In society

Rich Soboryans

January 16, 2009 Alexey Makarkin

Attention to the composition of the future local cathedral of the Russian Orthodox Church is not surprising. The last time such a representative church forum was collected in 1990 for the election of Patriarch Alexy II. But then the composition of the cathedral spoke little to the secular man: delegates from laity (one from each diocese) were not only recommended by the ruling bishops, but were also people who came to the church in pre -perestroika years - and therefore did not belong to the number of noticeable, career oriented citizens. These entered the CPSU, and the parish life for them was closed. Now, among the Soborians, there are rich and successful people whose presence in the cathedral causes observers a contradictory attitude. A standard question arises: how much is compatible with church activity, including with participation in the cathedral? Indeed, is it not easier for a camel to go through a needle ear than to get into paradise?

Firstly, with a camel, not everything is so simple. The classical interpretation of St. John Chrysostom, enjoying high authority in the Orthodox Church, says that "Christ does not condemn wealth in words, but those who are addicted to Him." Another famous interpreter, Blessed Theophylact Bulgarian, believed that even if a person is not in slavery at his own wealth, but simply owns it, then he is still “ hard to escape by human weaknesses. For it is impossible not to abuse what we have. ” However, Feofilakt left some chance as rich - “difficult”, but not impossible. Moreover, after the famous gospel quote about a camel and a needle ear, another follows: that a person himself cannot be saved, but everything is possible to God. Including, of course, the salvation of wealthy citizens. However, the church tradition indicates that the rich should make their efforts for this - lead a pious life, help the church and the poor.

Secondly, upon closer examination, it turns out that there are not so many people related to business among the Soboryans-at the moment a dozen two. Most delegates from laity are purely church people: elders, regents, diocesan employees. This is not surprising: democracy in the church is traditionally limited, and the laity on the cathedral is actually delegated by the ruling bishops, although their decision is officially reinforced by the election results. At the same time, the system works clearly in the province - unlike, for example, from the elections of delegates from spiritual educational institutions that led to a considerable scandal. Deacon Andrei Kuraev, a hot supporter of Metropolitan Kirill, accused the bishops - adherents of another probable candidate, Metropolitan Clement, of the rigid use of an administrative resource for his candidates. And the opposite side , in turn, reproaches the deacon in the end of the litter from the hut and insulting Archbishop Dimitry, the brother of the Lord Clement and one of the leading participants in the notorious election assembly.

Thus, the ruling bishop has a dilemma. Or send your Alter Ego to the cathedral, which are guaranteed to vote as their boss wants - the majority chooses this path. Or to “bore” the title of a suborce of a local notaches, which provides a considerable help - this is a choice of a smaller part of the bishop. The notable, of course, can disperse in the views with the bishop - he is influential and independent and not used to it when they indicate him. Moreover, the vote will be secret, and each member of the cathedral has one vote; Unlike the votes of 1945 and 1971, when on behalf of each diocese it was open - and under the vigilant supervision of curators in civilian clothes, the bishop spoke, and the rest of the Soboryans performed even more decorative functions. Nevertheless, it seems that there will be few discrepancies between spiritual and secular representatives of dioceses: the laity experiences understandable gratitude for the honorary difference and is unlikely to pay the bishops of ingratitude. Therefore, as before, a bishop will play a key role in the election process, which, incidentally, has an exclusive right to nominate three candidates for the patriarchs at the bishop's cathedral preceding the local.

And with the rich, not everything is simple. For example, on the Internet, many malicious words say that the Astrakhan diocese at the Cathedral will be represented by the director of the circus (the subtext is understandable - they would have chosen a clown!). But at the same time it is not said that he is the trustee of the Intercession Church in the village of Bolkhuna, to the construction of which he made a significant contribution. Klaipeda entrepreneur Alexander Popov, engaged in marine transportation, was delegated from the Vilnius diocese - he also initiated and financed the construction of the Iveron Church in Palang. The Ivanovo diocese will be represented by a representative of the tourism business and, part -time, the chairman of the local public chamber Valery Ivanov, who in 1995 headed the regional organization of Christian youth and family. Such examples can be continued. The stereotype, according to which the parishioner must not be from this world and speak in a broken Church Slavonic language, like the director Yakin before Tsar Ivan Vasilievich (“My Life”, “Velmi is to you”, “Very grateful”), is very grateful ”, is a thing of the past.

So the question of secular Soboryans, although it is of interest to observers, is still secondary in comparison with others, much more important. Namely: whether the state administrative resource (unlike the church, which is possessed by the main candidates, will be applied in the elections, it is difficult to divide between several applicants)? What position will Ukrainian delegates take about a third of the cathedral? How much “dirty technologies” used during the election campaign are capable of damaging the authority of the church - not among practicing believers (they are usually indifferent to attacks on the bishops, who are now accused of heresy, then of atheism, then in other sins), and in society as a whole? We will find out the answer to these questions soon.

Author-Vice President of the Center for Political Technology