Back home, as prayers continue for Kievan Lavra

As always, it's crucial to search for statements from church leaders -- not the politicos

What a nightmare.

I am back home, writing at my desk in the Southern Highlands after two weeks visiting Scotland, Ireland, Wales and thereabouts. I remain a bit jet-lagged, as is common for folks of my age, but there is work to be done.

The problem is that news from Ukraine has cancelled all of the plans that I had for today’s Rational Sheep post. How can I write about the business-model disaster that has killed Star Wars, or the “Disclosure Day” sermon from Steven Spielberg (reviews are not making me hopeful), when a highly symbolic site above the Lavra Monastery of the Kievan Caves is, or was, on fire?

Once again, it is time for journalists to slow down and ask the questions at the heart of hard-news journalism: “Who,” “What,” “When,” “Where,” “Why” and “How”?

Alas, I fear that there is no way this will happen, with a story this controversial.

Let me start with the most basic questions — “What” and “Where”? Let’s start with one of the more cautious (that’s a good thing) headlines, care of CNN: “Ukraine’s historic Kyiv Pechersk Lavra monastery set on fire following major Russian attack.”

The note of caution is the acknowledgement that the fire took place “following” a major Russian attack.” In the fog of a highly politicized war, leaders on both sides are making conflicting claims about the actual cause of this specific fire. That’s business as usual.

There is no question about the timing — this happened during a major wave of Russian drone and missile attacks on the city and then the Ukrainian attempts, using its defense weapons (care of Western states), to stop them. All kinds of things could have gone wrong.

But, again, let’s start with a very important question, one that journalists should care about — big time. Was the actual Lavra Monastery of the Kievan Caves hit?

The answer, as best I can tell, is “maybe.” There is no question that the Cathedral of the Dormition of the Theotokos was hit and suffered major fire damage. However, anyone who has spent a few hours in the Lavra knows that the cathedral is, for the most part, a facility that is controlled by the state — not the thriving monastic community in the Lavra.

The heart of the monastery compound is nearby and most of its treasures, including the bodies of many saints, are underground in the cave sanctuaries and a complex matrix of tunnels. We need to know if the actual monastery, above and below ground, has been damaged. The news reports assume that it was hit. True?

Why does all this matter? For starters, the great monastery of the Kievan caves was founded in 1051. How important is this holy site? Basically, it is the Jerusalem of the entire world of Slavic Orthodoxy. What do I mean by that? To be blunt, long before the creation of the Russian state (let alone the current government), Moscow was the city of power, St. Petersburg the city of culture and Kiev was the heart of all of Slavic Orthodoxy, which is a reality that is bigger than today’s Russia.

Rational Sheep readers will remember that this is all quite personal, for me, because of my two visits — as an Orthodox believer — to the Lavra. I would like to urge readers who care about this complex tragedy to read the following post and listen to the podcast embedded in the text.

Here is a key passage from that:

During both trips to Kiev, I was blessed to visit and pray in the Holy Dormition-Kiev Caves Lavra. To call this historic site “famous” is a major understatement, because of its crucial role in the history of the Slavic Orthodox churches.

When I returned home, I began having troubling dreams that continued, occasionally, for several years. I told my wife about them, of course, and our priest. In the dreams, I saw men in military uniforms carrying machine guns — walking among the bodies of the 100 or more saints in glass-topped caskets in the complex hallways in the caves.

I began praying for the protection of the saints of the Kievan Lavra. The giant monastery, controlled by the state, is now an ecclesiastical battleground because of the splintered state of Orthodoxy in Ukraine.

When did the schism begin? Press reports about the Russian invasion often imply that the schism is linked to the actions of the Russian regime of Vladimir Putin. But that is simply not accurate. The reality is much more complex.

Which leads to this flashback. At this crucial moment in talks seeking a ceasefire and peace treaty (I pray for a “stable, truly independent Ukraine”) I hope many readers-listeners will pray for Ukrainian believers and the protection of the Kievan Lavra.

Now, back to the basics, as reported by CNN. I will make comments along the way:

A prominent Ukrainian monastery complex in the heart of Kyiv was set on fire following a massive Russian attack overnight into Monday that killed at least five people and wounded more than two dozen in the capital, according to local authorities.

A “prominent” monastery? What a stunning understatement of the historical reality.

No, this is not a “Vatican” type complex. But for the Slavs, it is much, much, more than “prominent”? It is Ground Zero for the history of their churches.

Images showed flames billowing from the UNESCO-listed Kyiv Pechersk Lavra, which traces its roots back almost 1,000 years, and firefighters beneath the towers and domes of its Dormition Cathedral battling to control the blaze.

Once again, we need to know if the monastery itself was targeted and or hit by weapons involved in other attacks and defense actions.

By daybreak, firefighters were still working to douse the flames at the complex. Ukraine’s emergency services said a fire had affected 800 square meters of the roof of the Dormition Cathedral, and released images that showed damage to the building.

The Metropolitan Epiphanius of Kyiv and All Ukraine asked for “prayers for the salvation of the shrine from destruction,” in a statement. “Another Russian crime against humanity, against history, against Christianity.”

Obviously, CNN needs to explain that Metropolitan Epiphanius is the leader of the new Orthodox body in Ukraine, one founded with the support of the Ecumenical Patriarch in Istanbul, who does not have the kind of powers found in the Pope of Rome. Hold that thought, because I am attaching some additional background information to this post.

The CNN report does offer a small amount of background information about the Lavra itself, without noting that the cathedral is a state-controlled site (rebuilt in the 1990s after its destruction in World War II) next to the historic monastery, which is a UNESCO World Heritage site

The key: The monks of the monastery are not part of the modern church led by Metropolitan Epiphanius, and strongly supported by the European Union and the United States. This monastic community is part of the historic Ukrainian Orthodox Church, led by Metropolitan Onuphry.

Yes, this body has long-standing ties to the Russian Orthodox Church. However, in 2022, the UOC synod declared itself independent of Moscow and has done everything it can, in the context of centuries of Orthodox canon law, to cut all remaining ties. To be blunt, the UOC wants Orthodox leaders around the world — not one leader in Istanbul — to intervene in this schism, within the structures of Orthodox tradition.

Now, I cannot find any news coverage that even acknowledges that the monks of the Lavra are in communion with Metropolitan Onuphry. You can search far and wide and find little or nothing about the status of the actual monks in the actual monastery.

However, I found this material from the “Editorial Board of the Union of Journalists of the Russian Federation,” under this headline: “The Ukrainian Orthodox Church commented on the attack on the Assumption Cathedral.”

The UOC emphasized that military aggression has crossed all moral boundaries and called on Christians to intensify prayer for peace.

On June 15, 2026, the head of the Information and Education Department of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, Metropolitan Clement (Vechery) of Nizhyn and Pryluky, issued an official comment regarding the night attack on the Lavra. This was reported by the Information Center of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church .

“The Ukrainian Orthodox Church resolutely condemns Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine, which has resulted in the deaths of thousands of people and the destruction of holy sites,” the bishop declared. “God does not bless war. He sacrificed Himself for humanity, to grant it eternal life.”

The hierarch recalled that the Kyiv Pechersk Lavra is, first and foremost, “a place of prayer, a center of God’s special presence in the world.” The monastery’s monks spent a long time rebuilding the monastery from oblivion after the destruction of the Soviet era. The bishop emphasized: “It wasn’t just a building that came under fire, but a holy site.”

That doesn’t sound, to me, like an endorsement of the Russian claims about Ukrainian defense weapons going astray and hitting the cathedral. We will see what happens from sources representing believers caught in the middle of this war.

However, here is my main point: When writing about the fate of the Lavra monastery and its role in this tragic fratricidal war, journalists should not settle for quoting pre-ordained responses from the Russian and Ukrainian governments (or the United States, for that matter).

Instead, journalists should at least attempt to Write. About. The. Monastery. Search out statements of the leaders of the actual monastic community, and the ecclesiastical authorities that lead them.

This is not a political story, alone. And in the meantime, I will say, once again: Pray for the saints of the Lavra.

I will close with some additional background material, in the form of two “On Religion” columns. Reader will note, in these columns, link back to the earlier columns I wrote during and after visits to the Lavra.

---

Painful fighting inside Ukrainian Orthodoxy? Schism began long before the war

After the Soviet Union’s collapse, Orthodox Christians throughout the Slavic world celebrated the slow, steady, construction of churches after decades of persecution.

In 2004, the poet Nina Borodai wrote a long prayer — “Song of the Most Holy Theotokos (Greek for God-bearer)” — seeking the prayers of St. Mary for the lands of “Holy Rus,” a term with roots dating to the 988 conversion Prince Vladimir of Kiev.

“Mother of God, Mother of God / … All Holy Rus prays to you / And valleys and mountains and forests. … / Consecrate all the churches to you,” wrote Borodai (computer translation from Russian). “Domes, domes in the sky are blue / I can’t count the bells / The ringing floats, floats over Russia / Mother Rus is awakening.”

Borodai’s prayer of joy and repentance was an unlikely spark for an explosion of religious conflict inside Ukraine. Leaders of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church — with centuries of canonical ties to Russian Orthodoxy — face Security Service of Ukraine accusations of collusion with President Vladimir Putin of Russia. Some churches have been seized or padlocked as pressures rise for conversions to the rival Orthodox Church of Ukraine, officially born in 2019 with recognition by Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I of Istanbul and Western governments.

In November, an OCU priest posted a video showing laypeople singing Borodai’s poem after a service inside the Kiev Pechersk Lavra, the font of Slavic monasticism since its birth in 1051 in caves above the Dnieper River. Monastery critics made headlines by claiming the video proved the monks – part of the historic UOC — are disloyal to Ukraine. Lavra visitors, according to the New York Times, were “cheering for Russia.”

Days later, security forces raided the monastery and, in the weeks since, officials have accused bishops and priests of aiding Russia. They released photos of Russian passports, theological texts in Russian and pamphlets criticizing the newly created Ukrainian church.

The UOC synod responded by pleading for fair, open trials of anyone accused, while noting: “From the first day of the invasion of Russian troops, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church has condemned this war and has consistently advocated the preservation of the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine. Our believers, with God’s help and the prayers of their fellow believers, courageously defend their Motherland in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. … Memory eternal to all victims of this terrible war!”

This echoed waves of UOC statements condemning the invasion. When fighting began, Father Nikolay Danilevich, head of its church relations office, tweeted: “Putin treacherously attacked our country! We bless everyone for the defense of Ukraine! … God save Ukraine!”

UOC Metropolitan Onuphry proclaimed: “We appeal to the President of Russia and ask him to immediately stop the fratricidal war. The Ukrainian and Russian peoples came out of the Dnieper Baptismal font, and the war between these peoples is a repetition of the sin of Cain, who killed his own brother out of envy.”

Orthodox believers around the world have been stunned by these events, while watching for signs global Orthodox leaders will intervene in this schism. I am Orthodox and have — in 2009 and 2012 — worshipped in the Lavra and visited its vast underground matrix of sanctuaries, tombs and monastic cells. It’s hard to imagine officers with machine guns walking past the bodies of numerous saints.

After meeting believers on both sides, I believe three clashing views of “Holy Rus” have shaped this tragedy.

Putin proclaims that the Rus is real, and this justifies his invasion. Supporters of the new Ukrainian church argue that the Ecumenical Patriarchate, after years of conflict with Russian Orthodoxy, had the authority to trump centuries of Slavic history and create the OCU.

Caught in the middle, leaders of the historic UOC say the Rus is a historical reality but insist that this makes Russia’s invasion even worse — the sin of brothers killing brothers.

During worship in my own East Tennessee parish — part of the Orthodox Church in America, which has Russian roots — we continue to pray “for those who are suffering, wounded, grieving or displaced because of the war in Ukraine. And for a cessation of the hostilities against Ukraine, and that reconciliation and peace will flourish there, we pray thee, hearken and have mercy.”

---

Historic Ukrainian Church, once again, seeks help from global Orthodox leaders

Close observers of Eastern Orthodox Christianity were not surprised when the recent World Russian People’s Council bluntly rejected “abortion propaganda,” efforts to promote LGBTQ+ rights and this age of “sexual licentiousness and debauchery.”

It wasn’t surprising when that Moscow conference urged the defense of traditional families, “strong with many children,” during an era when birth rates are falling.

Then there was this proclamation – both theological and political – about the war in Ukraine: “From a spiritual and moral point of view, the special military operation is a Holy War, in which Russia and its people, defending the single spiritual space of Holy Rus, fulfill the mission of Restrainer, protecting the world from the onslaught of globalism and the victory of the West, which has fallen into Satanism.”

In response, a World Council of Churches statement noted that Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill, only a year ago, stressed that his controversial “Holy War” references were about the “metaphysical realm,” not to warfare in Ukraine. WCC General Secretary Jerry Pillay claimed that the Moscow patriarch agreed that armed warfare cannot be “holy.”

But the most striking rejection of the “Russian World” document came from the Department for External Church Relations of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which for centuries had been linked to the Russian Orthodox Church.

“The Church should care about the proper preaching of the Gospel, which Christ commanded her to do, and not of the formation of geopolitical and geo-spiritual concepts,” said its public statement. The “Russian World” text ignored the reality that “Ukraine has her own history, and Ukrainians have the right to their national identity and independence, which we are ready to keep defending. …

“Instead of providing ideological support and justification for Russia’s military aggression and intervention in Ukraine, we believe that the Orthodox Church in Russia should have raised her voice against this war. … Calls for the destruction of Ukraine and the justification of a military aggression are inconsistent with the Gospel teaching.”

Quoting its leader, Metropolitan Onuphry of Kyiv, the statement stressed: “We do not build any Russian world, we build God’s world.”

That statement echoed a Metropolitan Onuphry proclamation made immediately after the 2022 Russian invasion, which included: “We appeal to the President of Russia and ask him to immediately stop the fratricidal war. The Ukrainian and Russian peoples came out of the Dnieper Baptismal font, and the war between these peoples is a repetition of the sin of Cain, who killed his own brother out of envy.”

The “fratricidal war” reference affirmed ties binding Orthodox churches in that region, which date to the 988 conversion of Prince Vladimir and the creation of “Holy Rus.” Caught between Vladimir Putin’s Kremlin and the current Ukrainian government, the leaders of this church embrace the “Rus” as a historical reality but insist that this only makes the Russian invasion even worse, with Orthodox brothers killing brothers.

In 2022, the UOC synod declared itself independent, doing everything it could under centuries of Orthodox canon law to cut remaining ties to Moscow, while waiting for Orthodox leaders around the world to intervene in this schism.

Meanwhile, the leader of the rival Orthodox Church of Ukraine – created in 2018 by Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Istanbul, with support from Western governments – has urged the Ukrainian government to finalize legislation that will ban the older UOC.

“There is not a single religious association in Ukraine that would support publicly that religious organizations in Ukraine can continue to be subordinate to structures that are controlled by the Russian state,” said Metropolitan Epiphanius, during an April 10 visit to Geneva. The proposed legislation does “not affect freedom of religion,” he claimed, but will “protect religious organizations in Ukraine from becoming a tool of the Kremlin’s hybrid warfare.”

On the other side of that schism, Metropolitan Onuphry marked the second anniversary of the Russian invasion by stressing his embattled flock’s “love for the Ukrainian people and land, even if many prefer not to notice it.”

A native of Western Ukraine, Onuphry added: “The duty to defend one’s Motherland is one of the important principles in a Christian’s life. We should be worthy citizens of the earthly kingdom so as to become equally worthy citizens for the Kingdom of Heaven as well.”