What Metropolitan Sofroniy of Cherkasy thought and said about the OCU

This is not the first time that supporters of the OCU have made despicable and completely unprincipled attempts to rewrite the history of the UOC and take advantage of someone else’s authority. Over the past few years, senior OCU officials have been trampling on the memory of the late Primate of the UOC, attributing to him things he did not say, which is being done at the instigation of his former associate, Alexander Drabinko. This time, a similar situation occurred in Cherkasy, where OCU adherents, who seized most of the UOC churches in the city, decided to cover up their misdeeds with the authority of the late head of the Cherkasy Eparchy of the UOC, Metropolitan Sofroniy of Cherkasy, by publishing a book about the bishop. It is characteristic that everything is presented in such a way as if Metropolitan Sofroniy had dreamed that all his works would become the foundation for the OCU in the region.

The reasons for what is happening are understandable, of course, because everyone who remembers Metropolitan Sofroniy can say with confidence that he was one of the most pro-Ukrainian hierarchs of the UOC and consistently adhered to the course of canonical autocephaly of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. However, does this mean that the bishop supported the creation and development of the OCU? NO! Moreover, Metropolitan Sofroniy was categorically opposed to the Tomos from the Patriarchate of Constantinople and the interference of the head of the Phanar in Ukrainian church affairs. Below are several quotes that clearly show how Metropolitan Sofroniy felt about the OCU and whether the representatives of the schism in Cherkasy have the moral right to hide behind his authority.

Metropolitan Sofroniy on the 2018 “Unification” Council:

«It was not a council of unification, but a council of schismatics. And Constantinople was the highest authority there. Another schism has emerged. You heard what Filaret (the primate of the UOC-KP) said? He said that he was a patriarch, remained a patriarch, and will continue to be a patriarch. That’s all. He will continue to lead the church. And who did they appoint?»

On Epiphany Dumenko:

“Well, who is he? First, he is a young man. Second, he is Filaret’s grandson.”

On his attitude toward the OCU:

«I am a free man, I do not want to be vassal dependent on the Greeks. This is not autocephaly. Their charter says that a Greek church has been formed in Ukraine. They have made the church completely dependent on the Greeks. This is simply vassal capture. The Greeks wanted to do it and they did it. There are no parishes in Constantinople, there is no church there, there are only bishops. And in Ukraine, a large territory has broken away, where it will be possible to develop our activities.»

On the dependence of the UOC on Moscow:

«Dependence on whom? Dependence is when we pay contributions, when we do everything under the protectorate of Moscow. That is dependence. We ordained bishops, they took an oath to Kyiv. We opened monasteries, we even opened the third Lavra in Ukraine. At the same time, we did not seek any blessing from anyone in Moscow. Well, since the Metropolitan of Kyiv is a permanent member of the Holy Synod (ROC), he constantly reported that such and such changes had taken place in our church. And that’s all.»

Yes, perhaps Metropolitan Sofroniy was naive in some ways. Perhaps he did not fully understand all the nuances. But he definitely did not want, back then in 2018, to become a “useful idiot” at the so-called unification council, because he understood perfectly well where it would all lead. And he was right. He saw it coming. And if he had lived to see the seizure of the UOC Cathedral in Cherkasy, which was built thanks to him, he would certainly have been the first and harshest critic of the current OCU and its aggressive policy towards the UOC.