# Synodal Message on War and Just Peace

- Link: https://nweparchy.ca/2024/03/synodal-message-on-war-and-just-peace/
- Published: 2024-03-15T00:34:00-07:00
- Author: Website

«Rescue the oppressed from the hand of the oppressor» (Jer. 22:3)

**The Message**

**of the Synod of Bishops of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church in Ukraine**

**on War and Just Peace in the Context of New Ideologies**

_«Surely his salvation is near to those who fear him,_

_ that glory may dwell in our land»_ (Psalm 85:10).

**Dear in Christ!**

**Introduction**

 1. For ten years now, we have been living in war, and for two of those years, Ukraine
    has been plunged into the flames of a liberation war against a full-scale attack
    by the Russian aggressor. The time of war is extremely painful and cruel: it causes
    countless traumas to everyone and the whole society. Every day we receive tragic
    news about the deaths of Ukrainians; many have already lost their family members
    and friends; we are witnessing the destruction of what is most precious to us –
    our Homeland, our families’ well-being, our happiness, our dreams. In such circumstances,
    it is very understandable that a person is inclined to surrender to emotions: to
    plunge into despair and hopelessness, or to let hate reign in their soul. These
    feelings, despair, and hatred, enslave us and violate our dignity, which the Creator
    gave us. These sentiments of many Ukrainians are aptly expressed in the words of
    the psalmist David: «My soul also is greatly troubled. But you, O Lord, how long?»(
    Ps. 6:4); «How long shall my enemy be exalted over me? Consider and answer me, 
    O Lord, my God!» (Psalm 13:4). At the same time, a part of society is getting indifferent:
    some people who are affected by the war, perhaps less than many others, try not
    to notice it, as if to forget about it. This position can hide itself both as a
    psychological mechanism of self-defense and as a moral disease of indifference.
 2. First and foremost, we need to realize that winning the fight against such an insidious
    enemy requires perseverance. It has nothing in common with indifference or detachment
    from what the country and people live for. On the contrary, perseverance is always
    associated with activity, with a sacrificial love that is ready to serve for a 
    long period: «And let perseverance be perfect, so that you may be perfect and complete»(
    James 1:4). A short-term explosion of feelings or enthusiasm cannot  be sustained
    for a long distance rather that requires exhausting efforts. For this reason, Metropolitan
    Andrey Sheptytsky encouraged young people: «It is not by asingle minute’s disruptions,
    but only by constant struggle and unceasing sacrifices, even to the blood and death
    of many generations, that the nation moves forward». This is very well realized
    by our defenders, who keep watch and restrain the aggressor every day, for many
    weeks and months. That is why we call on everyone to persevererance and to perform
    an active act of love, and with today’s appeal, we seek to present certain moral
    foundations and principles on which to build a lasting and just peace in our homeland.
 3. Such a clear comprehension of the moral and spiritual principles that guide our
    actions during the war and on which we will build our future after it ends and 
    the achievement of a just peace is essential to ensure that our persevering efforts
    are a purposeful movement toward the desired victory. Christianity in general, 
    and the social teaching of the Catholic Church in particular, has a long tradition
    of theological and philosophical thought on peace and war that is relevant to the
    current circumstances of our country. Thus, our goal is to share with Ukrainian
    society and all people of goodwill a relevant part of these treasures.
 4. The Russian war against Ukraine raises new challenges and problems for the many
    centuries of Christian tradition of understanding peace and war. On the international
    stage, we witness support for our country, but at the same time, we face a lack
    of understanding of the depth and the seriousness of the events and hope for an
    easy resolution of the conflict. Sometimes we hear too hasty calls for peace, which,
    unfortunately, is not always associated with a proper demand for justice. «They
    have healed the wound of my people lightly, saying, «Peace! Peace!» but there is
    no peace», the prophet Jeremiah calls to our conscience (Jer. 6:14). Therefore,
    the Christian doctrine of peace and war should be considered in the context of 
    the contemporary Ukrainian experience, so that it may bring us the desired fruit
    and illuminate our aspirations and efforts with the truth of the Gospel. This message
    is aimed, on the one hand, at assisting our people to become wiser and stronger
    by being enriched by the ancient Christian thought on peace and war, and, on the
    other hand, at contributing to a better comprehension by the international community
    of the challenges of our time and the place of Ukraine and Ukrainians on the spiritual
    map of the modern world.
 5. **Causes and Origins of Russia’s Modern War Against Ukraine**

 1. It is impossible to comprehend the reasons for Russia’s war against Ukraine and
    to find the proper spiritual means for victory and a just peace without understanding
    the broader background of current events, without realizing the basic principles
    of social justice, both in social relations within each state governed by the law
    and in international relations and the foundations of international law. The roots
    of what is occurring today date back to at least the last century, or even much
    earlier. The twentieth century witnessed the emergence of totalitarian regimes 
    in Europe, primarily in Germany and Russia, which caused terrible wars and numerous
    crimes against humanity. The main characteristic of totalitarianism is disregard
    for human freedom and dignity. In this sense, totalitarian regimes are forms of
    state formation that are called tyranny in the Christian intellectual tradition.
    Tyrants, as well as the struggle against them for freedom, have been known since
    the earliest times of human history, but in the totalitarianism of the twentieth
    century, tyranny has acquired unprecedented scales. First, in the struggle against
    freedom, totalitarianism used modern technical means that did not exist in the 
    past (radio, cinema, modern weapons, means of mass systematic killing, such as 
    gas chambers, etc.) These technical means ensured total control over the subjects
    and led to an unprecedented number of victims, reaching tens of millions. Secondly,
    totalitarianism began to monitor not only the social behavior of a human being 
    but also the private sphere of his or her life. This is how it differs from another
    form of tyranny, authoritarianism. The latter still leaves a person a certain amount
    of personal space, provided that he or she is loyal to the government. Instead,
    totalitarian rulers seek to conquer the soul, and completely master the human personality,
    the subject of a totalitarian state must adore his or her tormentors. Totalitarianism
    has a pseudo-religious character: the tyrants of the twentieth century destroyed
    or repressed the Church because they competed with religion and wanted to replace
    the spiritual values of traditional religions with their own ideology.
 2. As a result of the Second World War, one of the two main totalitarian monsters 
    of the twentieth century, National Socialist Germany, was defeated. The Nazi totalitarian
    ideology and its crimes were put on trial in Nuremberg. In the decades that followed,
    West Germany went through a difficult and painful process of purification and became
    a democratic state. In contrast, the second totalitarian monster, the Soviet Union,
    with communist Russia at its core, was not only not destroyed but also appeared
    before the world among the winners of the war, claiming to be the main liberator
    from Nazism. Therefore, one of the four judges at the Nuremberg Tribunal was a 
    representative of the Soviet Union, although the crimes of the communist rulers
    were no less or even greater than those of the leaders of Nazi Germany. However,
    Ecclesiastes warned: «Because the sentence against evildoers is not promptly executed,
    therefore the hearts of men are filled with the desire to commit evil» (Ecclesiastes
    8:11). Therefore, after 1945, the USSR even expanded its geographical sphere of
    influence and conquered the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, creating satellite
    regimes in them and founding the Eastern Bloc of Communist states, which opposed
    the countries of the free world. It took more than forty years of the Cold War 
    for the communist and atheist Soviet Union to reach complete ideological, economic,
    and social decline and eventually cease to exist.
 3. The collapse of the USSR in 1991 brought liberation to those countries of Central
    and Eastern Europe that had been part of the communist bloc. It also gave a chance
    for freedom and a decent life to the nations that had created socialist republics
    within the Soviet Union. Among these nations were Ukrainians, who gained the independence
    and national state they had dreamed of for centuries. It is worth mentioning that
    it was our Church, which was criminally banned by the communist rulers after World
    War II, was persecuted and kept underground throughout the Soviet period, that 
    became one of the most important forces for change in Ukraine: the struggle for
    the legalization of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church in 1989-1991 was an important
    contribution to the destruction of the Soviet atheist empire, and after independence,
    the faithful of our Church tried to spiritually support the new nation-state and
    were consistent supporters of its renunciation of the totalitarian communist past.
    The journey to true freedom and liberation from the negative legacy of the twentieth
    century has been long and difficult for our country. However, we see good achievements
    along the way, especially in the development of a strong civil society in Ukraine,
    as evidenced by the Orange Revolution of 2004, the Revolution of Dignity of 2013-
    2014, and the current heroic struggle against Russian aggression. The Ukrainian
    Greek Catholic Church is an integral part of civil society and therefore cannot
    stand aside from its just aspirations to have proper control over state power, 
    build a fair democracy, and protect the rule of law and human dignity.
 4. The big mistake of the Free world after the collapse of the communist bloc was 
    that post-Soviet Russia, which was recognized as the successor to the Soviet Union,
    was not demanded by democratic countries to fully condemn the crimes of the communist
    period and to force the new Russian rulers to ensure decommunization, lustration,
    and purification of their state from the consequences of totalitarianism. Nothing
    similar to what happened in Germany after World War II was done in Russia. The 
    thinking was not focused on spiritual values but on economics: many in the world
    thought that the process of democratization in Russia would take place as if by
    itself, under conditions of private enterprise development, strengthening of economic
    levers, and trade with the Free world. The world’s democracies hoped that deepening
    economic ties with Russia would help build trust and sustainable peace. However,
    these hopes ultimately proved to be in vain, as the Kremlin used this situation
    to accumulate resources for another war. The democratic world – perhaps without
    realizing it – has learned over time to use double standards in its relations with
    Russia for economic gain, which clearly contradicts Christian teaching, which states:«
    Let love be sincere; hate what is evil, hold on to what is good» (Romans 12:9).
    Indeed, the Bible often contains texts that warn of the danger of underestimating
    the power of evil and naively hoping that evil will simply disappear: «Be sober-
    minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion,
    seeking someone to devour» (I Pet. 5:8; cf. Eph. 5:11; II Tim. 4:3-4). However,
    these cautions were not considered, so not only did Soviet totalitarianism escape
    its «Nuremberg», but the international community did not develop mechanisms for
    quickly identifying the danger and responding to a possible repetition of the tragedies
    of the twentieth century. All of this has led to fatal consequences: today we are
    dealing with an attempt to restore aggressive, militaristic totalitarianism in 
    Russia in its new hybrid or postmodern form.
 5. The new Russian tyranny of the twenty-first century is similar to the totalitarianism
    of the twentieth century, primarily because it is a ruthless enemy of human freedom
    and dignity. Like the totalitarian regimes of the recent past, it uses the latest
    technical means and seeks to conquer not only the bodies but also the souls of 
    people. At first glance, modern Russian tyranny seems to be less cruel and totalitarian
    than communist and national socialist totalitarianism. In fact, it transforms the
    totalitarian features of the past into much more insidious, and therefore even 
    more dangerous forms that can be called hybrid. The first feature of the new Russian
    totalitarianism is that it does not need ideology in the form that was characteristic
    of communism and national socialism, with its own «holy scripture», i.e., a body
    of «canonical» texts by leaders and ideologues that set forth a more or less coherent
    theory of the future to achieve some utopian «great purpose». Such an ideology,
    although it was false and ugly, still wanted to have its own «moral code» and used
    the phraseology of social justice. Instead, modern Russian totalitarianism does
    not claim to have positive content and a coherent theory; it is propaganda for 
    nihilism in its worst forms, and its goal is the moral corruption of man, his dehumanization
    to turn him into a weak-willed, indifferent to moral values, an instrument of crimes
    against humanity. It seeks to undermine faith in any moral principles and tempts
    his subjects with the opportunity to commit violence against others with impunity.
    It claims that the whole world is governed only by brutal force, deception, and
    self-interest. Putting forward various conspiratorial theories of a global conspiracy
    against Russia, it uses them to justify any crimes committed by the Russian government
    against other nations. In its cult of the ruler, militarism, corporatism, open 
    propaganda of brutal violence, and emphasis on its own national and racial superiority,
    the modern tyranny of Moscow has much in common with the fascism of the last century,
    therefore it is not surprising that the appropriate word «ruscism» was found to
    describe it.
 6. The second feature of modern Russian hybrid totalitarianism is the qualitatively
    higher level of technical tools. The tools used by the tyrants of the twentieth
    century have evolved radically in recent decades; culture and technology have risen
    to many levels. Moscow’s ruscism effectively uses the achievements of information
    technology, including social media. The digital (technological) revolution to some
    extent helps Russian propaganda to create a different, virtual reality that is 
    radically different from reality, and even more, distorts it. In its practical 
    actions, in producing fakes and postulating post-truth, modern Russian propaganda
    benefits from some of the most radical movements of philosophical postmodernism
    at the end of the last century, which denied the existence of objective and verifiable
    truth and claimed that there are no natural foundations of morality and law. That
    is why modern Russian tyranny can be called not only hybrid but also postmodern
    totalitarianism.
 7. When it comes to Ukraine, all these features of hybrid totalitarianism are superimposed
    on another extremely important factor: the colonizing legacy of imperial, tsarist
    Russia. Most of the territory on which Ukrainians lived was conquered and conquered
    by Moscovia, a state entity that adopted the name «Russian Empire», between the
    second half of the seventeenth and mid-eighteenth centuries. Since then, the Russian
    government has banned and suppressed Ukrainian culture, language, Сhurch, and identity;
    it has claimed that Ukrainians are only a younger, smaller, secondary part of the
    Russian population. As indicated by numerous public texts and speeches of contemporary
    Russian top-level leaders and propagandists, today this traditional Moscow imperial
    ideology has acquired a radical militant character and calls for the complete destruction
    of the Ukrainian state and Ukrainian identity as such. The war being waged by Russia
    against Ukraine has all the features of a neocolonial war on the European continent
    with clear signs of genocide. The destruction of everything that is Ukrainian has
    become the political program of the Russian leaders, their mania, which is supported
    by a large part of the citizens of the aggressor state, which indicates the unhealthy
    state of Russian society. That is why calls for a compromise with Russia, which
    Ukraine occasionally hears from some representatives of the international community,
    even from members of the religious community, have no real basis and demonstrate
    a lack of understanding of the situation in which Ukrainians find themselves. The
    problem lies not only in the fact that such calls are immoral, as they disregard
    the principles of respect for human dignity and just peace but also in the fact
    that they are simply unrealistic: a compromise cannot be reached if one of the 
    parties denies the very existence of the other. Russia leaves Ukraine no choice
    but to defend itself militarily. This war is a national liberation struggle of 
    the Ukrainian civilian nation for the right to its own existence and future and
    the independence, freedom, and dignity of our citizens.
 8. **From the «Russian World» (_Russkij mir_) to «ruscism» – the path of degradation
    of the aggressor state.**

 1.  From what has been said about contemporary Russian hybrid totalitarianism, it 
     follows that it has a particular attitude toward religion and the Church. Orthodoxy
     in its Moscow form is being used in Russia today to fill the ideological vacuum
     that arose because of the fall of communism, considering religion as a means of
     reinforcing state power and turning it into a political tool. At the same time,
     the symbols of the communist period are strangely mixed with the mental paradigms
     of the tsarist empire. The Russian Orthodox Church has a long, one might say the
     centuries-long tradition of serving the Russian government in its various, sometimes
     opposing historical forms – from the Orthodox of the Tsardom of Moscow and the
     Russian Empire to the atheistic and communist Soviet Union. In all these state
     formations, the leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church sought to be in unity
     with the political authorities and benefit from a privileged position. Therefore,
     it should not be surprising that the Patriarch of Moscow supported and blessed
     Russia’s criminal war against the Ukrainian people. Such actions are in line with
     the Moscow tradition of the Church’s ideological service to the authorities and
     its servility to those in power. Unfortunately, now this long-standing imperial
     tradition, combined with modern post-communist totalitarianism, has led to a real
     crime committed by the leadership of the Moscow Patriarchate to propagandize the
     war. It was this church leadership that generated the new genocidal ideology now
     known as the «Russian World» and voluntarily offered its services to the criminal
     authorities and sanctified them. We observe this deep moral fall of the Moscow
     Patriarch and his religious supporters with great pain because it compromises 
     Christianity as such and undermines the trust of our contemporaries in the Church
     and in all those who use the name of Christ. Therefore, today it becomes especially
     urgent for everyone to «test the spirits» (cf. I John 4:1) in order to be able
     to distinguish political ideology hidden in pseudo-Christian rhetoric from true
     faith in Christ.
 2.  For many years, Ukrainian society has been trying to convey to the international
     community that a new aggressive ideology is emerging in Russia, a mixture of ressentiment,
     nationalism, and pseudo-religious messianism. However, during the entire period
     preceding the war, no one heard us. This ideology, which the Russian authorities
     called the «Russian World», was established in Russia as the official and only
     correct ideology, and the role of the Moscow Patriarchate in creating and promoting
     this ideology is now well-known and undeniable. It is the Russian Orthodox Church
     that has given the «Russian World» ideology a quasi-religious spirit, portraying
     Russia as the last bastion of Christianity on earth that resists the forces of
     evil. At the same time, the Russian Orthodox Church endows the deadliest nuclear
     weapons on earth with an almost sacred status.
 3.  The quasi-religious doctrine of the «Russian World» provided ideological justification
     for Russia’s full-scale aggression against Ukraine. This aggression has raised
     to the surface a whole layer of issues that should have been left in the past.
     Thus, it would seem that attempts to ideologize Christianity, when it was identified
     with a particular country, nation, or nations with their political ambitions and
     goals, have long since become history, as such instrumentalization contradicts
     the very essence of Christianity. However, the whole world is now witnessing Russia’s
     most brutal use of Christian symbols and Gospel images to justify the violation
     of the international order, the attack on a sovereign state, and mass murder. 
     The prophet Jeremiah spoke of such duplicity: «They ready their tongues like a
     drawn bow; with lying, and not with truth, they hold forth in the land» (9:2).
 4.  It is important for Christians around the world that the doctrine of the «Russian
     World» has been condemned by numerous representatives of the Orthodox community
     itself. In particular, a group of nearly 350 Orthodox theologians called it a 
     heresy and a «vile doctrine that has no justification». According to these theologians,
     the basis of the «Russian World» ideology is the false doctrine of ethnophyletism.
     They also “denounce all those who affirm Caesaropapism, replacing total obedience
     to the crucified and risen Lord with obedience to any leader who is endowed with
     authority and claims to be God’s anointed, regardless of the title he is known
     by: «сaesar», «emperor», «king», or “president.” And, as the previously mentioned
     theologians conclude, «if such false principles are considered valid, then the
     Orthodox Church ceases to be the Church of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Apostles,
     the Nicene-Constantinople Creed, the Ecumenical Councils, and the Church Fathers.
     Unity becomes fundamentally impossible».
 5.  The Appeal of the Christian Churches of Ukraine to condemn the aggressive ideology
     of the «Russkij mir» states that «Patriarch Kirill Gundyaev of the Russian Orthodox
     Church and the Russian Orthodox Church have been and remain one of the main creators
     and propagandists of the ideology of the «Russian World», which provides for the
     exclusivity of the «Russian civilization» and its separation and hostile confrontation
     with others. However, such a position – to exclude or delineate others based on
     ethnicity or cultural affiliation – does not correspond to the foundations of 
     the Christian faith as such. Inciting hatred and waging war based on the «Russian
     World» ideology violates Christian principles and contradicts the spiritual norms
     that the Church is supposed to embody. This ideology today is a challenge to the
     preaching of the Gospel in the modern world and destroys the credibility of the
     Christian witness, regardless of confession».
 6.  Eventually, this quasi-Christian doctrine degraded into a complete ideology of
     ruscism with its cult of the ruler and the dead, a mythologized past, fascism’s
     inherent corporativism, total censorship, conspiracy theories, centralized propaganda,
     and a war to destroy another nation. It seems that ruscism has combined all previous
     ideological constructs, from the Tsardom of Muscovy with its messianic ideas of«
     Holy Russia» and «the Third Rome» to the USSR with its aggressive imperialism 
     and desire for global domination.
 7.  This degradation of the Christian nature of the Russian Orthodox Church has revealed
     major weaknesses in the previous ecumenical dialogue. Its participants, having
     good will and intentions, remained inaudible to warnings that the Moscow Patriarchate,
     as in the days of the USSR, was only instrumentalizing this dialogue. Eventually,
     we came to a point where this instrumentalization became visible, and the quasi-
     ideological formula of «dialogue at any cost» became contrary to the Gospel principle
     of «dialogue in truth».
 8.  In addition, we can state that the European practice of «realpolitik», which sometimes
     turned into zealotry before the powerful of this world, did not justify itself
     either. It was considered a reasonable approach that took into account the realities
     of life. However, such a position is rather evidence of implication and a recognition
     of the alleged inability of the Gospel to illuminate the paths of human life, 
     where «sensual lust, enticement for the eyes, and a pretentious life» (I John 
     2:16) leads people. Today, the world needs the prophetic voice of the Church, 
     which will speak the language of justice, take the side of the offended, and shame
     and condemn the offender.
 9.  The inability of the Christian world to find adequate spiritual and worldview 
     solutions to these challenges from Russia is partly due to the fact that current
     Christian postulates in the international community have also undergone a certain
     ideologization. Evangelical fidelity to the truth, which in a situation of violent
     confrontation with evil turns into the sword of Christ (cf. Matthew 10:34), has
     conceded to the ideology of political correctness, which creates the illusion 
     of the possibility of pacifying evil. The reasonable conclusion that only God 
     has absolute truth has turned into a trap of ethical relativism, which gives legitimacy
     even to deliberately constructed lies. That is why it is so important for Christians
     to critically reflect on their past perceptions in order to find the truth again
     in the thicket of modern ideologies and thus restore their ability to «hear His
     voice» (John 18:37).
 10. The current challenges brought about by the doctrine of the «Russian World» and
     the shift toward relativism are bringing great spiritual and ideological confusion
     to the human community, causing many people and even some governments to lose 
     the ability to distinguish between truth and deception, good and evil. The tragedy
     of the current war is that the very language of spiritual values is threatened,
     as Russia and other authoritarian regimes use this language to persuade people’s
     hearts to commit terrible sin: «as they make a pretense of religion but deny its
     power» (II Tim. 3:5). For example, the concept of «spiritual fight» has acquired
     a distorted meaning in Russia and is discredited at a time when spiritual confrontation
     with evil is becoming almost the only means of saving humanity.
 11. The ideological manipulativeness of the «Russian World» doctrine leads not only
     to worldview but also to pastoral losses. While fictiously defending the interests
     of the Russian people and elevating them above other nations, this doctrine actually
     leaves them without pastoral care. The souls of Russians hear the voice of earthly
     Caesar instead of the voice of God and therefore become defenseless against the
     demons of Russian history. Therefore, in a spiritual sense, the flock of this 
     Church is left to its own devices.
 12. **Nonviolent resistance**

 1.  Looking to Christ and following the encouragement of his disciples and apostles,
     many early Christians chose a spiritual path that today is described as nonviolent
     resistance. They were convinced that Jesus’ example of forgiveness and mercy, 
     his refusal to defend his life through physical resistance was an ethical call
     that precluded discipleship that accepted the shedding of blood. This was the 
     path taken by the ancient Kyiv princes Borys and Hlib, who refused to engage in
     dynastic struggle and defended themselves by violent means (cf. Matt. 26:52). 
     For this spiritual feat, the Kyiv Church proclaimed them one of the first saints
     of the Kyiv land.
 2.  Throughout history, this form of opposition to aggression has taken on different
     forms and practical implementation. In particular, in the Middle Ages, those who
     sought to renew the Church called for a return to the «pre-Constantine» abstinence
     from any form of self-defense that involved the use of weapons. Nonviolent movements
     of the twentieth century are also widely known today.
 3.  In the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, «Gaudium et Spes»,
     the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council affirmed: «Motivated by this same spirit,
     we cannot fail to praise those who renounce the use of violence in the vindication
     of their rights and who resort to methods of defense which are otherwise available
     to weaker parties too, provided this can be done without injury to the rights 
     and duties of others or of the community itself». Similar thoughts are found in
     the Catechism of the Catholic Church. And in the Catechism of the UGCC «Christ
     is our Pascha» we read: «War is a crime against life because it brings suffering
     and death, grief, and injustice. War cannot be considered a way to resolve conflict
     issues. For this purpose, other means are consistent with human dignity: international
     law, honest dialogue, solidarity between states, diplomacy». Therefore, since 
     the time of this Council, the Church has emphasized the right of every person 
     to moral choice and discernment in wartime.
 4.  This tradition of nonviolent resistance has become an important part of the spiritual
     experience of humanity, but it cannot be considered the only one with evangelical
     legitimization. St. Augustine rightly noted: «If Christian doctrine defined all
     wars as sin, then soldiers who asked for advice on how to save their souls would
     have been told in the Gospel that they should lay down their arms and refuse to
     serve in the military. But they were told do not practice extortion, do not falsely
     accuse anyone, and be satisfied with your wages» (cf. Luke 3:14). In other words,
     military service should be a service of peace and justice for the common good.
 5.  The Gospel is peace-loving and peacemaking, but not pacifist (in the modern sense
     of the term). It does not eliminate the duty of the state to protect the life 
     and freedom of its citizens. After all, as St. Paul states, the state «does not
     bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the
     evildoer». (Rom. 13:4). A person has the right to a fair trial, to self-defense,
     to the inviolability of his or her health and life, and the state’s task is to
     provide all the conditions for the realization of these rights. That is why God
     has given the state the power to stop violence, protect the innocent, preserve
     peace, and bring criminals to justice. For this purpose, power structures and 
     armed forces exist. We need to distinguish between force and violence because 
     not all use of force is violence. The state must ensure a fair trial because its
     task is to ensure that justice is done. If the state encourages people to do things
     that are contrary to their conscience, then we must be guided by what the Scriptures
     teach: «We must obey God rather than men» (Acts 5:29).
 6.  It is extremely important to understand Jesus’ words about turning the other cheek(
     Matthew 5:39) and loving our enemies (Matthew 5:44) in context and correctly. 
     We can forgive personal insults, but we do not have the right to remain silent
     when we see violence directed against other people. Moreover, there is evidence
     in the Scriptures that the offended did not remain silent when violence was directed
     against him. For example, Jesus said: «Why do you strike me?» (John 18:23), and
     St. Paul warned his offender: «God will strike you, you whitewashed wall!» (Acts
     23:3). Therefore, forgiveness does not mean tacit approval of the offender’s actions
     and submission to evil, but rather overcoming them by the power of Christ. It 
     only indicates that the Christian entrusts God with the restoration of justice,
     for «Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord» (Rom. 12:19).
 7.  Contemporary pacifists, completely ignoring the gospel foundations of the objectivity
     of Truth, often see peace as the fruit of appeasement of evil or compromise with
     it. However, in 1979, in Ireland, St. Pope John Paul II affirmed that peace is
     the result of adherence to «ethical principles». This is fully in line with the
     prophetic tradition: «Justice will bring about peace; right will produce calm 
     and security» (Isaiah 32:17). And in 1981, the same pope expressed his conviction
     that «wars arise as a result of invasions or as a result of ideological imperialism,
     exploitation and other forms of injustice».
 8.  In order to achieve a fictional peace, pacifists are often willing – consciously
     or unconsciously – to withdraw the perpetrators of peace from responsibility. 
     The arguments vary and sometimes are even highly moral, such as the desire to 
     avoid further human losses. This is the argument that is often raised in the context
     of Russia’s large-scale aggression against Ukraine. The words of the Apostle Paul
     should serve as a warning to the creators of a false peace: «When people are saying,«
     Peace and security», then sudden disaster comes upon them…» (I Thessalonians 5:
     3). Because the aggressor concludes that its violence becomes its legal right 
     and tries by all means to achieve recognition of this «right to crime» under the
     guise of legitimizing geopolitical interests and justifying them. The lack of 
     proper condemnation and opposition to such actions by the international community
     and church leaders creates the illusion of the success of this model of the behavior
     of an entire state, which [model] not only does not find fair opposition but is
     rapidly spreading as a legitimate model of international relations. The force 
     of international law is being replaced by the blind law of the strong one. Instead
     of respect for the dignity and inviolability of the sovereignty of the subject
     of international law, exclusive and special «rights» of modern world powers are
     affirmed, which impose themselves in international relations as those who may 
     have the right to «patronize» other sovereign states or directly declare the loss
     of the right of a certain state and a certain nation to exist. This undermines
     the credibility of international law and any international peace agreement based
     on it. International cooperation and mutual trust come to a standstill, the world
     begins to arm itself and plunges deeper and deeper into an atmosphere of fear,
     mutual threats, and ultimatums. This way of imposing international relations today,
     when the sovereignty of international law subjects is sacrificed in the name of
     appeasing the claims of global power, is very similar to the international climate
     in Europe and the world before the outbreak of World War II. Indeed, the aggressor
     again feels impunity and plays on this fear. Thus, the experience of the current
     Russian aggression demonstrates that unprincipled pacifist slogans of pacification
     encourage the aggressor to further violence. In this historical context, the prophetic
     gesture of Ukraine thirty years ago – its renunciation of nuclear weapons and 
     its trust in the signatories of the Budapest Memorandum, an international agreement
     concluded on December 5, 1994, between Ukraine, Russia, the United Kingdom, and
     the United States on security guarantees for Ukraine in connection with its acquisition
     of a non-nuclear status – is a prophetic gesture of trust in the power of international
     law on the part of the Christian people and a manifest of their national aspirations
     for just security and peace. Today, this gesture deserves special attention and
     a new comprehension.
 9.  One of the main reasons for the current commitment to the ideas of pacifism is
     also the growing danger of war with the use of nuclear weapons. Often, instead
     of proclaiming the inadmissibility of such a war and searching for ways to abandon
     it altogether, one can now find theories about the «limits of legitimate self-
     defense» of non-nuclear-weapon states and «legitimate surrender» in order to avoid
     possible casualties. However, is it really possible to prevent this by laying 
     down arms in front of the aggressor? This is a question that has become acute 
     in the context of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, and the entire international
     community must answer it.  The hypothetical avoidance by Russia, a nuclear power,
     of responsibility for a criminal violation of international law and an attack 
     on a sovereign state will only accelerate the growth of the number of nuclear 
     powers on the planet. Now, after the start of Russia’s full-scale aggression against
     Ukraine, non-nuclear states feel more vulnerable than ever before to the possessors
     of deadly warheads. And if we consider Russia’s seizure and shelling of Ukrainian
     nuclear power plants, the situation becomes even more alarming. How can we talk
     about international security today when a state that is a member of the UN Security
     Council and possesses one of the largest nuclear arsenals in the world, in order
     to achieve its aggressive goals, itself poses a threat to this security and resorts
     to outright nuclear blackmail of the entire international community?  The prophet
     Micah wrote about such brutal behavior: «They covet fields, and seize them; houses,
     and they take them; They cheat an owner of his house, a man of his inheritance»(
     2:2).
 10. Adherence to the Decalogue is a prerequisite for a just society, and war is a 
     brutal violation of God’s commandments. As the above-mentioned constitution «Gaudium
     et Spes» emphasizes, «Any act of war aimed indiscriminately at the destruction
     of entire cities of extensive areas along with their population is a crime against
     God and the man himself. It merits unequivocal and unhesitating condemnation».
     Can the human community leave without condemnation and responsibility for the 
     genocide of Ukrainians that the Russian army has organized in Bucha, Borodyanka,
     Irpin, Mariupol, and many other occupied territories of Ukraine? Who will stand
     up for the victims and their families? The current cry of Ukrainians to the international
     community for justice has the full support of the Church, as it has always made
     and continues to choose favor of the offended. This is the essence of her mandate
     from our Lord Jesus Christ and her warning against injustice, which does not come
     by itself: «He made a pit, digging it out, and falls into the hole that he has
     made». (Psalm 7:15).
 11. **Defensive war and legitimate defense**

 1. Since the time of St. Ambrose of Milan (340-397) and St. Augustine (354-430), given
    the real circumstances of the sinful world in which we live, the Church has been
    guided by a rule known today as the just war theory. This approach excluded any
    unprovoked aggression and any unmotivated use of force and also contained rules
    of warfare.
 2. Throughout history, many Christian thinkers have reflected on these principles.
    The clear presence of evil in history has led to the realization that the defense
    of one’s neighbor and one’s own survival requires the need to resist armed aggression.
    Reflecting on the experience of the First World War, the righteous Metropolitan
    Andrey Sheptytsky spoke of the right of the people to self-defense and «the permissible
    defense of their own land, their own families, and their own homes». To ensure 
    that defense does not escalate into violence and meets the criteria of proportionality
    of such self-defense, certain principles of a just defensive war were developed,
    as we say today, the principles of legal defense. Scientific and technological 
    progress, which led to the development of new, more dangerous weapons, and thus
    new threats and the emergence of new forms of social organization could not but
    affect the evolution of the theory of justice in such a war. The process of rethinking
    some of its aspects was particularly active after the end of World War II. Pope
    Pius XII (1939-1958) considered defensive wars just and emphasized that other nations
    have a duty not to abandon an attacked country in trouble. The Fathers of the Second
    Vatican Council in the constitution «Gaudium et Spes» stated that «As long as the
    danger of war remains and there is no competent and sufficiently powerful authority
    at the international level, governments cannot be denied the right to legitimate
    defense once every means of peaceful settlement has been exhausted».
 3. After the Second World War and the establishment of the United Nations, international
    law ceased to operate with the concept of a «just war» and moved to a complete 
    prohibition of warfare. According to the UN Charter, the use of armed force against
    the territorial integrity or political independence of any state is recognized 
    as unlawful, and all disputes between states are to be settled by peaceful means
    in such a way as not to endanger international peace and security, and justice.
    Later, in Resolution 3314 (XXIX) «Definition of Aggression», adopted by the UN 
    General Assembly on December 14, 1974, it was stated that no considerations of 
    a political, economic, military, or other nature can justify an act of aggression.
 4. The use of force is authorized only by a decision of the UN Security Council to
    the extent necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security or
    in self-defense against an armed attack. Thus, the UN Charter defines that the 
    right to individual or collective self-defense against armed attack is inalienable,
    and the Charter itself does not limit this inalienable right in any way.
 5. St. Pope John XXIII sought to shift the focus of the discussion of war and peace
    to peacebuilding but did not deny the right of nations to self-defense in the event
    of an unprovoked attack. Therefore, the Church distanced itself from the practice
    of naive pacifism, which often turns into moral blindness in distinguishing between
    good and evil. Moreover, St. Pope Paul VI warned about «the insidiousness of a 
    purely tactical pacifism, which intoxicates the enemy to be defeated and kills 
    the understanding of justice, duty, and sacrifice in souls».
 6. The Catholic Church teaches that legitimate armed defense against an unjust attacker,
    as well as war in general, is always the last means that a party in danger can 
    resort to. This is emphasized by the Catechism of the UGCC «Christ is our Pascha»:«
    The use of military force may be permissible only in cases of extreme necessity
    as a means of permissible self-defense, and the Christian soldier is always a defender
    of peace». The Catechism of the Catholic Church outlines the elements of a just
    defensive war: «The exact conditions for legitimate defense by military force must
    be carefully determined. The seriousness of such a decision subjects it to the 
    strict conditions of moral legality. It requires at the same time that the damage
    done by the aggressor to a nation or community of nations be prolonged, severe,
    and indisputable; that all other means of putting an end to it be impossible or
    unsuccessful; that the possibilities of success be reasonable; and that the use
    of arms not cause disaster and disorder greater than the disaster to be removed»,
    that is, when negotiations, arbitration, compromise, and other means have failed.
    As a rational being, a person is obliged to make decisions based on common sense
    and the law, rather than using force, whenever possible. For the legal defense 
    to be just, the safety of civilians must be kept in mind. This defense always has
    a clearly limited goal: a just peace, not the complete destruction of the enemy’s
    people, economy, or political institutions. In order to achieve a just peace, limited
    and proportionate means must be used: armaments and force must be limited to what
    is absolutely necessary to repel aggression and deter future attacks.
 7. In his encyclical «Fratelli Tutti», His Holiness Francis warns against «an overly
    broad interpretation» of the right to legitimate defense, which could be used by
    some to «preventive» attacks or actions that cause more evil than the one that 
    needs to be eliminated; he also added that «today it is very difficult to choose
    the criteria developed over the past centuries to affirm the possibility of a «
    just war». This is a valid point, given the way Russian propaganda justifies its
    aggression against Ukraine. However, does not such manipulation by Russia indicate
    the need to develop even clearer and more precise criteria for legal defense, which
    would make it impossible for the aggressor to pretend to be a victim?
 8. In the light of the teachings of the Catholic Church, the Security and Defense 
    Forces of Ukraine are legitimately defending the state and the people. Today, there
    is no shortage of evidence that Russia has been unwilling to resolve its contradictions
    with Ukraine at the negotiating table as an equal and sovereign partner. The aggressor
    country rejects the very right to existence of the Ukrainian people and its state
    as a subject of international law, refusing to engage in dialogue and negotiations
    with a sovereign Ukraine. It is impossible to «engage in dialogue with someone 
    who does not exist», as Russian propaganda constantly repeats. According to the
    above-mentioned modern Russian ideology of ruscism, the «Ukrainian issue» must 
    be resolved once and for all through the complete destruction of everything Ukrainian.
    Since 2014, Russia has carried out unprovoked acts of aggression against Ukraine,
    first occupying the Crimean Peninsula and then launching a proxy war in Donbas.
    In 2022, it launched a full-scale invasion and, using a wide range of weapons, 
    mercilessly destroys civilian infrastructure, terrorizes, and kills civilians. 
    The Ukrainian army is up against an extremely powerful military machine that uses
    the full range of sophisticated weapons and periodically threatens to launch a 
    nuclear strike against a non-nuclear country, to which it guaranteed security and
    territorial integrity by signing the 1994 Budapest Memorandum.

**V. Neutrality in time of war**

 1. Neutrality can indeed be the result of prudent judgment and analysis. There are
    situations in which a country does not want to deepen a conflict because of its
    involvement in it or wants to mediate between the opposing sides. However, such
    neutrality has its pitfalls: there is a limit beyond which such a position begins
    to be a betrayal of one’s own values and principles and plays into the hands of
    the wrongdoer. If it [neutrality] is caused by indifference, cowardice, or a biased
    or self-serving attitude, it becomes a morally wrong choice rather than a manifestation
    of a deep understanding of the causes and consequences of the dispute (cf. Prov.
    24:11-12; Matt. 12:30; James 4:17; Rev. 3:15-16).
 2. Keeping such situations in mind, Pope Pius XII emphasized in his 1948 Christmas
    message that in the case of unjust aggression, «the solidarity of the family of
    nations forbids others to behave as mere spectators, by showing impassive neutrality»,
    and added that it was impossible to measure the damage «already done in the past
    by such indifference to wars of aggression” and that such a position “has only 
    reassured and emboldened the authors and instigators of aggression».
 3. In times of war, neutrality needs to be approached with a delicate understanding
    of the ethical and moral aspects. There may be a legitimate desire to prevent further
    bloodshed or to facilitate a diplomatic resolution of the conflict. However, neutrality
    should not be extended to the point where it becomes a passive approval of injustice
    and crimes, as there is a moral imperative to oppose unjust aggression against 
    any country and to defend the values on which the international community is based.
    The lessons of history, as emphasized by Pope Pius XII, are a strong reminder that
    indifference to acts of aggression can have far-reaching consequences. Nations 
    are obliged to assess the limits of their political neutrality, which cannot become
    moral, otherwise it will turn into a betrayal of fundamental values and principles.
    At such critical moments, the international community must rise above mere impartiality
    and actively work for justice, peace, and the preservation of human dignity.
 4. Russian aggression against Ukraine is not a struggle for disputed territory: it
    is an attack on international law and a crime against peace. The current war in
    Europe is a zero-sum conflict of identities, as Ukrainians seek to preserve their
    state independence and the right to be Ukrainians, while Russians seek to deprive
    Ukrainians of their right to exist as such and revive their empire. The atrocities
    of the Russian army against civilians, which the whole world is watching almost
    live, are a brutal outrage on human dignity and a crime of genocide. Maintaining
    feigned neutrality in such a situation is a betrayal of the values of respect for
    international law, justice, and human dignity. This is a position based on interests,
    not principles.
 5. Artificial and formal neutrality encourages many to treat both warring parties 
    symmetrically, as politically and morally equal, ignoring the real causes of this
    war and its circumstances, and therefore it is destined for an ethical defeat. 
    This defeat is also determined by the fact that the Russian-Ukrainian war is radically
    different from traditional military conflicts. In this situation, it is impossible
    to maintain moral neutrality; instead, one must make a choice in favor of values:«
    You cannot serve God and mammon» (Matthew 6:24).
 6. Of course, there are countries in the world that, due to a certain historical trajectory
    or the specifics of their role in the international community, declare permanent
    neutrality in the event of any armed conflict, and therefore consistently adhere
    to the principles to which this status obliges them. Among such states, the Holy
    See occupies a special place, whose positive neutrality means that it does not 
    limit itself to observation but seeks to facilitate dialogue between the parties
    of the conflict. In serving the cause of peace and international cooperation of
    the Apostolic See, it is necessary to distinguish between two types of neutrality:
    diplomatic and moral. However, we do not see moral neutrality in the actions of
    the Holy See. For example, in the case of Russia’s unjust aggression against our
    Homeland, it clearly distinguishes between the aggressor and the victim of its 
    attack and always supports the one who became this victim – the Ukrainian people.
 7. At the same time, the millennial tradition of the role of the Roman Bishop as the
    highest arbiter of the Christian world, that is, the position «above the parties»
    at war, has enabled and enables the Vatican to play an important, sometimes decisive
    role in resolving many conflict situations around the world, as well as to help
    establish channels for the exchange of prisoners and relieve the suffering of civilians.
 8. The significance of this mediation cannot be overestimated in the context of Russia’s
    current aggression against Ukraine, as many mothers and wives gratefully recall
    the Holy Father’s role in the release of captured soldiers or deported children.
    Such facts become especially eloquent when the diplomatic mediation efforts of 
    the Bishop of Rome are harmoniously combined with the language of faith, which 
    dares to call evil evil, healing human wounds with this word of truth, as was the
    case, for example, on January 8, 2024, during a meeting of Pope Francis with the
    diplomatic corps accredited to the Holy See. At that time, the Pope reminded the
    participants that it was Russia that unleashed an aggressive war against Ukraine
    and emphasized that war crimes require an appropriate response from the international
    community.

**VI. The goal of legal defense is a just peace**

 1. In this message to all people of goodwill, we want to emphasize that it is our 
    Christian and civic duty to defend the lives of our neighbors, especially children,
    women, and the elderly, most courageously and radically possible – by taking up
    arms and willingly laying down our own lives, as Jesus taught: «No one has greater
    love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends» (John 15:13). We are 
    in a situation where we must defend people from non-humans.
 2. In Christian ethics, a just peace means more than just a victory over aggression.
    The ethics of just war, which prevails in the Christian understanding of war and
    peace, was formed in the Middle Ages when the Church used the concept of justice,
    a constant desire to give everyone his or her due. This concept became the basis
    of modern international law, which means the right of nations and peoples to independence.
    The roots of the understanding of justice can be found in the Bible – here it means
    all-embracing right relationships, which are expressed by the Hebrew term «tzadik»
    and the Greek term «dikaiosine». This justice is consistent with rights and the
    law, but it is broader than that, as it also includes virtues such as giving and
    mercy. It reaches its climax in God’s reconciliation of the world to himself through
    the cross and resurrection, which the apostle Paul calls the justice of God (cf.
    Rom. 3:21-26; II Thess. 1:6).
 3. Ukrainians, of course, want the war to end as soon as possible and the long-awaited
    peace to come. Saints Augustine and Thomas Aquinas believed that the goal of a 
    just war is a just peace. Pope Paul VI reiterated this thesis on the Day of Peace
    in 1972. However, the end of war is not true peace if it means the end of Ukraine.
 4. The purpose of legitimate defense of one’s own people and statehood is to ensure
    a just peace for all parties, so revenge, conquest, economic gain, and subordination
    are unacceptable. A just peace can neither be the «appeasement» of the aggressor
    nor the so-called «minimal peace» that implies recognition of the territories occupied
    by the aggressor. Such a [just] peace must be long-lasting and permanent, with 
    the restoration of the principles of international law. It involves not only defeating
    the aggressor and restoring Ukraine’s territorial integrity, but also measures 
    aimed at restoring proper relations between Ukraine and Russia and healing the 
    wounds caused by the war: disclosure of the truth and recognition of criminals,
    international criminal courts, reparations, political apologies and forgiveness,
    memorials, new constitutions, and local reconciliation forums.
 5. In order to achieve a just peace in Ukraine, Christian churches, international 
    organizations, and political institutions must be able to use very clear rhetoric
    to condemn Russia’s military aggression and genocidal acts against Ukraine, and
    to ensure that war criminals are prosecuted. Unpunished evil continues to cause
    even more damage.
 6. The numerous victims that Russia has caused in Ukraine throughout history, particularly
    in the 20th century, as well as after the full-scale invasion on February 24, 2022,
    should be the focus of the international community’s attention to properly assess
    these ongoing atrocities.
 7. Russia’s aggression in Ukraine has forced the world to live through new experiences
    and new traumas similar to those that humanity experienced during World War II.
    The terrible consequences of this Russian invasion need to be addressed now and
    considered when working to strengthen the security architecture of Ukraine and 
    the world. This global and sustainable security architecture should be based on
    the principles of a just peace, and the efforts of states, international organizations,
    and Christian churches should be directed to this end.

**Conclusion**

 1.  There is «a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them», said Ecclesiastes(
     Ecc. 3:5), and our time confirms this. The current regime in Russia has set out
     to dismantle the recent international security structure, redraw the world, and
     establish its own rules. The international institutions and mechanisms that supported
     this order are now showing their powerlessness in the face of the attack of the
     destroyers of this order.
 2.  All this was not only a shock to the international community, but also a challenge
     to the Church of Christ. After all, its teachings, which, on the initiative of
     the Christian democrats of Europe, set the paradigm for the half-century development
     of its peaceful civilization, have largely adapted to the conventional rules. 
     Today, we need to remember that the Gospel is not so much a collection of postulates
     from which Christian doctrine is built as God’s word, which encourages us to eternally
     renew our spirit and rethink the realities of this world.
 3.  The same Ecclesiastes reminds us: «There is a time to be silent and a time to 
     speak» (cf. Ecc. 3:7). So, there is a time when the Church speaks with a pastoral
     voice, fulfilling the commandment of the Lord: «Feed my sheep» (John 21:16-17).
     There is a time when the Church speaks with a teacher’s voice, giving instruction:«
     Go therefore and make disciples of all nations» (Matt. 28:20). And there is a 
     time when the Church must speak with her prophetic voice, giving sick people a
     ray of hope on how to overcome evil: «They conquered him by the blood of the Lamb
     and by the word of their testimony; love for life did not deter them from death»(
     Revelation 12:11). We, Christians, must pray a lot so that the prophetic voice
     of Christ’s Church becomes convincing.
 4.  Ukraine has become a center of global change and is facing terrible challenges
     today. The evil is real – we have seen its face. The voices of the innocently 
     murdered and ruthlessly tortured, brutally raped, and forcibly deported are calling
     out to the world’s conscience. Ukrainians do not question the importance of soberly
     weighing threats and carefully calibrating political steps. However, it is equally
     important to maintain the ability to look at current events through the eyes of
     a victim.
 5.  The world has failed to stop the Moscow tyrant and warn him that «sin is a demon
     lurking at the door: his urge is toward you, yet you can be his master» (Genesis
     4:7). Today, when genocide is being performed online, it is a good time to openly
     tell this tyrant that he has brought a curse from Heaven upon himself, dooming
     himself to «You shall become a restless wanderer on the earth», (cf. Genesis 4:
     12).
 6.  How should Christians around the world act now? First of all, we need to realize
     the global nature of the current threat and to affirm and develop the power of
     just international law. The belief of some world societies that this war is a 
     purely local conflict between two nations is wrong, and therefore, after reconciling
     them, it will be possible to return to the usual comfort. Today, all the foundations
     of human civilization are under threat.
 7.  For many years, Russia has been using the so-called hybrid warfare as a tool to
     achieve its imperial, human-hating goals, which includes the creation of economic
     dependence in individual countries, information warfare through the spread of 
     propaganda and fakes, bribing heads of international organizations and politicians,
     intimidation and destruction of its own dissident citizens who managed to leave
     for other countries, and so on. Russia’s goal is to cause threats and chaos in
     order to annex the territories of other countries or offer them its «help» in 
     order to gain control over them. Such an insidious and destructive policy requires
     the international community to quickly recognize global threats and a clear moral
     assessment by the Church.
 8.  By launching a hybrid war against Ukraine, Russia has actually challenged the 
     entire civilized world. It has stirred it up so much that many people have ceased
     to distinguish between truth and deception, and thus between good and evil. Before
     our eyes, a terrible substitution is taking place: what is evil is dressed in 
     the dress of good, and what is good is stamped with the stigma of hell. In such
     a distorted world, it will be impossible to avoid or stop wars. Blurred verbal
     declarations and vague political language will be powerless, and diplomatic neutrality
     without clear values and guidelines will gradually turn into moral relativism 
     or even weakness, which already prevents many politicians in the civilized world
     from recognizing the atrocities of Russian troops in Ukraine as genocide of the
     Ukrainian people because it would require their intervention. At present, many
     Christians who belong to the postmodern generation of the Western world simply
     do not see the genocide of the Ukrainian people and do not hear the cries of the
     victims, but in order not to lose face, they continue to express their worry and
     deep concern.
 9.  All of this can be overcome only by a clear and distinct proclamation of the Gospel
     Truth. If modern humanity – the humanity of the «post-truth era» – does not recognize
     objective truth, it will gradually turn into a «post-justice world». If it does
     not develop and establish social justice based on the main principles of human
     dignity, sanctity and inviolability of human life, common good, and solidarity,
     it will end up in societies where the concept of _law_ is replaced by the _concept
     of interests_ of certain individuals or criminal groups, the right of the strong
     prevails over the rule of law, the law is not the same for everyone, and the foundations
     of international law and the inviolability of state sovereignty fall victim to
     the geopolitical and economic interests of the world powers of today.
 10. The voice of the eternal Gospel Truth, and its implementation in social and international
     relations, has its own unique history in the tradition of the Kyivan Church and
     our millennial tradition of state-building. This eternal Truth and Justice is 
     reflected in the light of our St. Sophia, the Divine Wisdom, the unchanging matrix
     of the development of the Ukrainian people and our native state and is precisely
     formulated as a guideline for social and international relations in the millennial
     slogan «Do not let the powerful destroy a man!» from the immortal «Teaching to
     Children» by Prince Volodymyr Monomakh of Kyiv (1053-1125). «Do not let the powerful
     destroy a man!» is the call of the Kyivan Church to the conscience of the modern
     Christian and its vision of the development of the Church’s social teaching on
     justice and peace in the modern world. «Do not let the powerful destroy a man!»
     is the call of the suffering Ukraine to the international community to proclaim
     the objective values of just social construction and international cooperation.
 11. The righteous Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky, during the madness of World War 
     II, called at archeparchial synods for a new understanding of God’s commandments
     as a way to implement the life-giving principles of the truth of God’s law in 
     building a just society. For only by restoring the legislative effect of the Decalogue
     can we expect the restoration of God’s peace. Without this, the next threat facing
     humanity may be the last. This call is especially relevant in the context of Russian
     aggression today.
 12. «Jesus Christ yesterday and today is the same forever» (Hebrews 13:8). The Lord
     wants His disciples to be like they were at the beginning of Christianity – courageous
     in their faithfulness to the truth; not to turn a blind eye to terrible injustice,
     seeking economic gain and peace of mind. The life of Jesus – His teachings and
     deeds – are an example and a gracious light for us to be true human beings, created
     in the image and likeness of God and carrying the peacemaking power of the Holy
     Spirit. They testify to His wise and just rule in the world. This example is so
     pure and clear that it cannot be replaced by any opportunistic diplomacy or politics
     that disregards the dignity and rights of individuals and nations.

The blessing of the Lord be upon you!

On behalf of the Synod of Bishops

of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church

in Ukraine

**† SVIATOSLAV**