Historical outline

Hubichi lies seven kilometres south-west of Drohobych. Formerly (15th-17th centuries), they were part of the Drohobych starosty. However, they were partly owned by the nobility. Owners include Alexander Brześćński and Bartosz Hubicki.

In the 1930s, the village became part of what was then known as the "Great Boryslav". It was around that time that it was decided to create an independent parish in Hubichi. Previously, the village belonged to the community of Drohobych, later to Tustanovice (eventually renamed Boryslav). It is likely that already before 1934 a project was commissioned from the architect Lawrence Dayczak. A year later the construction was completed and the consecration took place in 1936.

After the Second World War, Father Tadeusz Łącki, who was the parish administrator in Borysław, took all the movable equipment of the church to Poland. In the evacuation chaos, the items were mixed with those salvaged from the other two Boryslaw churches.

The Soviets turned the abandoned building into a salt warehouse. This led to damage, resulting in the building being demolished in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

Architecture

The creator of the now defunct church was the then well-known Lviv architect Vyacheslav Daychak, who specialised in projects for sacred buildings. The author was perfectly in tune with the then fashionable historical trend, within which he readily referred to past eras. This was most often Gothic (sometimes broken up with Romanesque style) and Baroque. However, Dayczak did not always adhere rigidly to a specific framework. Sometimes he played with form, treating epochal associations in a rather free manner. The church in Hubicze is a great example of this. Yes, it made reference to the Gothic, but it was also a modern design, not shying away from functionality. Above all, however, it represented a simple and unpretentious form. Światosław Lenartowicz wrote about the building:

'Particularly noteworthy is the solution of the façade, the gable of which is optically connected to the slender signature tower, creating the impression of a tower façade. The careful composition is complemented by horizontal masonry segments with gates, topped off with vertical accents of a bell tower and a pedestal with sculpture. Evidence of the attention to a unified expression of the building, both on the part of the builders and the architect, is the author's solution to details such as the layout of the floor, woodwork and iron crosses.

The building was located on the main street. It consisted of a four-bay nave and a lower and narrower single-bay chancel facing west. On the sides of the nave were rectangular chapels, and on the side of the chancel were a vestry and a store room. The east bay of the nave housed the music choir.

The nave from the interior was decorated with a wall of pillars. The rainbow arch was closed with a semicircle, barrel vaults were used at the top, and the windows in the central bays of the nave were tall, rectangular, grouped in threes.

A large rectangular window was used in the front wall and closed with a semicircle. In contrast, the windows of the choir bay, chapels and annexes at the chancel were much smaller and rectangular.

The façade of the church was tripartite, two-storey with a high stepped gable. The central field was slightly set back from the sides. Its lower storey was formed by a forward projecting porch, over which a balcony was placed. A high window was placed in the second storey, closed with a broken cornice. The stepped gable was divided into five fields and topped by a ball with a cross. The roofs of the nave and chancel were gabled. A turret with a slender signature topped with a cross was built in the middle of the roof leading across the nave.