Khary instead of charisma

Charisma evaporates at the beginning of summer the Silver Kalosha Award was awarded to Patriarch Kirill "for the immaculate disappearance of the watch in the nomination" Hands on the elbow in miracles. "This joke marked an important event - the loss of the Russian Orthodox Church of the last remnants of the charisma. Patriarch lost that mystical aura of priesthood that made such a gesture unimaginable. He turned the Holy Patriarch in the eyes of many into a citizen of Gundyaev, by the will of the occasion occupying the position of Patriarch, and no more.

Often you hear that Christianity as a religion differs from institution, that the collapse of the institution does not hurt religion as such. However, I am not sure that the idea can exist completely separately from the institutions in which it receives expression. But that is not the point. The question is how, in principle, a church can exist, from which charisma has disappeared from the hierarchy. What does it mean for her?

Max Weber proposed to distinguish between magicians, prophets capable of exceptional mystical contacts with the deity, and the clergy that Weber considered officials of the routine religion, specialists in the field of doctrine and liturgical ritual, responsible for maintaining religious and social norms. This "church bureaucracy" seems to not need charisma. The “priest” term can be applied to officials of a regularly organized permanent enterprise influencing the gods, in contrast with the individual and irregular efforts of magicians, ”wrote Weber. The Patriarch is the manager of the church, so to speak, the supercan of the church hierarchy, but at the same time - this is fundamentally - a figure endowed with mystical charisma. The army of various church ranks can baptize and catch a funeral service without any patriarch (under the Synod, and the Protestants do not know the highest church hierarchs). Nevertheless, the disappearance of charisma from the church leads not only to its further bureaucratization, but also to a deep transformation.

This process is also interesting because in parallel it is a gradual extinction of the president’s charisma. The state ideally also consists of charismatic politicians and bureaucrats. The politician wins the election and receives a kind of mystical “anointing” from the population that gives him the charisma of popular will and its representation. We have two “castling” and falsification of elections caused irreparable damage to presidential mysticism. Bureaucrats seem to not need presidential charisma, they, in the end, are responsible for ensuring that trains go on schedule, and pensioners receive a pension on time. Meanwhile, bureaucracy almost nowhere can exist without political mysticism. And this is due to the mysterious concept of power. Power is a certain ability to organize the activities of people without violence. Power is based on the recognition of the legitimacy of its carrier and its right to dispose of people. To function, officials whom no one chose need a certain engine that drives a state machine, namely in the authorities of the authorities. Without such a figure, bureaucracy loses all meaning. The same thing happens with the clergy. Without mystical grace, the ritual becomes a meaningless speaking of empty words, as this, for example, is shown in the “Chekhov’s motives” by Kira Muratova, where the priests themselves no longer understand what they do and say.

In a situation where charisma disappears both in the state and in the church, the art arises for one institution to rely on another. Power goes for legitimacy to the Patriarch, and the patriarch to the president. The focus, however, is that neither the President nor the Patriarch can legitimize each other today. Authority was at the same time; As a result, instead of mutual support, mutual delegitimization arises.

The authority and violence Hannah Arendt believed that the authority was based on authority as a secular hypostasis of religious charisma, and the fall in authority leads to its replacement by violence. This is understandable: if an authoritative politician gives the bureaucracy in motion by his will and people voluntarily obey it, then a politician who does not have authority is forced to force people to obey in other, violent ways. It is amazing that the observation of tenant is equally related to the church, which, it would seem, has no violence apparatus and is forced to turn to the state for help. The process over Pussy Riot is the direct result of the patriarchal "silver galosh". Orthodox squads are exactly the same result of the evaporation of grace and charisma. This parallelism is obvious between near -church squads and all kinds of namers, the Tkachevo Cossacks and collective workers from Nizhny Tagil.

In this light, it is clear to what extent the replacement of authority by violence is not neutral in relation to church bureaucracy and routine activities of bureaucracy. As soon as the Horizons with Drakoli arise on the horizon, the entire content of the Christian liturgy as a practice of salvation based on love is destroyed to the ground. But exactly the same thing happens with state apparatuses. As soon as the court becomes a means of state violence, it loses its attitude to justice.

The substitution of authority by violence, which is manifested today in most body movements of the church and the state, is of fundamental importance because it leads to systematic decrease and intensive destruction of state and church institutions. According to the Weber model, the Church and the state consist of two echelons - charismatic and bureaucratic. The substitution of authority by violence leads not only to the rapid destruction of the remnants of charisma, but also to the collapse of the bureaucratic, neutral-technological echelon.

A little history of the recent event in many rightly provoke association with the emergence of a “black hundred” in Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century. The Black Hundred was created at the moment when the crisis of the monarchy resulted in a revolution. In October 1905, the tsar in the manifesto reluctantly gave the country some freedom - and then, in November of the same year, the "Union of the Russian People" was founded (is it not true, a familiar sequence of events?).

Until that moment, the monarchy resisted the creation of political parties and movements, because she believed that royal charisma and bureaucracy was enough to manage the empire. Activist of the "Union of the Russian People", Dr. Alexander Dubrovin (one of the creators of the Union, lawyer Boris Nikolsky called Dubrovin "vile parasite" and "rude repulsive animals") convinced the government that only the Orthodox patriotic movement, which needed to finance and police support, could save Russia. The union plans included mass manifestations and terror. Since the king was deeply convinced that there was an international conspiracy against him, he ordered to support the Black Hundred. It is well known what this led to - the murders of the deputies of the Duma, hundreds of Jewish pogroms with thousands of victims. Only in Odessa there were 300 killed. In the second half of October 1905, 1622 people died in the pogroms. In ten days of October, the pogroms took place in 660 settlements. On October 21, in Tomsk, the Black Hundreds set fire to the theater, more than a thousand people died as a result of fire and murders. “Black Hundred” took Odessa so much to her hands that in essence introduced a terror regime and systematic robberies in the city, which led to the decline of the local economy. As a result, Stolypin ordered to stop financing the Black Hundred in Odessa and disarm it. The disarmament of the Black Hundreds were forced to engage in the troops of the Odessa Military District. Governors of Astrakhan and Irkutsk were forced to take such measures. Count Witte wrote in his diaries: "Union - the organization of ordinary thieves and hooligans"; “The goals of the“ black hundred ”are selfish and have the lowest nature. Their aspirations dictate the stomach and pockets. These are typical killers from the high road.” The Black Hundred hated Witte and prepared his murder.

What was planned as the salvation of the Fatherland sharply accelerated the collapse of the empire, as it was objectively destroyed by the latest functioning state institutions. It is significant, of course, that church hierarchs actively participated in the Black Hundred. Of the 70 bishops in the "Union of the Russian People" consisted of 32. The Honorary Member and Sr.'s confessor was John of Kronstadt, the Archbishop of Anthony Volynsky, the Archbishop of the Saratov Hermogen, was active in it, the future Patriarch Tikhon was also in the Union. The organizer of many pogroms Hieromonk Iliodor, who considered Stolypin, was especially famous for a Jewish agent. Parting in the pogroms of Popov literally brought down the remnants of church charisma, and the participation of police officers (in Orsha, Simferopol and Feodosia, the police spent the lack of a “black hundred”) and opened the path of the revolution. One can even say that the beginning of the destruction of Russian statehood and Orthodoxy is not connected with the revolution, but with the Black -Sotnic non -intonestial violence.

At one time, Walter Benjamin distinguished between violence related to the law, and violence aimed at canceling laws. The first he attributed to the state, and the second considered the revolutionary. But violence, which compensates for the decline in authority, indirectly destroys laws and rules, and therefore, based on the authorities, objectively turns out to be revolutionary, although it seems to the authorities that it is directed against the revolution.

And morality ... In conclusion, it should be emphasized that authority and bureaucracy, that is, institutions in the broadest sense of the word, interdependent. Each element of the system here limits and outlines the field of activity of another element. And this is the social order that priests and officials claim in their routine. Enthusiastic violence, however, is characteristic of violating all boundaries, rules and orders. The loss of institutional boundaries and norms once allowed the archbishops to participate in pogrom organizations.

Since Russian statehood has long integrated mafia structures, the collapse of institutions may look like the release of the mafia from the burdensome norms of behavior for it. The mafia is “tired” to disguise themselves as a state and, as it were, refuses camouflage, speaking in its natural, pure form. This metamorphosis is pushed by the gradual evolution of the presidential authority into the mafia type of "authority", based on the violence and roofing of "their".

The result of erosion of borders is too dramatic so as not to try to prevent it. That is why today the question is so acute about the delimitation of spheres - police and courts, states and church, legislative and executive branch. Violation of borders and spheres is the first sign of an institutional crisis, which creates the illusion of a special role of the Church, which has always sought to exist outside the boundaries, between dogma, ritual, saving salvation and morality. In the same place where the norms and laws recede, violence is always masked by morality as a free sphere of human activity. Kant following Rousseau argued that morality is the sphere of freedom. Paradoxically, non -intentional violence seeks to imagine itself as a sphere of freedom - primarily freedom from norms and borders. The Black Hundred was also declared a spontaneous, free manifestation of folk will, although the pogroms ended as soon as the financing of this “freedom” stopped. The growth of non -intentional violence is always accompanied by multiplying conversations about the salvation of fundamental values ​​and morality. Protection from pedophiles and homosexuals, from blasphemers and traitors of the Motherland, protecting the morality of children always accompanies the end of charisma and a dangerous increase in its compensating violence.