Archbishop Hilarion of Volokolamsk gave his first interview as chairman of the department for external church relations of the Moscow Patriarchate to Ogonyok. Commenting on the film "The Tsar", he reflects on the relationship between church and state.

— How does the church interpret the conflict between Metropolitan Philip and Ivan the Terrible? How do you see the figure of Ivan the Terrible, who, on the one hand, is the persecutor of Metropolitan Philip, on the other - some see in this statesman almost a saint?

— Disputes about assessing the activities of Ivan IV began in the 17th century, but only in our days have there been fans of not only political methods, but also the moral character of the Terrible Tsar. Actually, the question of his glorification is not so much a question of faith, religious feeling or reliable historical knowledge as a question of socio-political struggle. However, supporters of canonization have not been able to present a single new source, based on which it would be possible to question the tradition that has developed in historical science of a generally negative image of the reign and personality of Ivan the Terrible.

Undoubtedly, Grozny was a bright, extraordinary personality, a very educated person for his time, including a talented writer, author of liturgical texts and music for the service for the feast of the Vladimir Icon of the Mother of God. Carrying out an active and in the initial period very successful foreign policy, Ivan the Terrible in the second half of his reign turned into a bloody tyrant, leading the country to a socio-economic crisis, the ruin of the population and the failure of many domestic and foreign policy initiatives. “To hostility and arbitrariness,” writes the famous historian, professor of the Moscow Theological Academy Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky, “the tsar sacrificed himself, his dynasty, and the state good.”

And if one can argue about the harm or benefit of the political techniques of Tsar Ivan IV, then his moral character is quite clear. Thousands of and most often innocent victims of oprichnina terror, persecution, the murder of his own son Ivan... With the direct connivance of Ivan the Terrible, not only many secular persons were executed, but also clergy who did not please the tsar in any way, including metropolitans canonized by the Church Philip and abbot Korniliy of Pskov-Pechersk. One can also recall the tsar’s polygamy, as a result of which for the last 10 years of his life he was excommunicated from the communion of the Holy Mysteries of Christ, etc.

As for the question of interpretation of the conflict between the Terrible Tsar and Metropolitan Philip, then, in my opinion, it can be neither secular nor ecclesiastical, it must be solely historical. And evidence of this is that the results of many historical studies, including modern ones, are confirmed by the “Life of St. Metropolitan Philip” as edited by one of the most authoritative Russian hagiographers - St. Demetrius of Rostov.

— Almost 100 years after his death, Metropolitan Philip was canonized. How important was this for the then Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich? Any canonization is the restoration of some trampled truth. What truth was important here for the king? And why did it take almost 100 years to evaluate the actions of the Metropolitan?

— Firstly, to evaluate the actions of the Metropolitan, it took not 100 years, but much less. Already in 1590, 21 years after the death of the saint and 6 years after the death of Ivan the Terrible, the remains of Metropolitan Philip were brought to Solovki. During these same years, his first “Life” was compiled, and local veneration of the saint also began. Patriarch Joasaph I (by the way, a monk of the Solovetsky Monastery) in 1636 included the text of the service to St. Philip in the printed Menaion and established a churchwide memory for him. Thus, in the middle of the 17th century, under Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, it was not the canonization of the saint that took place, but only the transfer of his relics from the Solovetsky Monastery to Moscow. The council decree decided to transfer for burial in the Assumption Cathedral the remains of three Moscow hierarchs: Metropolitan Philip, Patriarch Job, exiled by False Dmitry to Staritsa and died there, and Patriarch Hermogenes, tortured by the Poles in the Chudov Monastery. The initiator of the transfer was Metropolitan Nikon of Novgorod, the future patriarch, who saw a special meaning in this. All three saints were ascetics for the people's, national cause and fell victims to tyrannical power. By returning the saints to their first altar church, the royal government brought repentance for the sins of their ancestors, performed an act of reconciliation with the deceased heroes, thereby restoring the destroyed symphony of Church and state.

Secondly, the answer to the question of what trampled truth was important for the tsar can be the eloquent message of Alexei Mikhailovich to the deceased Saint Philip: “I beg you to resolve the sin of our great-grandfather the tsar and Grand Duke John, inflicted on you recklessly, by envy and incontinence of rage ...forgive those who have insulted you needlessly..." Saint Philip was not a politician and therefore could not become an obstacle in the struggle for power. He was only a defender of the truth in a Christian state and died protecting the truth. One can conditionally admit the state necessity of harsh oprichnina measures in the fight against the boyar opposition, but at the same time there is no way to hide contempt for human justice, tyrannical cruelty, which is not justified by any state considerations. Russian Orthodox thinker Georgy Petrovich Fedotov wrote: “During the years of the bloody revolution carried out by the supreme power, Metropolitan Philip rebelled against the tyrant and paid with his life for the fearless confession of the truth.”

— The open confrontation of a clergyman with secular authorities, his active social position—how much is this consistent with the image of a shepherd who is an example of meekness and humility? Which path is closer to you - admonishing the authorities or confronting them? In general, how compatible are social temperament and spiritual calling?

— Of course, a pastor must have both humility and meekness, but at the same time he is called to evangelize, edify, instruct, and defend the truth of God. And often the shepherd, who is responsible before God for the flock entrusted to his care, is required to have the courage to resist evil. The path of the Church is the path of the world. It is not for nothing that she is a peacemaker, encouraging conflicting parties to sit down at the negotiating table and seek reconciliation. The Church, in the person of its outstanding archpastors and pastors, has always petitioned the authorities for mercy towards those convicted. Often grief was associated with danger to the life of the intercessor himself. However, this did not stop the faithful sons of the Church from seeking and defending justice.

Pastoral work is inseparable from social service, and the path of spiritual improvement is impossible without helping others. The Church is not an institution separated from society; on the contrary, it lives by the demands and needs of its flock, helping people overcome life’s difficulties and adversities.

— How far can a clergyman go in conflict with secular authorities and what means of influencing secular authorities does he have in his arsenal? After the film “The Tsar,” many will ask the question: in what cases can a clergyman still make a deal with secular authorities?

— The divine truth that the Church contains is alien to violence, bitterness and malice. But at the same time, it requires loyalty and devotion to oneself. This is evidence confirmed by the blood of martyrs of ancient times and modern times.

No matter how church-state relations developed and no matter who was in power in a given historical period, the Church was always aware of its otherworldliness, carefully preserved the teachings of its Divine Founder, but at the same time called on its children to be loyal to the powers that be. It is from these positions that we should consider the difficult time of relations between our Church and the Soviet state in the 20th century.

At the same time, the “Fundamentals of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church” indicate that if the government forces apostasy from Christ and His Church, as well as sinful, harmful acts, the Church can refuse to obey the state. This is not a weapon of political struggle, but evidence of a person’s readiness to defend his faith even at the cost of his own life.

The Church does not fight the authorities, but exposes sin, regardless of persons. After all, sin is equally destructive for all people. The means in this struggle are the preaching of the immutable Gospel teaching, the faith of a Christian, evidenced by good deeds.

Cooperation between Church and state, based on mutual respect and independence, can extend to many areas of social relations. At the same time, we are not talking about influencing secular authorities, but about partnership in solving problems that are significant for society. It is difficult to set limits for such cooperation from the outside, since its main content is the focus on creating a harmonious society, rich in its spiritual and cultural traditions.

— Pavel Lungin is already making his second film related to church themes. The success of "The Island" showed how important cinema that affirms spiritual values is to the audience. Do you have any fear that there will be a stream of series on a church theme, that directors who are not as gifted as Lungin will use the church theme for promotion and making money?

— I would like to express my gratitude to Pavel Lungin and other directors who in their films address the theme of Orthodoxy values, trying to show all the beauty and richness of the world of faith. Unfortunately, in our country, during the period of militant atheism, more than one generation of people has grown up who have never crossed the threshold of the church fence and simply do not imagine church life. Perhaps the films will make some of them think about the higher, spiritual calling of man.

The theme of spiritual quests and experiences is quite difficult to reveal in cinema, so it is unlikely that directors who want to make quick money will turn to it.

Nowadays, when fewer and fewer people read books, television and the Internet are becoming the main sources of information, and it is their content that determines what ideas will be shared by ordinary people. Injustice and evil cannot be defeated or eradicated by external violence and other evil. The root of evil is not outside, but inside the human soul, in the absence or distortion of moral values, in the sinful will, in the darkening of consciousness. It is possible to defeat evil and correct life only by conscious deep repentance, by changing the entire structure of life, by returning to the path of goodness and truth, that is, to God. Therefore, the Church welcomes the good intention to affirm the ideals of Christian life through cinema, to attract the attention of the mass audience to spiritual values, the importance and uniqueness of every human soul, which is called by God to eternity.

Interviewed by Ekaterina Danilova

Dossier

Hilarion , Chairman of the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate, Archbishop of Volokolamsk (Alfeev Grigory Valerievich)

Born on July 24, 1966 in Moscow. He graduated from Gnesinka in violin and composition. In 1984-1986 he served in the Soviet army.

In 1987 he was tonsured a monk. Graduated from the Moscow Theological Seminary in absentia.

In 1990 he became rector of the Annunciation Cathedral in Kaunas. In 1991 he graduated from the Moscow Theological Academy, then graduated from graduate school and taught. Trained at Oxford. Since 1995 he worked in the department of external church relations.

In 2002, he was consecrated Bishop of Kerch, vicar of the Sourozh diocese, then appointed Bishop of Podolsk, vicar of the Moscow diocese, head of the representative office of the Moscow Patriarchate to European international organizations. In 2003, he became Bishop of Vienna and Austria with the assignment of temporary administration of the Budapest and Hungarian diocese.

Since March 31, 2009 - Bishop of Volokolamsk, vicar of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus', chairman of the department for external church relations and permanent member of the Holy Synod. Rector of the Church "Joy of All Who Sorrow" on Ordynka. On April 20, 2009, he was elevated to the rank of archbishop. Writes symphonic music.

"The Church can refuse to obey the state"