"I had a big house that I had recently renovated. I had a good job. I always worked hard." Stories like these are often heard by organizations assisting internally displaced persons (IDPs).
People whose lives were turned upside down in an instant want to share their experiences. They seek to explain that they are not beggars but are forced to accept humanitarian aid because they have lost everything they had worked for over the years.
When working with those in need, aid organizations frequently encounter a key question: How can assistance be provided without undermining the beneficiaries' sense of dignity? This issue is more critical than it might seem at first glance. The number of Ukrainians classified as "vulnerable" has dramatically increased since the start of the full-scale invasion. There are about five million IDPs alone. Additionally, there are families of military personnel, relatives of fallen defenders, and veterans. These circumstances could deepen existing fractures and create new divisions within society, threatening the integrity of our social fabric. Addressing these weaknesses must start now.
With this in mind, the Jesuit Refugee Service in Ukraine and the Institute of Leadership, Management, and Coaching organized a discussion titled "Dignity and Solidarity: How to Build a Responsible Society." Participants included representatives from leading charitable, civic, and religious organizations and government institutions. The discussion format featured two keynote speakers and group work sessions.
"Since God created humans in His image and likeness, we are not 'something' but 'someone.' From this, the concept of human dignity arises," began the first speaker, Myroslav Marynovych, a dissident, former political prisoner of the Soviet GULAG, and president of the Institute of Religion and Society at UCU, as he explained the notion of dignity.
The speaker then emphasized that dignity is given to us by God and cannot be lost, only stained. However, according to Mr. Myroslav, "There is no pit so deep that a person cannot rise from it and restore their dignity."
The preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: "The recognition of the inherent dignity and the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world." Building on this, Mr. Myroslav emphasized that harming a person’s dignity will not safeguard freedom, establish justice, or bring about true peace. The extent to which human dignity is upheld serves as a benchmark for both national and spiritual security. Therefore, it is our duty to protect dignity—both our own and that of others. While fear of the powerful and influential remains one of the greatest threats to dignity, Mr. Myroslav urged people never to remain silent when witnessing the humiliation of others.
"Disregarding human dignity ultimately harms not only the victim but also the perpetrator and those who choose to stay silent," he stated. At the same time, the dissident warned that one can never truly protect their own dignity by degrading someone else’s.
Dignity is maturity. A defining characteristic of maturity is the ability to take responsibility. Myroslav Marynovych quoted a passage from the Ukrainian Charter for a Free Person: "To be a free person means, above all, to take responsibility. Responsibility for one's own life — and therefore, for its success, well-being, and happiness — cannot be delegated to anyone else. We alone are responsible for ourselves.".
He shared how he had encountered objections to this definition. Some argued that responsibility should not be discussed with ordinary citizens but rather with those "at the top" — leaders and officials. "But if you delegate responsibility for your life to those 'at the top,' you are admitting that you are merely a servant, a cog in the system," he countered. An individual becomes truly human not only when they exercise their free will and recognize their dignity but also when they take responsibility for their own actions.
He further noted that a persistent weakness—our society’s "Achilles’ heel"—is the lack of solidarity. Ukrainians struggle with trusting one another and having the courage to live honestly. Many still believe that living truthfully and with integrity means harming oneself and becoming a loser. Even war has not fully changed this mindset—for many, the logic of personal gain and material benefit continues to outweigh the moral authority of God’s commandments.
However, positive changes are emerging. As an example, Marynovych pointed to the cooperation between volunteers and the military, which is rooted in love for one’s neighbor and truth. This cooperation fosters interpersonal trust, making true solidarity possible.
"The task of civil society is to grow in dignity, to become outraged at ourselves for allowing unworthy individuals to manipulate us. But the solution is not to attack them with an axe or throw them into trash bins. Instead, we must join hands and build new networks of trust. We must not betray one another at the slightest opportunity for personal gain. We must abide by the accepted rules of fair play and expand circles of solidarity," he concluded.
After his speech, Myroslav Marynovych posed a discussion question for small group work: "Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky warned against 'moral hemophilia': we start a debate as opponents but end as enemies. How does this affect human solidarity, and how can we address it?"
Participants reflected on the concept, comparing moral hemophilia to a medical condition where the blood fails to clot. In a societal sense, it represents the loss of dialogue and the inability to find unity. "Just as physical hemophilia can lead to death, the same can happen to a society," they noted.
They also pointed out that when we dehumanize our opponents, we strip them of their dignity, reducing them to something less than human in our eyes. Often, this is driven by stereotyping or constructed perceptions—when we repeatedly discuss people or regions based on our assumptions, we create a distorted reality. "But this does not mean they truly are as we imagine them. It is simply our perception, and this perception erodes dialogue." As a remedy for moral hemophilia, participants suggested the ability to listen and truly hear others. Just as treating an illness takes time, restoring dialogue also requires patience and effort. They also proposed another form of treatment: a "blood transfusion"—meaning that Ukrainian society needs new generations capable of bringing the necessary change.
Marynovych supported these ideas and added that for real change to take root, churches and educators must play a crucial role. He also noted that the tendency toward heated disputes has long been part of Ukrainian society, especially in times of war. Even if one assumes that a powerful Russian campaign is working to divide Ukrainian society, the problem remains internal. "Yes, Russia may pour its ‘gasoline’ into our potential fires, but it is our own Ukrainian ‘wood’ that burns," he emphasized.
"Each side in an argument fiercely defends its position and immediately invokes the blood of the fallen as proof that there is no room for opposing views. As a result, the intensity of disputes escalates rapidly. But the real issue is not who is right. Everyone has already lost the moment a discussion turns into hostility."
As a solution, the former dissident suggests "psychotherapy sessions" for society as a whole to recognize moral hemophilia as an ailment worsened by the traumas of war. He also stresses the need to distinguish between an opponent and an enemy. If this distinction is not learned, society risks becoming easy prey for a real adversary.
The second speaker, Svitlana Filypchuk, a historian and editor at the Levyt publishing house, also spoke about the inability to listen and the issue of stereotypes. Her speech focused on how Christian organizations and churches provide aid to those in need. She pointed out that a misunderstanding of human dignity can create obstacles to effective charitable work.
She shared findings from her own research on common mistakes religious organizations make when providing assistance. Surprisingly, people often stumble over seemingly simple issues, such as the belief that aid should only be given to those deemed "worthy" or "moral" from a religious perspective. Stereotypes about the homeless, displaced persons, or individuals with alcohol and drug addictions also persist, leading to restrictions on assistance or even outright discrimination by aid providers.
According to Filypchuk, special attention should be paid to language in charitable work. She emphasized the importance of communicating with beneficiaries to ensure respectful terminology. She shared an example from her experience working with the wives and mothers of fallen soldiers: these women do not want to be called widows but rather the wives of heroes. She also noted a common misunderstanding that people in need often face a complex set of challenges. For instance, families of fallen soldiers require not only psychological support but also help navigating bureaucratic procedures in military offices and other institutions.
"Ignoring systemic issues," she argued, "results in focusing solely on individual aid without addressing the root causes of poverty and injustice. This creates the illusion of charity that does not actually change the situation, leaving social injustice and human rights concerns unaddressed. A Christian mission should combine individual assistance with the fight for social justice."
Filypchuk also highlighted the paternalistic attitude often shown toward displaced persons, where they are treated like children. Paternalism in aid manifests as seeing the recipient as someone less capable, needing constant care and oversight. This approach fosters dependency and prevents individuals from developing their abilities and independence. Aid should instead support autonomy, encourage self-respect, and promote responsibility for their own life.
Svitlana Filypchuk emphasized the importance of overcoming negative stereotypes about each other and truly listening to those receiving assistance. She concluded by saying, "In the end, helping others is also a valuable resource for those who provide aid."
The discussion topics proposed by Filypchuk encouraged participants to share their own experiences.
"Dignified treatment of those in need begins with how we offer assistance," one participant noted. "If we are distributing second-hand clothes, they should at least be cleaned and hung properly. Food packages should not be handed out straight from the ground but placed on tables. It is also degrading when organizations prioritize displaying their banners over ensuring dignified aid distribution."
Participants stressed the importance of fostering empathy in charitable organizations and church communities. "Any of us could find ourselves in a difficult situation, and a culture of acceptance helps uphold human dignity. Every situation matters, so it is crucial not to diminish or dismiss others' losses and emotions."
One of the discussion topics focused on the relationship between church organizations and local authorities. Participants worked to create a "map of stereotypes" regarding both institutions. Some noted that churches are sometimes viewed as a political electorate, with local authorities leveraging good relations with religious institutions to shape public opinion, particularly during elections. Conversely, the church is sometimes seen as an easy source of financial resources, especially during wartime when local authorities receive less scrutiny from prosecutors and the church is perceived as operating with goodwill. As a result, financial resources may be funneled through church networks to local communities.
During the full-scale war, local authorities have, at times, delegated tasks to the church that should be handled by state institutions, and the church has taken on these responsibilities. However, there are stereotypes not just about the church but also about local authorities. Some church communities see local governance as redundant, believing they can address their own needs independently. Another common stereotype, according to seminar participants, is that the church does meaningful work while local authorities engage in "nonsense" and that all government officials are corrupt. Participants highlighted the damaging impact of these stereotypes, which hinder cooperation between those involved in providing aid. They also proposed key principles for collaboration between local authorities and church communities:
- Equality for all – Local authorities must ensure equal rights for all religious communities, regardless of denomination.
- Dialogue between church communities – Religious organizations should engage in discussions among themselves and advocate for equal treatment rather than preferential status.
- Interfaith and multilevel dialogue – Platforms should be created to foster dialogue across different religious denominations and levels of governance.
- Leading by example – The church should serve both within its community and beyond. Instead of trying to "recruit" local authorities into a specific religious group, it should demonstrate values through action.
- Partnership relations – Each side should view the other as a partner. All participants should fulfill their obligations consistently, understanding that each plays a necessary role.
At the conclusion of the discussion, the organizers highlighted the constructive and practical nature of the conversations that took place in the forum they provided. They expressed hope that similar events would contribute to the development of charitable initiatives in Ukraine — initiatives free from bias and focused on a single goal: strengthening society by providing targeted support to those who have suffered the most.
##DONATE_TEXT_BLOCK##