The Nostalgia of the Church Abroad
The descendants of immigrants believe Russia
is still the country their ancestors left behind.
Archpriest Pavel Adelheim (Pskov Diocese ROC MP)
We are all burned
by fate in different ways.
Who vanquished a fortress,
Who got to know Siberia.
That's why we know
the priests and deacons
now pray for all the members
of the Sovnarkom.
Sergei Esenin
The Church Abroad suffers from nostalgia and the promise to reunite
with the "Church in Russia" as soon as the Soviet power structure was
no more. Reasons have piled up that make one believe that that time
has arrived. The Soviet government has often played with the
feelings of the Russian immigrants and has always won. Each time,
they lost bitterly and paid dearly for their feelings of trust,
feelings that were quite genuine.
The ROC MP has always acted on behalf of the Soviet power structure.
Not because it had affection for the Soviet government, but because
it liked being part of the Soviet power structure. It was part and
parcel of it, as was the entire Soviet nomenklatura.
The West, in its naivete, considers the "Soviet power structure" to
be an ideological power structure, which will end when its name is
changed to something else. The Soviet government is constantly
changing its spots, its own and that of its constituent bodies. The
West thinks the institution of the "Cheka" was transformed when they
started calling it the "NKVD"; that it was reborn when it was called
the "MGB"; that it became more humane when it was called the "KGB";
and made completely democratic as the "FSB." Now, it is busy
upholding the law, being a charitable organization and is partial to
kiddies.
In a flash, the CPSU disappeared, as if it never existed. Where did
the multi-million- member party go to? In fact, there never was a
CPSU. The CPSU was a myth. The nomenklatura was the only actual
entity and it never went anywhere: it was, it is and it will be,
changing its spots, preserving its members and its essence.
The "Soviet power structure" is the outward manifestation of a social
concept, which changes slowly over centuries from the influence of
objective reality. Its inner process continues to this day, but it
lacks an ethical imperative. Its focus is on the collective, not on
the individual, which is always in want. We sang "where man can
breathe free," while half the country was dying in the camps. The
West extolled the virtues of our humanism. They make samovars in
Tula. The workers secretly steal various parts. When the parts are
put together, it always ends up being a machine gun. We understand
why, the West doesn't.
Our emissaries often convinced immigrants to return. Always,
successfully. Metropolitan Nikolay (Yarushevich) , a dedicated
patriot and a wonderful sermonizer, played an active role in these
deeds. When they asked him, "Bishop, why do you lie that we have
freedom of conscience in our country?" He answered, "If your mother
is a drunk, are you going to tell the whole world?"
The after-effects of repatriation have been written about in the
West. Let's remember the fate of Marina Tsvetayeva, who returned
after the war. Let's remember the Cossacks, who were brought back
after the war. Is it possible to list each one?! What else do you
need? Nobody likes facts, people prefer to have hope. Those who are
free, love freedom.
Why doesn't ROCOR investigate what happened to those in the Orthodox
Church, "the ones we don't talk about," who returned to the ROC MP?
These were confessors of the faith, who returned from the camps, from
exile. Entire generations that were thrown overboard by Soviet
reality. Many of them have now been canonized as New Martyrs. What
happened to them? Some didn't make it to today, some blended in,
others couldn't. The schism was resolved only formally. The
standoff between the "Soviet" and "anti-Soviet" ideologies outlived
the "Soviet power structure." Politics had nothing to do with it.
The "anti-Soviet" ideology was characterized by a loyalty to
Christian ideals, a refusal to lie, and a concentration on
mankind. "Soviet" ideology was characterized by conformity, making
excuses for falsehoods, and sacrificing mankind. Two moral stands
which differed in their views on life, religion, the arts and
science.
By 1927, two different approaches to church policy emerged regarding
the cooperation between church and state. One opinion was put forth
in the "Epistle from Solovetsk" by the bishops held at the Solovetsk
labor camp. The opposite view was put forth in Metropolitan
Sergey's (Stragorodskiy) "Declaration. " The contradiction between
the two policies was a matter of principle and characterized the
schism in the Church as between the "sergians" and "the ones we don't
talk about."
When these "unmentionables" returned, they remained second-class
citizens occupying second-class positions. Archbishop Ermogen
(Golubev) gave his heart and all his strength to the ROC MP. He
lived out his final days in isolation, stripped of his right to serve
and his freedom. Who fooled him? Who locked him away in the
Zhirovitskiy monastery and ignored his appeals?
The West didn't understand what happened in London? The ROC MP's
Charter from 1988 allowed Metropolitan Anthony (Bloom) to amend the
Charter of the Diocese of Sourozh, as long as it was approved by
Moscow. The Charter was never approved. Bishop Vassiliy (Osbourne)
realized that Metropolitan Anthony's wishes were not realized and he
switched to Constantinople.
The "Act of Canonical Communion" is based on the principle of the
Russian expression "yes and no" – "I allow it and forbid it." One
clause contradicts the other and further explanations are required.
For example, #3 contradicts #9. Numbers 11 and 12 negate the meaning
of #10. This is exactly what happened in London. The naming of the
First Hierarch and the bishops along with the establishment of
dioceses must be approved by Moscow. What then, if they don't
approve? The procedure to resolve these matters is not laid out and
the final decision is left with Moscow.
Can a vague charter, where nothing is agreed upon, possibly become
the legal basis for ROCOR's newfound existence? Holes in the law big
enough to drive a truck through, will only lead to ad hoc decisions.
The so-called independent status is not supported by the structure
and will remain only an empty pretense. What childish nonsense!
Was it so hard to find a competent lawyer? Are all the professors of
canon law gone? The law always protects the weak. If something is
not codified, it will be abused, sooner or later, by the strong for
their own benefit.
To explain the known facts of Soviet psychology to the immigrants is
useless. Experience hasn't taught them anything – "Experience has
never saved anyone from ruin." The descendants of the immigrants
believe Russia
is still the country their ancestors left behind. We live in a
different Russia, one suffering the loss of moral principles. They
have been destroyed in the government and in the church and in the
society. When having a conscience is lost, laws won't help. If
repentance doesn't wake one's conscience, the result will be deadly.
The decades-long call to repent, which ROCOR made to Russia, has now
been silenced…
