One of the constant and boring reproaches against the UOC and the ROC is the assertion that for “decades” they “did nothing” to heal the schism and did not enter into dialogue.
At the same time, those who throw such reproaches ignore the obvious fact – it was impossible to come to an agreement with Filaret and his entourage!
The demands of Denysenko and the “episcopate” of the UOC-KP were absolutely unacceptable and impracticable. Even if we imagine that the UOC would have made colossal concessions (contrary to the canons and common sense), the schismatics would never have had enough!
In addition, the empirical facts fully confirm this.
Denysenko never, at any stage in the existence of the “UOC-KP”, did not give a reason to believe that he could give up his ambitions. Neither in relation to the Russian Orthodox Church, nor in relation to the same Constantinople Patriarchate.
For example, in 2008, when the Patriarchate of Constantinople agreed to invade the canonical territory of the UOC for the sake of legalizing the split, and Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko supported this project, Filaret rejected the proposal of Patriarch Bartholomew! That is, even recognition from the Phanar was not enough for him, and he was only interested in his own power and the patriarchal cockle.
As for the general position of the “Kyiv Patriarchate”, it became completely irresponsible back in 2007 after the publication of the “Historical and Canonical Declaration” adopted at the “Bishops’ Council” of the schismatics. It contained such impudent and wild theses that even then it became absolutely clear that no dialogue on the part of the UOC with such claims and demands is possible in principle. In addition, this is without taking into account the acts of violence against the communities of the canonical Church, which also made any negotiations problematic.
In 2017, Filaret disavowed his “letter of repentance”, despite the fact that the ROC and the UOC created a special commission to conduct a dialogue. Yevstratiy Zorya helped Denysenko to disown his words, and now Zorya is actively giving interviews about the unwillingness of the UOC to negotiate.
Finally, the so-called “unification council” in 2018 was carried out only by deceiving Filaret. The Ukrainian authorities and the Greek Phanariots simply tricked the old man, promising him to retain internal leadership. But even after that, he did not reconcile himself and again recreated the split in the schism, abandoning the tomos. It should be noted that the “unification council” would not have taken place if the UOC had suddenly agreed to take part in it.
Filaret would simply refuse such a format of association, because, again, he would have lost the chance to manage the new structure.
In this context, all attacks against the UOC a la Drabinko, as if “Moscow forbade dialogue,” are ridiculous. Because on the part of “UOC-KP” and Filaret there were only demands, extortion and insults, and not a single hint that they agreed to act in line with the canons. It was impossible to prohibit what was already impossible.