| Analyzing the transformation of Church-State Relations in Russia from 1987 to 2008 Ryan Hunter The quarter century that has passed since the fall of the USSR has seen the resurgence of the Russian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) as a major force in Russian public and political life. Given that the Church is the only ancient public institution which survived Soviet rule, and that it serves to tie Russians to their pre-revolutionary national culture and history, understanding how it came to revitalize and resurrect its cultural influence and political power in the wake of the Soviet collapse is crucial to understanding Russia today. Russian church-state relations beginning with Gorbachev in the mid-1980s were marked by an end to the Soviet policy of marginalization and repression of the MP and growing state toleration of Church influence. The seeds for much of the Church’s rapid rise in political prominence, influence, and power under Yeltsin and especially Putin may be found, ironically, in Gorbachev’s personal attitudes and official changes in state policy toward the Church during his tenure at the helm of a USSR where, ironically, Marxist-Leninism and atheism remained official state ideologies until the 1991 collapse. Patriarch Aleksey II proved crucial to developing, along with Gorbachev and later Yeltsin, many aspects of this new church-state relationship which marked a complete departure from Soviet leaders’ entrenched anti-Church attitudes, laws, and policies before 1985. By the fall of the USSR, the Church’s resurgence and revitalization had already begun, and would only deepen and grow stronger in the following years. Gorbachev and the Church’s new-found freedom: mid-1980s to 1991 M. Gorbachev As Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeyev) observed in a January 2008 lecture one year prior to then-DECR chairman Metropolitan Kirill’s election as Patriarch and Hilarion’s own appointment as Kirill’s replacement, the case for a genuine religious reawakening in Russia can be made from as far back as the period of perestroika and glasnost under Gorbachev in the mid-to-late 1980s when Russia remained an officially atheistic communist republic. |
| Michael Prokurat, Alexander Golitzin, Michael D. Peterson Скачать epub pdf CHURCH AND STATE CHURCH AND STATE. Until the 19th-c. rise of nationalism and the consequent appearance of state churches, and with the notable exception of Russia and certain earlier local churches (e.g., Armenia, Georgia [qq.v.], etc.), the understanding of the state in the Orthodox Church had been governed by the latter’s relationship to the two great Empires, Roman and Ottoman (qq.v.), which dominated the eastern Mediterranean basin for two millennia. Early Christian attitudes to the Roman Empire oscillated, depending on persecutions, between seeing the emperor and his imperium as the providential guardians of law and order (e.g., Rom 12 ), or else as the agents of the devil and the antichrist (e.g., Rev). The imperial cult of the emperor’s spirit or genius was, of course, consistently resisted. Radical change came with the accession to power of Constantine the Great (q.v.). Eusebius of Caesarea (q.v.), in numerous writings including his Church History and especially his oration In Praise of Constantine, sketched the outlines which would become the official, political theology of Byzantium (q.v.). This held that the Empire was a providential gift, intended by God to stretch across the oikoumene (q.v.; or “inhabited earth”) and to parallel the universal Church of Christ, to become in short the secular arm or reflection of the Church. The emperor, while no longer divine, was presented as the “image of Christ,” i.e., in Christ’s capacity as governor and ordering power of the universe (pantacrator). In a famous phrase, Constantine therefore called himself the “bishop” or overseer of the Church’s outer life-in effect, its chief executive officer-though he never claimed the right to define its faith. (See Caesaropapism.) Some two centuries later, Justinian (q.v.) articulated the doctrine of “symphony”: imperium and sacerdotium coexist as the mutually complementary and supporting aspects of a single Christian polity, with the emperor seeing to its good order and defending its orthodoxy and the bishops retaining full authority (q.v.) for Christian teaching and discipline, and in particular the exclusive right to pronounce on the truth or falsity of doctrine. It was thus the emperor’s general duty to enforce the standards of the Church and, in times of doctrinal debate and imperial crisis, to convoke a universal synod of the episcopate, the Ecumenical Council (q.v.), for a decision on the disputed issues. While this was the theory, the practice depended on the relative strengths of the different emperors, patriarchs, and bishops, and, not least of all, the influence of the monks as a third and often very powerful element. |
| А.Л. Беглов Summary. Alexey Beglov. In search of «ideal church catacombs». Church underground in the USSR This book is the first study of the illegal, i.e. prohibited by the Soviet law, Church life during the Soviet period. It underlines the illegal surviving strategies and describes the variety of forms, used by the Church underground movement (podpolie) as a reaction to the state policy towards the Church. The book describes the illegal parishes and monasteries, the underground charity work and church economy, as well as the pilgrimages to the «non-official» (that is the places located in the closed monasteries) holy places. The period between 1920 and 1940s is the focus of author " s attention, although the most important tendencies of the church underground movement are traced up to the 1980s. It was in the 1920s, during the campaign of the exemption of the church treasures that the state power defined in an arbitrary way what was legal and illegal as far as the Church was concerned. This approach was soon to become an effective tool for oppressing the Church. During 1922–1927 the central and diocesan administration of the patriarchal Church was denied the official registration. The absence of registration immediately became another reason for oppression. When the required registration was obtained in 1927 the decree of VZIK and SNK «On the religious organizations» established an extremely narrow zone of legal church practice by prohibiting the church charity activity and church education. The decree demanded an extremely strict procedure of registration for church communities. As a result mass closure of churches followed, which in turn led many church communities to go underground, thus de facto becoming illegal. The sphere of legal activity for the Church continued to shrink during the 1930s. The existence of Church underground movement became one of the main reasons for State repressions against both the legal Church and the underground communities. The situation changed in the period from 1930 to the beginning of 1940. |
| His Holiness Patriarch Kirill Delivers Address at a Meeting of the Supreme Church Council Source: DECR On 26 December 2018, the Supreme Church Council of the Russian Orthodox Church held a regular session in the Hall of the Supreme Church Council of the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow under the chairmanship of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia. His Holiness delivered an opening address. Photo: Oleg Varov/foto.patriarchia.ru I greet all the members of the Supreme Church Council at this year’s last session. Of course, we will discuss the results of the year, but first of all, I would like to cordially greet all of you. And I have to say a few words about the year gone by, which, as we all feel, was very difficult. The situation of our Church in Ukraine is still a source of great tension, a factor affecting the well-being of Orthodox Christians, their spiritual welfare. You are well informed, you know what is going on, what developments – radical, extremely dangerous for the integrity of the Ukrainian people, and not only for our Church – have recently taken place in Kiev following the decision of the Ukrainian parliament requiring to change the name of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. These changes will be followed by repressions, and it is completely obvious that an ultimatum has been presented: if the Church does not change its name, its registration will be cancelled. And if the Church changes its name, then, naturally, an enormous pressure will be exerted on the Ukrainian people, on the public. There is no doubt that acts of violence will be committed to take away church buildings. People in Ukraine are believers, they are Orthodox Christians, firm in faith and emotional, hence there is a risk that the situation concerning the church buildings can escalate into bloody conflicts. Therefore, I ask you to pray even more zealously for peace in the brotherly Ukrainian land and for the preservation of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. As is widely known, what triggered persecutions of the Ukrainian Orthodoxy was the unprecedented decision of Constantinople, going beyond the bounds of any canonical order and therefore criminal, to encroach on the canonical territory of the Ukrainian Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, on the territory of our Church. This encroachment resulted in and was followed by the devastating developments, first of all, the interference of the governmental authorities, also unprecedented. And it occurred in the country which declares its commitment to the European values, one of which is the separation of the Church, of religion, from the state! In violation of this fundamental European value the state in the person of president directly interferes in church administration, one may say, presides at what is called “unification church council” and participates in negotiations with Constantinople on the so-called “tomos,” doing all this in front of TV cameras, in plain view of the whole world. |
| Accept The site uses cookies to help show you the most up-to-date information. By continuing to use the site, you consent to the use of your Metadata and cookies. Cookie policy Metropolitan Onufry on the fate of canonical Orthodoxy in Ukraine The information and education department of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church has published an interview given by His Beatitude Onufry, Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine, to Pastor and Flock magazine. - Your Beatitude, according to the Ukrainian Constitution, Church is separated from state. When in the early 20 th century the Bolsheviks adopted this law, many believers perceived it as a serious religious catastrophe. However, as it very soon became clear, the Bolsheviks separated Church from state only to busy themselves with her destruction. Later, in the early 90th, the situation changed as the communists went down from the historical arena and a time of restoration came for the Church. And here the law on the separation of Church from state played to some extent a positive role: the Church could develop in a necessary direction almost without any pressure from the authorities. But now when the authorities seek to influence the solution of church problems, how would you comment on the developments? Can the government help create ‘a One Local Church’? And how should a believer react to all this? - The law on the separation of Church from state is a fruit of revolutionary transformations carried out in the early 20 th century. The Bolsheviks separated the Church from the state in order to show that the country adopted a new, atheistic way of development. This law was also necessary to the Soviet power to untie its hands in its struggle against the Church until her full destruction. And this struggle was waged under the slogan: ‘The Church is an enemy of the state’. However, the Lord, Who does everything for the good of His faithful, ordained that the separation of Church from state became a new stimulus for her powerful development. And we humbly thank the Lord for this mercy to us, unworthy children of His holy Church. |
| The Assembly of Bishops specifically demands the inviolability of the religious rights and freedoms of the Serbian people and of other peoples in Kosovo and Metohija. We, the bishops of the Serbian Orthodox Church, the ancient and glorious Patriarchate of Pech, gathered by the grace of the Holy Spirit, for the regular convocation of the Holy Assembly of Bishops in the historic See of Serbian archbishops and patriarchs, the Monastery of the Patriarchate of Pech, and in the republic capital Belgrade. During this preparatory year for the Commemoration of the 800 th Anniversary of Autocephaly of our Church of Saint Sava (1219-2019), concerned with the survival and wellbeing of the Serbian people and their holy sites in Kosovo and Metohija, headed by His Holiness the Serbian Patriarch, direct this message to all faithful sons and daughters of our holy Church, as well as local and international media. The question of Kosovo and Metohija represents a Serbian church, national and state question of the first order. Our Church, the spiritual mother of our people, as a whole, and of Serbia, the country in which the largest number of Serbian people reside, to which the territory of Kosovo and Metohija belongs, bears the greatest burden of responsibility for the preservation of that historic province within the borders of Serbia and for the future of the Serbian people in it. Kosovo and Metohija, with its one thousand and five hundred Serbian Orthodox monasteries, churches, foundations and monuments of Serbian culture, represents the inalienable central part of Serbia. This is convincingly witnessed by the traditional spiritual conscienceness of our Church, in which the Kosovo Testament signifies the expression of the central message of the New Testament. Concretely, experienced in the historical experience of the Serbian people, as well as the conscienceness of the Serbian people with regard to their indentity, spiritual and ethical values and historical path. Kosovo and Metohija, from our standpoint, is neither a question of national ideology or mythology nor, even less, of mere terminology, but represents the very core of our being and existence as a church and people, without which we will be lost in the overall process of globalization and secularization. The prosperity of Serbia cannot be built on the disintegration of that which represents the cornerstone of its identity, history and statehood. |
| Persecution, Church Seizures, and Vandalism Ramp up in Pat. Bartholomew’s Post-Tomos Ukraine Source: OrthoChristian Ukraine, January 15, 2019 – Whereas the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church was experiencing intimidation before, the state authorities have now moved into repressions against the Church, says His Eminence Archbishop Theodosy of Boyarka . Since the creation of a new nationalist structure at the “unification council” on December 15 and the granting of a tomos of autocephaly by Patriarch Bartholomew to “Metropolitan” Epiphany Dumenko on January 6, the canonical Ukrainian Church has experienced increased persecution from the state and nationalist-schismatics. The community of the St. Alexander Nevsky Church in Vinnitsa, located on the territory of a higher professional school, was suddenly forced to evacuate the premises after 13 years and take all their belongings, including the dome on the roof. Several Ukrainian outlets subsequently reported that the priest had destroyed and even set fire to the church in protest of some parishioners supporting the new nationalist church, though the Vinnitsa Diocese refuted this lie. The priest and community of a 340-year-old church in the village of Vorsovka have been locked out of their church, after the warden and candle stand worker at the church collected signatures from throughout the village, whether parishioners or not, to move the parish to the nationalist church. The schismatics had previously tried to demand that the rector, Fr. Basil, stop commemorating His Holiness Patriarch Kirill in the services. Fr. Basil was also hospitalized with a hypertensive crisis. Despite a meeting being called by supporters of the schismatic church to try to force the local church to transfer to the schismatic structure, the residents of the village of Dunaets in the Sumy Province voted almost unanimously to keep their St. George Church in the canonical Church. In the Uman Diocese , the Church of She Who is Quick to Hear was vandalized with graffiti reading “ROC FSB? [Russian Orthodox Church-Federal Security Service of Russia].” |
| 4th Meeting of Commission for Dialogue between ROC and Assyrian Church held in India Source: DECR Photo: mospat.ru From November 13 to 18, 2019, the 4 th meeting of the Commission of Dialogue between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Assyrian Church of the East took place in Thrissur, Kerala State, India. The Moscow Patriarchate delegation included Bishop Clement of Krasnoslobodsk and Temnikov, co-chairman of the Commission; Hieromonk Stefan (Igumnov), secretary for inter-Christian relations of the Department for External Church relations; and S. Alferov, DECR, secretary of the commission. Representing the Assyrian Church of the East were Bishop Mar Awa Royel of California, secretary of the Holy Synod of the Assyrian Church of the East, co-chairman of the Commission; Cor-Bishop George Kanon Toma, cleric of St. Andrew’s Church in Glenview, Illinois, USA; Priest Ephraim Alkhas, secretary of the commission; and Deacon Roland Bidzhamov, cleric of the Assyrian diocese of Northern Iraq and the CIS. Metropolitan Mar Aprem Mooken of India, the oldest member of the Synod, and Bishop Eugene Kyriakos, vicar of the Metropolis of India, welcomed the participants in the meeting on behalf of His Holiness Catholicos-Patriarch Mar Gewargis III of the Assyrian Church of the East, who recalled with warmth his repeated visits to Russia, with the latest one made in late May-early June 2014, during the historic visit of the late Catholicos-Patriarch Mar Dinkha IV to the Russian Orthodox Church in June 2014. The commission discussed the implementation of agreements reached at the previous meeting in October 2018 in Sankt-Petersburg and defined the further cooperation program to be approved by the Supreme Church Authority. The meeting noted the successful development of inter-church contacts in the academic field, in particular, in students’ exchanges, as in autumn 2018, the first representative of the Assyrian Church of the East, Rev. Addai Daniel Nazlu, was enrolled in Moscow Theological Academy. It is planned to involve representatives of the Assyrian Church in academic conferences organized by the Moscow Patriarchate theological schools and to invite delegates of the Russian Orthodox Church to similar events held by the Assyrian Church’s educational institution, in particular, in the recently opened Nisibis Theological College in Sydney, Australia. In 2021, the 2 nd Summer Institute will be organized in Moscow for young Assyrian clergy and student. Its program will include visits to synodal establishments of the Russian Orthodox Church and introduction to ecclesiastical and historical-cultural sights in Russia. |
| On 4 November 2015, the feast day of the Kazan icon of the Mother of God and the Day of National Unity, President Vladimir Putin of the Russian Federation and His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia led the opening of the 14th Public Forum and Exhibition, this year called " Orthodox Russia. My History. From Great Upheavals to the Great Victory " organized by the Patriarchal Council for Culture with support of the Moscow City Government. The " She Who Reigns " icon of the Mother of God has been brought to Manezh from the church of the Kazan icon in Kolomenskoye. The head of the state and the Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church put candles at the miraculous icon and venerated it. President Putin addressed those gathered at the opening, saying: " Your Holiness, dear friends, I congratulate you on the opening of the annual exhibition in the Orthodox Russia cycle, timed to commemorate the Day of National Unity. " This educational project is the result of a big joint effort by the Russian Orthodox Church and leading research organizations, archives and libraries, and is evidence of the growing deep and real interest in Russia’s history and in our spiritual roots and origins. I want to thank sincerely the organizers and participants for their work. " This extensive exhibition’s central theme is the period from 1914 to 1945, a time of World Wars, revolutions and upheavals. It was the time when old foundations shattered, destinies crumbled and millions of people became the victims of cruel social experiments. " But even in those hard and difficult conditions people lived, created, made discoveries and achieved breakthroughs, always remembering what was most important when our homeland was in danger. They understood the importance of unity and drew strength from, eternal values and lofty moral ideals. Ideological stereotypes faded before the real historical Russia. " Love for the Motherland was the strongest and all-vanquishing emotion. It inspired, helped and saved. This was how our people came through the 1941–1945 Great Patriotic War and not just survived, but preserved and strengthened our statehood and brought peace and liberation to the enslaved peoples of Europe. |
| Michael Prokurat, Alexander Golitzin, Michael D. Peterson Скачать epub pdf RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH. We focus our attention on the Russian Church in the 19th and 20th c. since the medieval and early imperial history can be found under Kievan Rus’, Novgorodian Tradition, Muscovite Tradition, Unia, and the Spiritual Regulation (qq.v.). The difficulties caused by the Spiritual Regulation of Peter the Great in the 18th c. continued into the 19th c. and developed further: The government interfered increasingly in the intellectual and administrative life of the Church; not only was there no patriarch, but the Holy Synod was controlled by the government; and the social status and economic situation of the clergy continued to deteriorate. The ober-procurator’s power, influencing the Holy Synod and leading it, grew until the office became an official Ministry of State. Under Tsar Alexander I the Ministry of Ecclesiastical Affairs and Education was formed, but had a brief existence (1817–1824). This so alarmed the hierarchy that it complained of persecution of the Church. Nevertheless, Count Nikolai Protasov (1799–1855) became ober-procurator of the Holy Synod from 1836 to 1855 and continued the trend of strengthening the office. During his tenure he successfully transformed the Russian Church into an organ of the state, “The Department of the Orthodox Confession.” His political methodology may be described as attempting to reduce the Russian Church and clergy to civil religion in the worst sense-bureaucratic functionaries of the state’s “confession.” With this goal, true higher education and ecclesiastical freedom became irrelevant. All that was needed was supplied by the tsar, who was “the supreme defender and guardian of the dogmas of the ruling faith, and observer of orthodoxy and all good order in the Holy Church. In this sense the Emperor, in the law of succession to the throne (5 April 1797), is called the Head of the Church” (Fundamental Laws, articles 42, 43, 1832 edition). Under Protasov, church finances and clergy employment became the sole domain of the ober-procurator. Of those who opposed him, Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow, renowned for his work on the Russian Bible (q.v.) translation project, distinguished himself by attempting to keep Protasov in check. |
|
|
