not be allowed.
At the Pan-Orthodox Council in Crete in 2016, it was discussed that such councils should be held regularly, for example, once every five or seven years. Such a parliamentary process would prevent our separation into isolated church communities. However, as we can see, those initiatives have not yet been implemented...
photo: private archive...
How do you understand the relationship between national and religious? Is it possible to transform that relationship more in favor of faith?, and less in favor of national identity?
The problem of the relationship between religious faith and national consciousness is not new. It has been intensively discussed in the Orthodox Church since the 19th century. It was then that the phenomenon of "national churches" in the modern sense of the word began to take shape. However, as the apostle Paul writes, in the Church there is neither a Greek nor a Jew, nor a barbarian nor a Scythian (Col 3:11). In other words, there is no place for national division in the Church. However, in practice we often see how the national consciousness of Christians overshadows that Christian universalism. Such a distortion of church consciousness was condemned in 1872 as ethnophiletism.
Of course, the texts of the Holy Scriptures should be read in the context of the entire Divine revelation. Thus, for example, in the Book of Revelation it is said that the glory and honor of the people will be brought to the Heavenly Jerusalem (Rev 21:26). I believe that it is an extremely important text, because it clearly shows that earthly achievements, not only of individuals, but also of human communities, that is, nations, are worthy of being entered into the Kingdom of glory.
So, on the one hand, national identity must not overshadow Christian universalism. But, on the other hand, this does not mean rejecting the national feeling as such.
In addition, today the term nation itself often does not have the same meaning that it had in the 19th century, nor the same meaning that the term people has in the Holy Scriptures. Today, for example, there is talk about the formation of political nations. Thus, all citizens of Ukraine, regardless of their ethnic origin, are considered the Ukrainian political nation. In this sense, the modern understanding of the nation may be closer to Christian identity than a strictly ethnic understanding of the term.
It is generally known that the Church has always supported nations in their struggle for independence or in their resistance to external aggression. There are numerous examples of this in the history of Serbia, Greece, Bulgaria and Romania. Even today, the Church in Ukraine is together with its people.
