New Russian Patriarch enlists regime’s help to suppress ROAC

[Priest Siluan]

New Russian Patriarch enlists regime’s help to suppress independent Orthodox believers /b

Articles in English 30 Apr 2009 Paul Goble

VIENNA, April 30 – A Russian appeals court has left in force a decision of a lower court to allow allowing the state to seize eight church buildings in Suzdal belonging to the Russian Orthodox Autonomous Church, the latest indication of the manner in which Patriarch Kirill is using the state to suppress any independence among Orthodox believers.

That is the conclusion of Aleksandr Khramov, a religious affairs writer, in a commentary published yesterday on Portal-credo.ru, a conclusion highlighting both the newly enthroned patriarch’s well-known authoritarian tendencies and an increasingly dangerous collusion between his church and the Russian state (http://www.portal-credo.ru/site/?act=comment&id=1575)

In decisions announced yesterday, the collegiums of the First Appellate Arbitration Court in Vladimir left in force the February 12th judgment of the Vladimir Oblast Arbitration Court which granted a government request to seize the churches, ostensibly because their parishes had violated one or another rules of the use of their properties.

The oblast official who initiated the case has routinely insisted that the Moscow Patriarchate “does not have any relationship to this case,” but that assertion Khramov argues is a total “lie.” The government does not need these churches and almost certainly will hand them over to the local bishop of the Moscow Patriarchate in short order.

Three aspects of this case are especially disturbing, the religious affairs writer says. First, the entire process of going after independent believers “suddenly accelerated after Kirill became the patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate,” an indication of his influence with the government generally and President and Mrs. Medvedev in particular.

Thus what is happening in Suzdal sets a precedent that is likely to be used elsewhere in the Russian Federation soon: The Moscow Patriarchate will enlist the power of the state to go after its enemies and even after those believers who seek only the right to worship in their own way independently of Kirill and his “power vertical” inside the church.

Second, while the independent believers plan to appeal, “even now,” Khramov writes, “the majority of them are seized by the darkest forebodings: In the era of ‘missionary mobilization,’ which the new Patriarch has proclaimed, all those unwilling to enter into the ranks of ‘the supporters of the faith’ under the flags of the Moscow Patriarchate” will be in trouble.

And third, there is a very real danger of violent clashes between the followers of such independent churches and the state. On the one hand, because they believe in their mission, the followers of such independent Orthodox groups say they do not plan to simply obey what they see as an illegal and unconstitutional seizure of their property.

Metropolitan Valentin, a leader of the Russian Orthodox Autonomous Church, has publicly declared that “even if they use clubs to drive us out, we will suffer for the truth and suffer for Orthodoxy. We will not give the keys [to the churches to the Russian government for handing over to the Patriarchate]. We will not leave.”

And on the other, the government appears to be gearing up to use force against them. Officials have announced that on May 18th, there will be a large “anti-terrorist training course.” In advance of that, it is already clear that for the Russian government as for the Patriarchate, “the terrorists” in Suzdal will not be “militants but Orthodox believers.”

Such an expansive reading of “terrorist” by the authorities, one that they appear prepared to extend to those whose only crime is that they are not followers of the government-approved faith, may ultimately prove to be the most dangerous aspect of this situation, one that has attracted some attention from religious rights organizations but so far little from anyone else.

http://www.eesti.ca/?op=article&articleid=23576

[MPROCORDsdnt]

Generally speaking, it is indeed a policy of Patriarch Kyrill to "quell dissent" and "dispossess dissidents." While his hand has only been strengthened and his activities redoubled in this regard by the manner in which the reunification of ROCOR was accomplished and what the capitulation of the Fr. Alexander Lebedev faction did in compromising Orthodox confessorship.

But the ROAC has done itself no favors with its extremist ecclesiology and its lack of tact in even offering to "dialogue" with the state and the Russian church to at least "air its concerns" and emphasize its "patriotic credentials" and work to "arrive at All Orthodox unity."

The Old Believers were an institution before they went into dissidency and even now after centuries have only achieved a modicum of "rehabiliation" in the eyes of the Russian state, where their status is secured but their witness is marginal at best. Old Believers mind you believe in the idea of an Orthodox Russia and eschew any types of relationship with "foreign intrigues."

From that standpoint, the ROAC may well indeed find itself based in the successor states one day (or abroad), for its ecclesiology and political rigidity/inadequacy have left it without friends and in a world of mutual anathemas. What it has lost will never be recovered, but the question of their day is how can they successfully adapt to "pursue Orthodox confessorship" (as they see it) and at the same be loyal and patriotic citizens who believe and ultimately aim to achieve All Russian Orthodox reconciliation in confession of the Truth. That is the spectre which haunts the ROAC.

Jason Bently

[Priest Siluan]

ROAC in Russia has followed all the legal procedures and he has respected the law and constitution of the Russian Federation (this behavior from ROAC sometimes has been criticized by some more "fanatic" TOC groups) ROAC always did so for not giving reasons to the "Russian" State of accusing her as "fanatic" and "terrorist", because the "Russian" state threatened to did so. In fact who have violated their own constitution and their own laws and the human rights have been this neo Soviet or neo Stalinist government.

It is also interesting that respected organizations of human rights in Russia and other places, and even respectable organizations of laws like the Center of Slavic Right in Russia support to ROAC and other kind of organizations (also patriotic ones) do too.

As for the patriotism, people of ROAC in Russia are very patriotic and they loves very their Fatherland and the Holy Rus, but, of course, they are not agree with this current continuation of the Soviet Power called "Russian Federation".

[MPROCORDsdnt]

Well, I don't think that statement reflects an understanding of what Soviet Power and Stalinism was. For one, Stalin wouldn't have even allowed even private prayer by your group during the worst of his era and would have had you all met by the "chorny voron." Secondly, the fact we have a tricolor today and we honor the great achievements of Russia gives us something even more credible than the liberal "democratic" Kerensky government. If one were to read the rhetoric of the White Movement, one would read about a government curiously THE SAME as today's Russian government. The ruling party is still debating whether or not to return Orthodoxy to the status of state church--and you equate this with Bolshevism and Stalin's terror?! So, politically, arguing that a patriotic Russia is not "free" because it isn't liberal democratic and allows for total sectarian abasement of the ROC as an institution is like arguing for Russia to stop being Russian, represents total enthrallment to the degenerate West and its utterly anti-Orthodox orientation, and does nothing whatsoever to adequately understand Bolshevism, which is clearly over.

Again, precisely these attitudes is what will have the ROAC exiled and shut down in Russia as being a russophobic, even seditious, organism on Russian soil, not respecting Russian institutions and calling for their demise and an "Orange Revolution" to placate the West and its degenerate standards. If one wants to see religious persecution and neo-Bolshevism, one would be better served in visiting the EU, say Britain, than baiting a resurrecting ORTHODOX Russia. That West is the "liberal democracy" the ROAC is advocating. Stockhom for the masses with Utrecht's Old Catholicism. As a Russian, I say NO THANK YOU!!! I also urge you to review some of the patriotic, artistic work of the last twenty years, say Igor Talkov and his song, "Gospoda Demokraty." Take it to heart. Thus, attitudes of incorrigible russophobia rightfully alienate the sympathies of the people and the Russian state. Moreover, if you all hate it so much, why are you there? To propagate McCulture and hope to "stop Putin." Stop Putin and what? Another Yeltsin or a Russian Yuschenko (even though "Ukrainians" are Russians)--look how that ended.

Seriously now. Adaptibility is key to surviving and part of that involves at least an Orthodox ecclesiology in your dissidency and a loyalty and honor to the Russian state. That will get you further and may preserve what you have left, but NO ONE is going to accept Old Believer/Matthewite nonsense being pushed upon unsuspecting people as "Orthodoxy" from people who neither have an interest in All-Orthodox unity and are openly hostile to an emerging Russian Orthodox state. That is the problem. So if greeted with such obscene dissent, the authorities rightly move to "solve the problem," for you all don't want it resolved. You want upheavals and problems in Russia. We want a great and Orthodox Russia.

Jason Bently