This paper analyzes Florovsky's treatment of the Kyivan Theological Tradition in his magnum opus, The Ways of Russian Theology. I argue that Florovsky failed to sufficiently understand the distinctiveness of this tradition because he took the political narrative of Russian imperial history for granted. The assumption of the imperial narrative led Florovsky to evaluate all western influences upon Ukrainian theology as distortions (he borrowed Oswald Spengler's term "pseudomorphosis" to describe the phenomenon) of Christian Hellenism, which he considered normative for Orthodox theology. In conclusion, I identify the unique features of the Kyivan Theological Tradition and chart a way for the future studies of the ways of Ukrainian theology.