The authorities and the keys to the Pochaiv Lavra
The tens-of-thousands-strong religious processions to Pochaiv from Volhynia and Vinnytsia regions, as well as the large-scale celebrations in honor of the Pochaiv Icon of the Mother of God, provoked a sharp reaction from local media and activists. The pilgrims were called "waiters," "vatniki," "sabotage and reconnaissance groups," and "a threat to Ukraine's national security."
But the peak of this wave can be considered the statement made by the head of the Kremenets-Pochaiv Nature Reserve, Vasyl Ilchyshyn. He filed a complaint with the police, since neither the clergy nor the pilgrims had sought permission from the Ministry of Culture. Ilchyshyn is entirely serious in his belief that religious services could cause harm to the churches and other property of the Pochaiv Lavra.
"Within the boundaries of the historical and cultural reserve, any activity that negatively affects or may negatively affect the preservation of cultural heritage sites, their protection and use regime is prohibited. In particular, this applies to the holding of mass events. They may only be held with the approval of the authority responsible for managing the historical and cultural reserve, that is, the Ministry of Culture," the official stated.
At the same time, he does not recall that the Pochaiv Lavra was not built by the state, nor was it built as a "cultural heritage site" — it was built by believers in order to pray there. He does not recall that after the Soviet devastation, it was the parishioners themselves who restored and rebuilt the lavra. He does not recall that both he and the Ministry of Culture have exactly the same relationship to the shrines of Pochaiv as Soviet officials had several decades ago.
There is yet another analogy. According to Cossack chronicles, in Right-Bank Ukraine in the 17th century, the keys to Orthodox churches were held by Jews who served as managers of Polish magnates on these lands. It was they who decided whether to open the churches, whether to permit the holding of religious services, and at what price. Did these people build the churches? No. Did they perhaps care for their upkeep? Also no. If one were to modernize their demands, one could quite aptly say: they ensured that the Orthodox faithful did not "negatively affect the preservation of cultural heritage sites, their protection and use regime."
As they say, spot the 10 differences.
