The congress of "persecuted" in Lavra is an attempt on state security, - Pavlenko
He wrote about this on his Facebook page.
"On February 22, a meeting was held in the Kyiv Pechersk Lavra, which cannot be explained either from ecclesial or state perspectives.
This parade of hatred cannot be called anything other than an attempt at stability and state security.
Obviously, this is an attempt to put pressure on the judicial branch of government at a time when the Constitutional Court began the procedure for confirming the constitutionality of the laws on the rights of believers that were adopted in 2018 and 2019," the MP said.
As Pavlenko noted, openly "Russian-World's" themes were propagated at this Congress.
"At this meeting, there were outright calls for disobedience and getting "millions of dissatisfied people" take to the streets (I wonder where they will find them?). The usual pseudo-canonical "Russian-World's" themes were also voiced. As the Savior taught that God Is Love, and bequeathed to love one's neighbor, such gatherings are far from Christian ethics and teaching," the MP stressed.
Rostyslav Pavlenko said that within the limits of the powers of the MP, he would find out who permitted the "persecuted" to hold a meeting in the Refectory Church of Kyiv Pechersk Lavra, which is part of the National Reserve.
"And what do specially authorized state bodies do at this time? No reaction. They are keeping silent as if nothing happened.
This should be perceived as solidarity with anti-state tricks and the Russian narrative of hatred?
Moreover, the meeting was held in the Refectory Church of the Kyiv Pechersk Lavra, which is part of the National Reserve "Kyiv Pechersk Lavra", makes part of the UNESCO World Heritage List, and each instance of using the sites from this list must be regulated by a special use agreement between the Reserve and a specific religious organization.
Consequently, both the Reserve and the Ministry of Culture could not have been unaware of this anti-state activity. So why are they silent?
Did they know but still agree and support? Then it is a case of collaboration in the framework of a hostile campaign against Ukraine. Concrete questions arise:
- Are there any agreements regulating the procedure for the use of the Reserve's facilities by the Moscow Patriarchate (such agreements are available in all other reserves, but they do not seem to be available in the Lavra);
- Is there any response from the Reserve's management?
- Is there any response of the relevant central executive authority - the Ministry of Culture or, at least, the State Service for Ethnic Policy and Freedom of Conscience?
- In the end, is there any response from the SBU?
I will apply for clarification of all this within the scope of my power. Since complaining about non-existent "persecutions", the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine simultaneously goes beyond all limits," Rostyslav Pavlenko stressed.
