Translated material
The church closes
In society
The church closes
November 8, 2012 Svetlana Solodovnik
Before the Day of National Unity, Patriarch Kirill made two important statements, but difficult to fit with each other: that the church “will be in a dialogue with any power ” and that “the ideas of solidarity and concern for general”, as well as 400 years ago, “ are designed to become a cross between our society”.
In his first speech, which was dedicated to absolutely insolvent, according to the First Hierarch, accusations of the “stiff” of the church with the state, the Patriarch remembered the foundations of the social concept of the Russian Orthodox Church. The document does not say anywhere, he noted that the Church intends to compete with the state where the decrees of the Synod or the Bishop Cathedral on this topic? What are the grounds for such accusations?
Meanwhile, the social concept written during the “dashing 90s” was even further: it included the provision that in the event that the authorities forced the Orthodox believers “to sinful, sincere acts, the church should refuse the state to obey”. Then the power was greatly excited because of this situation, the hierarchs were called to the carpet, they demanded an explanation-the concept, recall, was finalized just by the beginning of the Putin rule. Now they do not remember “sincere deeds” and “disobedience” - the church is ready to cooperate with any power.
What the Patriarch understands by cooperation, we know - after the protest events of the end of 2011 - the beginning of 2012 he does not miss the opportunity to show this. But what the Patriarch understands by solidarity is not very clear. On the one hand, he headed the laying ceremony of the monument to Patriarch Hermogenes-the inspirer of the People’s Militia of 1612, who nobly exalted his vote “against lawlessness”, as the head of the church said in an interview with ITAR-TASS. On the other hand, all attempts to fight “lawlessness” here and now do not find his approval. The priest Dmitry Sverdlov, for example, who went to the parliamentary elections in December 2011 and then wrote about the lawlessness that were happening before his eyes, was very soon removed from the post of rector of the temple and sent the third priest to another. The hegumen of Timofei (Simedov), the culprit of an accident on the garden ring, in which two more cars were injured, also removed the abbot from the post and even banned the service of the circumstances of the case in the service, but the court, having taken the right from the abbot, nevertheless guilty of an accident did not find him. And this after the police established that it was he who chose the wrong speed and as a result could not cope with the management. And what about the patriarch? Talk about the shortcomings of the priests force us to turn our eyes off the Lord’s cross, he inspiredly preached in the next “word of the shepherd”, inspire us with a misconception that “the Cross did not bring anything to the world and that the Church, which is designed to preach about the Cross, does not correspond to this sermon ...” The abbot Timofey must be understood ...
The official church is always trying to sit on two chairs. Why does the Patriarch consider it important to cooperate with the authorities? Therefore, he explains that "the Church is responsible for the moral state of its people" and is ready "through cooperation with the authorities, including to serve these high goals." Poor, poor Vatican! How does he, unhappy, supports the morality of the soldiers around the world? You can’t lawize with each Pinochet - but the real Pinochet, by the way, tried very hard to build a state ideology based on traditional, including Catholic, values, but did not receive the support of the Catholic Church in this; Soon after his coming to power, she began to finance civil society institutions, including human rights organizations.
Not that with us. Putin scolds human rights activists - and church newsmakers echo him, in the bowels of the patriarchy, the concept of human rights is being developed in the peak of traditional. But this is the already completed stage, the most fierce attacks on human rights activists fell in the mid-2000s, “Fundamentals of the teachings of the Russian Orthodox Church on dignity, freedom and human rights” have been dusting since then somewhere on the shelves not in demand. Now in the main "enemies" there is an opposition , "sowing the turmoil." Following the authorities, representatives of the church establishment are diligently trying to prove that the opposition is “not a people”, these are renegades who “disobediently” dreaming of the collapse of Russia. They scold the “liberal press”, prone to criticism, and over and over again, they repeat about the need for the church to develop their “positive agenda”. The one that, presumably, supports the "people". Once again, this topic was raised at the fifth festival of the Orthodox media “Vera and the Word”, which took place at the end of October.
At the festival, many faithful words were spoken: about the frequent unrealism of the church environment to open discussion of problems and their diagnosis; The fact that the churches should look for support not in the person of the authorities of those who are in power, but in the person of the urban and rural intelligentsia. But all this is fraught with: you will begin to openly discuss the problems - and now he involuntarily joined the “sowing turmoil” of the opposition, the dialogue with the authorities may be under threat. “We are almost daily forced to react to external stimuli,” the chairman of the Synodal Information Department Vladimir Legoada complained at one of the discussions of the festival. “ It turns out that we do not create the agenda, but only participate in it.” Is it possible to somehow go into such that the Orthodox media become leaders on the information field, and the active discussion of the church agenda confirms its importance and necessity?
I think you can: you just need to talk about what is happening here and now and worries the whole society, and not to compose fictional problems. After all, even the tripped church concepts of a very narrow orientation, about the human rights, the moral code of the entrepreneur, rot under the sabotage, and here the patriarchy sets itself the task of much more ambitious - no less creating positive virtual reality. I’m afraid that even the inters -suffering presence in this case will not help, even if the church completeness - bishops, clergymen, monks, laity - together will try to develop a “consonant position regarding the challenges of time”. In addition to the church, there is still social fullness - suddenly it will be dispersed with a “consonant position”?
Still, even people of the Church still cannot get rid of the Soviet mentality. Remember the slogan of the XXII Congress - “The current generation of Soviet people will live under communism!”? In essence, the Patriarchate think in this direction: the current generation of Russian people will live ... Is it really in paradise? And the “positive agenda” is, obviously, something like directive instructions: do not positively look at the surrounding reality? - Not a people, it’s good, if not an enemy of the people.
Another sign of the inexplicable (or revived) Sovietness: intending to develop the current agenda for the whole society, for some reason the organizers of the festival-we note, for the first time in the years of its existence, they have not been concerned about wide accreditation to the media festival, not only secular, but also Orthodox. The dreams of a positive agenda are good, which will be produced by quiet sapa in some secret corner! No, many people known in the secular information environment, so to speak, were invited to the festival, but they were invited, but there was no condemnation of the press to the festival. Either provincial Orthodox journalists (mainly employees of the diocesan media gather at the festival) were protected from the corruption of the cunning capital colleagues, or, following the example of the Kremlin, the creation of a church pool was completed and the entrance to church events was ordered from now unwanted people - but the fact is obvious. And this is another evidence that the church leadership, who loves to talk about the church as a powerful civil force, does not feel it organic part of society, another step towards the transformation of the patriarchy into the ideological department of the Central Committee, from which the head of the Church is so diligently peeling off.