Prime Minister Putin and the Nochnye Volki (Night Wolves) M. C.: A Rally for the Russian Black Sea Fleet

Prime Minister Vladimir Putin (1952- ) with Aleksandr Zaldostanov (“The Surgeon”), head of the Nochnye Volki (Night Wolves) Motorcycle Club. Leather wings… ease on down the road!

Today, there was an unusual caller at the headquarters of the Nochnye Volki (Night Wolves) Motorcycle Club. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin came to visit the bikers’ club-house. The club-members described to the premier the preparations for a motorcade to Sevastopol where there will be a bike rally dedicated to the Black Sea Fleet. Mr Putin met the President of the Night Wolves M. C., Aleksandr Zaldostanov (better known by his nickname, “The Surgeon”), at the entrance of the club. “The Surgeon” told the premier that the 13th International Bike Show will take place on 10-11 July in Sevastopol. The show is not only dedicated to the Russian Black Sea Fleet, but, also, to the 65^th anniversary of the liberation of the city from the Fascist aggressors.

This year’s show will be attended by bikers not only from Russia, but, also, from neighbouring countries all over Europe. The bulk of the riders, on several thousand motorcycles, have already left Moscow. The Surgeon told Mr Putin that the headliners of the event in Sevastopol will be the rock group Alisa, their song Nebo Slavyan (Slavic Skies) is the theme of the rally. Aleksandr showed the premier on the map the route of the procession, which is to run through Oryol, Kursk, and other Russian and Ukrainian cities. The bikers asked Mr Putin to sign the map, and he did so zestfully. The Night Wolves handed the premier a picture with the logo of club, Mr Putin, in turn, presented them with a big Russian flag. Then, the riders showed off their “iron horses” for the premier. Mr Putin admitted that he tried to ride a motorcycle recently.

Mr Putin:

I tired to ride one of these things recently.

The Surgeon:

Yes, I heard you did.

Mr Putin:

The rear wheel bucked up and it hit another bike. Everything was a mess.

The Surgeon:

I hope that you weren’t “spooked”, as they say. But, you didn’t give up on the bike, and I hope that you don’t just keep it in the garage.

In Sevastopol, the Wolves shall be accompanied by popular Russian musicians. In addition to Konstantin Kinchev and Alisa, the groups Aria, Pilot, Korol i Shut (The King and The Jester), Mongol Shuudan, and Igor Kupriyanov (ex-Chorny Kofe (Black Coffee)). A particularly-honoured guest of the festival shall be the Ukrainian rock-band Bratya Karamazovy (The Brothers Karamazov). (The Brothers were an important part of the missionary rock-tour of the Ukraine by Deacon Andrei Kuraev sponsored by the MP last year: editor’s note)

Fr Vsevolod Chaplin, the Deputy Head of the MP Department of External Church Relations, told Voice of Russia World Service that the MP supports the action of the Night Wolves. “Many of the bikers are faithful Christians, we see quite a bit of them as they are often at services. When the leaders of the Night Wolves M. C. told the Patriarch about their plans to go to Sevastopol, His Holiness listened with great interest and gave them his blessing”.

The rally shall be in anticipation of the visit to Kiev by Patriarch Kirill Gundyaev of Moscow and all Russia. The column of bikers shall roll through Russia and the Ukraine, picking up new riders as it goes along. Bikers from Byelorussia, Lithuania, Latvia, Germany, Poland, the Czech Republic, Serbia, Greece, and Bulgaria are expected to join the cavalcade. In addition to all of this, the bikers have invited several of the veterans of the Battle of Sevastopol to participate in the event, in commemoration of the 65^th anniversary of the liberation of the hero-city.

7 July 2009

Igor Siletsky

Voice of Russia World Service

http://ruvr.ru/main.php?lng=rus&q=120316&cid=22&p=07.07.2009 (in Russian)

The New Patriarch Made His First Decision: He Does Not Need the Glory of a “Reformer”

Metropolitan Kirill Gundyaev of Smolensk and Kaliningrad (1946- ), the Patriarch-elect of Moscow and all Russia, at the St Sergius-Holy Trinity Lavra in Sergeyev Posad

Yesterday, the Local Council of the MP, which had elected Metropolitan Kirill Gundyaev of Smolensk and Kaliningrad as Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia the day before, completed its work. The new First Hierarch of the MP has already made his first official statement, making it clear that “no reforms shall descend from above; I shall not traumatise the people”. Meanwhile, a debate has unfolded about possible staff changes in the leadership ranks of the MP.

Despite the fact that Metropolitan Kirill is considered to be a “modernist” in Church terms, one of the first statements that he made after his election was couched in conservative terms. “God forbid! We’ve already had one patriarch go down in history with the name of a reformer”, he said, as quoted yesterday by Interfax. “But, there are changes that grow organically from within the lived experience of the people. Did the life of the Church remain static and unchanging during the life of my predecessor? So, shall you who call my predecessor, His Holiness Patriarch Aleksei, a reformer?!”

One could say that a radical transformation of church life began yesterday. Thus, according to Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev of Vienna and Austria, a debate unfolded at the Local Council of the debate unfolded on the status of this body. Individual delegates proposed to limit the powers of the Local Council to purely deliberative functions, and to transfer all decisions of substance, particularly in the area of faith and dogma, to the Archpastoral Council (the members of this body are the 140 ruling bishops, whilst the Local Council adds clerical, monastic, and lay representatives). Metropolitan Kirill noted that, throughout the history of the Church, the ecumenical councils established dogma and doctrine, and these bodies were composed entirely of bishops. Nonetheless, the newly-elected patriarch reassured the faithful, “No reforms shall descend from above; I shall not traumatise the people”. He called the laity and clergy to actively seek out answers at further conferences, and, perhaps, he would create a new forum for such debate.

However, in the lobbies, the Council delegates discussed possible staffing changes in the leadership ranks of the MP. Will the patriarch reward his supporters and punish his opponents who came forward during the election campaign? Recall the key role played in the election of Kirill to the patriarchal office by the senior members of the Holy Synod, Metropolitans Vladimir Sabodan of Kiev, Philaret Vakhromeyev of Minsk, and Yuvenaly Polyarkov of Krutitsky and Kolomna. They declined to campaign for the patriarchal throne at the very beginning of the election process, and Metropolitan Philaret gave a boost to Vladyki Kirill at the end, as he was one of the three candidates named for consideration by the Local Council, but, he took himself out of the running, calling on his supporters to vote for Kirill. Observers in the MP told Kommersant that they found this attitude of the senor hierarchs remarkable, “They have everything except for the post of patriarch, but, they refused the honour”.

“But, the main thing is that Metropolitan Kirill always proceeded from the position of not making any [pre-election] promises. He did this to preserve his freedom of action in decision-making”, said Deacon Andrei Kuraev, who seemed to be Metropolitan Kirill’s PR man before the election. Vladimir Legoida, the editor of the Orthodox journal Foma (Thomas), also believed that if there are personnel changes in the MP, if such occur, they will not depend on the personal feelings of Vladyki Kirill. “We should not forget that holding office in the MP is not that sort of thing”.

Most in the Church doubt that Vladyki Cyril has designs of humiliating his opponents. A source close to the MP leadership told Kommersant, “Here, for example, take Metropolitan Feofan of Stavropol, who is considered to be a supporter of Metropolitan Kliment. Now, the elections are over, so, let’s look at the facts. Feofan is a successful manager of a diocese in a convoluted situation. Why should the patriarch remove him?” However, it is necessary for the new patriarch to attend to at least two questions. Firstly, he has to find his replacement as the head of the MP Department for External Church Relations (DECR). Secondly, he must name a new archpastor to the Diocese of Smolensk and Kaliningrad. Kommersant learned from informed sources in the MP that the new head of the DECR will likely be the current Deputy Chairman of the DECR, Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin, or Bishop Mark Golovkov of Yegorevsk. However, there are some in the Church that do not exclude that this post could be offered to Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev. Most believe that the post of archpastor of the Diocese of Smolensk and Kaliningrad shall be taken by one of the vicar-bishops. According to information received by Kommersant, Bishop Seraphim, the vicar-bishop of the Diocese of Smolensk and Kaliningrad, is being considered for the post, but, some think him quite young for the job, as he is only 48-years-old.

However, nevertheless, some experts associate with the election of a new patriarch the beginning of changes in church policies. Aleksandr Dugin, a member of the Presidium of the World Russian People’s Congress, said, “The church will begin a new phase, but, its fundamental basis shall not change, I am sure. If, in the time of Patriarch Aleksei II, the ‘foreign policy’ of the church was moderate and rather defensive, now, it shall go on the offensive. Vladyki Kirill shall lead the Church into society and assert the core values of Orthodoxy. The MP shall come out against postmodernism, liberal culture, and libertine individuality”. In support of his words, he recalled that the Declaration on Human Rights and Dignity, in which the liberal system of values of the contemporary bourgeois world was subjected to severe criticism (which, in turn, caused indignation on the part of many “human-rights activists”), was formulated by Metropolitan Kirill.

The enthronement of the new patriarch is set for 1 February. After entering his new post, he will move to the working residence of the First Hierarch of the MP in Chisty Pereulok in Moscow. Also at his disposal will be the official residence in the Daniilovsky Monastery, the dacha in Peredelkino near Moscow, where he lives, and special apartments in many stavropegial monasteries.

29 January 2009

Yuliya Tarututa

Pavel Korobov

Kommersant (The Businessman)

As quoted in Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=print&div=9531 (in Russian)

The Next Patriarch should be… a Man of Prayer?

Editor’s Foreword:

The translations from the Fathers are my own, from the Russian text given in the original article. I am not a patristic scholar, not in the least. Excuse me for any infelicities.

******

Deacon Andrei Kuraev (1963- ), professor at the MDA and popular preacher

What the does the Church want to see in its next patriarch? To this question there is no single answer, that is, one that would suggest the continuation of a meaningful dialogue. Obviously, a question immediately arises… whose opinion is the view of the Church? The Church has millions of people, with their differences, yet, they have a point of consensus. But, that point is well-known; it is the “Symbol of Faith (Creed)”. It is silent about what qualities the Patriarch should possess. In addition, all agree that the patriarch must be “a good Christian” and “a good pastor”. But, the interpretation of these honorary titles is slightly different.

Extensive discussions on this topic have developed on the Orthodox Internet. To me, the most interesting viewpoint is one that desires to see the patriarch as a silent man of prayer. I would say that this is a popular position. But, the axiom vox populi, vox dei has never been a tenet of Christianity, nor is it a scientific formula; I will venture to argue with it.

It is clear that Christians find the grace of God the main condition and content of church life. It is understandable that, from a Christian point of view, the grace of God attracts the prayer of sincere, pure, and zealous hearts. Hence, it is completely logical to think that the Patriarch, who is the head of the earthly Church, which means that he is already on the border of the celestial hierarchy, should be an ideal communicator of the needs of the earthly Church upward, and vice versa, he should be a good recipient of the blessings of Heaven for us, those on earth… Nevertheless, this popular theology is completely in the wrong.

Patriarch Aleksei Rediger of Moscow and all Russia (1929-2008), with President Vladimir Putin (1952- )

1. Christians have only one Mediator between heaven and earth… Christ. The prayer of a mother over the cradle of her daughter is no less than “intelligible” before Christ, than the prayer of the Patriarch in the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour.
2. The Church does not “rate” those who pray. It does not record the results of their prayers. Accordingly, there are no criteria that you can use to ascertain which of the clergy are “more” or “less” prayerful. You cannot use the duration and frequency of their prayer as a means to gauge their effectiveness.
3. All of the bishops serve the public services equally well, that is, they are equal in frequency, in duration, in commitment, and in beauty. Only their cell-attendants could judge their private and domestic prayer. So, can we replace the Local Council with an in-depth interrogation of the archpastoral cell-attendants?
4. In the history of the Church, there is a well-known type of ascetic elder. In silence, they conduct a life of prayer and strict abstention. But, in this case, they lack the gift of the understanding of people and Mercy; therefore, they show no leniency. This is a Pharisee in the original sense of the word (even when this word is not used as a synonym for “hypocrite”). The Pharisee in the Gospel is simply a strict and zealous believer; he is rigid regarding himself, the same as he is to others. Incidentally, the word “Pharisee” became negative after they called in the Roman occupiers to settle their intra-Jewish disputes…
5. Why disturb your prayer to pray? Why drag it out of one’s private room to the Patriarchal throne? If the ministry of the Patriarch is reduced to prayer, then, why would you interrupt your prayers and go to the patriarch? God finds the prayer of every human being, irrespective of his rank, equally pleasant. He who would pray must ask, nevertheless, why do I pray? However, we do not elect a patriarch merely to read lists of commemorations.
6. We do not elect a patriarch merely to pray for us. Even monasteries, when they elect a superior, it is often not the most-prayerful who is selected.
7. Perhaps, we select someone to pray for us because we are too lazy to pray ourselves? By the way, in the history of the Church, there have been many prayerful men who proved quite incompetent as patriarchs.
8. The patriarch receives wisdom not because he prays more than you, but, because millions of other Christians pray for him. Let’s see, a) on prayers for the Church, and b) for the needs of the Church, the instructions of the Lord to His pastor are much more important than his own merits. The situation of a clergyman is not identical to that of a person in the world. As a priest and bishop, the patriarch gains strength form the prayers of the community (be it a parish, a diocese, or a Local Church), and, through this powerful source, he can compensate for his personal infirmity. It is more important for the Church to pray for the patriarch, than it is for the patriarch to pray for the Church (more precisely, the first is more needful than the second). The entire Church can pray for the patriarch. However, he must think and make decisions himself. So, we should choose someone with a more agile mind, he will bring that along when he ascends to the patriarchal office.
9. The patriarch has many different tasks besides prayer. First and foremost, he must be a politician and administrator. He is the one who the Church delegates to represent it in the dialogue with the secular authorities. He is the bishop of the capital city. Only in that way is he different from the other bishops. It is easier for him to go to the highest government authorities to uphold the interests of the Church in the community and to aid regional bishops in dealing with their local problems. A provincial bishop is transferred to the capital not so that he could pray more, but, rather, in order to allow him to attend to the secular interests of the Church.

Patriarch Aleksei Rediger with Metropolitan Laurus Skurla (1928-2008), after the signing of the Act of Canonical Communion on 17 May 2007 in Moscow

There is no special sacrament involved in the assumption of the office of patriarch. He is a normal bishop in a not-so-normal city, the capital of the country. Why, is Moscow closer to heaven than Vladivostok? No, of course not. But, in Moscow, the office of the bishop is closer to the Cabinet, to the all-Russian tsar or president. Because of the force of his proximity to the powers-that-be, all the other bishops turn to their colleague in the capital, not so much as to “implore” him, but, so that he could help them defend the interests of the Church (including the provincial dioceses) in the corridors of power in the Kremlin Palace.

In general, the patriarch must not be seen to MORE prayerful than the ordinary bishop. This does not mean that he should not love prayer and the divine services. Simply put, it just means that it is not necessary for us to search for a prayerful man as our SALIENT criterion for the patriarchal ministry. It is not obligatory for him to be more prayerful than any other bishop or any other rural batushka (affectionate Russian usage for a priest: editor’s note), for that matter. But, the Patriarch must be wise, informed, modest, and persuasive.

Today, the slogan “We need a prayerful patriarch” has become the battle cry of faction opposed to Metropolitan Kirill. This seemingly “unworldly” position has quite clear political implications. “Prayerful seclusion” is an old method used to adapt the church to the distortions of secular life. We sit inside the church fence, and we do not go outside of it. Life goes on in front of us, and we just sit and pray (unfortunately, our prayers are not heard, and our sons do not return from the Komsomol). This is what it was like in the Soviet times. Yes, it was like that even in the century before the Revolution, too. Solzhenitsyn, in his literary cycle The Red Wheel, wrote that when he was preparing to write this novel, he read such in a volume of selections from pre-revolutionary newspapers. He was struck by the Church’s response to the major events of people’s lives at that time. There were only two such reactions, one was a Pannikhida (prayers for the dead), and the other was a Molieben (thanksgiving prayer). For example, if there was an unsuccessful attempt on the life of the tsar, there was a Molieben, if there was a successful assassination of the tsar, it served a Pannikhida.

The non-religious world is very satisfied with this deal! On the day of the funeral of the patriarch, a (non-Church) woman said to me, “The Church should not teach us! The Church must pray for us and forgive all of us”. This is a brilliant formulation of the attitude of the self-satisfied to the Church!

However, the Orthodox themselves are not far from such a position. Konstantin Krylov precisely summed up this attitude, “Kirill confuses many Orthodox. God forbid, he may actually do something, rather than just ’say his prayers’, as befits a man. ‘Pimen, Pimen, we want Pimen again, who prayed for all the sick and for all mankind’” (http://krylov.livejournal.com/1775896.html?thread=62074904).

Mosaic Icon of St John Chrysostom, Patriarch of Constantinople (347-407), the Cathedral of Agia Sofia, Istanbul, Turkey

The Church, in its pastoral service to the people, is higher than any prayerful seclusion. Here are the words of St John Chrysostom to a monk-hermit. “Leave your mountains and leave there any barren propensity, which cannot serve neither people nor God. Take a stick and cast down the idols in Phoenicia” (cited by: Thierry A., St John Chrysostom and Empress Evdoksiya. Christian Eastern Society. M., 1884. S. 183).

For Chrysostom, in essence, it is more important to be with the people than staying in solitary purity. “Monasticism is a great podvig and the labour of monks is great. But, if someone compares their work with the priesthood, an objective observer will find among them a difference such as that as exists between a king and commoners (Words on the Priesthood, 6.5).

“If a man offered me a choice, where I would like to gain a good name for myself, as a rector of a busy urban church or in the monastic life, I would choose the first a thousand times over” (Words on the Priesthood, 6.7).

“Do not tell me these heartless words. ‘I should worry about that? I don’t have anything in common with that’. We have nothing in common with the devil; however, we have much in common with all other people. We will not say that we shall not have anything to do with them, because that is devilish inhumanity” (Conversations on Statues, 1).

“There is nothing colder than the Christian who does not care about saving others… No one was condemned for their own sins, but, for not being useful to another” (Talks on Acts 20.4).

“Why did Paul confound the Jews living in Damascus, when he had not yet started to make signs? Then, he had not yet started to work miracles, and no one can say that the people were surprised by rumours about his miracles, until now, he conquered only by the force of his words” (On the priesthood, 4.7).

“If we have the force of signs, then, words would not much matter, but, if there is no trace of such force, and we find ourselves amongst enemies coming at us from all sides, it is necessary to us to guard our words, that we are not surprised by the arrows of our enemies… For all this, we have not been given anything other than our words. However, if someone does not have this power, then, the souls of the people under him (I mean the weaker and more meddlesome amongst them) will constantly be in a position no better than that of a storm-tossed ship… How can someone remain ignorant of this and not expose them? All these are inventions and excuses to cover carelessness and laziness… Some matters are not sufficiently taught” (On the Priesthood 4, 5-8).

“If twelve men ‘leavened’ the whole world, think how great our insipidness must be, if we, being in such numbers, are not in a position to correct the remaining, and, in fact, we should have been enough to leaven a thousand worlds… But, you will say, they were apostles. What is this? Were they angels? But, you will say they had the gift of miracles. For how long shall these miracles serve us as a cover of our negligence?” (Conversations on the Gospel of Matthew. 46, 2-3).

Patriarch Aleksei Rediger with his parishioners

If that was so in the ancient world, then, the modern information society needs one not afraid of the battlefield, a warrior. This is especially needful in the case of the head of the Church. The patriarch has many possibilities to speak a good word. The main thing is that he would say such words that could persuade people not in the Church, and not just sing a well-worn mantra of sweet words for the already-Orthodox.

You will say, “His ‘weak prayers’ from the cell can maintain the preachers of the Church, and he would pray for them”. But, after all, he is the chief, the one who organises the work of his subordinates, protects them, and, you will excuse me, he finds the money to pay for their work and projects.

As the Patriarch is elected for life, then, we must not elect someone who is weak and by nature a hermit. But, you ask, why must we make such a choice immediately? Maybe we should give him at least a few years to work things out?

Soon, the Local Council shall express the Mind of the Church. But, up to this point, these are my thoughts… thusly.

13 January 2009

Deacon Andrei Kuraev

Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=analysis&div=113 (in Russian)

Deacon Andrei Kuraev Believes that the New Patriarch Should Lead People to “Fall in Love” With Orthodoxy

Deacon Andrei Kuraev (1963- ), contemporary Russian preacher, theologian, and missionary

Odessa, 17 December 2008 (Interfax):

Deacon Andrei Kuraev, a Professor at the Moscow Spiritual Academy, believes that any future Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia should have a marked aptitude for missionary outreach. “The Moscow Patriarchate needs a patriarch who can make people fall in love with Orthodoxy. He should be able to send a ‘message’ to young people that Orthodoxy is not only a legacy of Russia’s past, but, also a part of its future. He should stress that the ultimate thing is Heaven above us”, Fr Andrei said at a press conference in Odessa. In his opinion, “The propaganda of death in today’s youth culture has too many faces, advocating homosexuality, drugs, and contraceptives, with a casual attitude to abortion. Abortion is viewed as a minor cosmetic surgery to improve the figure”.

“Therefore, we can set only one thing against this kind of ‘thoughtless tsunami’, that is, a world of ‘religious super-values’, through the means of a ‘missionary breakthrough’ in the MP”, Fr Andrei, himself a well-known missionary, believed. “It is too late to preach at our grandmas that abortions are no good and that contraception may cause their children to become migrant workers in Moscow. Consequently, we must convey these ideas to young people”, Fr Andrei said, and added, “I know no one amongst the ranking bishops other than Metropolitan Kirill” who could successfully meet such challenge. “There was nothing unexpected in the election of Metropolitan Kirill as the acting head (of the Church: Interfax). We need a comparatively young and vigorous man in this position”, the Ukrainian website Ekho (Echo) quoted Deacon Andrei as saying.

Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=news&div=27925 (in Russian)

Editor’s Note:

Methinks that Deacon Andrei is speaking with a deliberately-forked tongue. Not for nefarious reasons, of course. If one looks at his description, it fits Kirill Gundyaev not at all. Kirill is no missionary, he is a bureaucrat through and through, he is windy, verbose, and rambling, as anyone who has read his speeches comes to realise in very short order. At age 62, he is on the old side for a “young” candidate. Indeed, there is a bishop who meets all of Deacon Andrei’s criteria… that is, Archbishop Vikenty Morar of Yekaterinburg, who is 55, vigorous, a missionary, and a man who cleaned up a corrupt diocese. Kirill is known for his ambition and non-tolerance of opposition. Deacon Andrei is being coy to save his own skin in the short term. By the way… Kirill is not capable of leading people to “fall in love with Orthodoxy”, whereas Vladyki Vikenty has that ability in spades. May the latter be elected and let the former “give speeches, issue ghost-written books, and jet about the world”, as a clerical friend of mine put it. Amen!

Deacon Andrei Kuraev is Upset that Believers are Reading Pseudo-Spiritual Books

Deacon Andrei Kuraev (1963- ), professor at the MDA and popular preacher

Moscow, 19 November 2008 (Interfax):

Deacon Andrei Kuraev, a professor at the Moscow Theological Academy (MDA) expressed his misgivings over the fact that many Orthodox believers are interested in pseudo-spiritual literature. “Now, since we have such a glut of information, we can easily consult a book about the Holy Elders or any book by St John Chrysostom. Frequently, however, it turns out that many people choose to read those lives of saints that contain pseudo-prophecies about the end of the Light, instead of reading the writings of Chrysostom and the Bible”, Deacon Andrei stated at a press conference in Moscow for the release of the popular scientific book The Apocryphas (works not included in the biblical canon: Interfax) of Old Russia (Apokrify Drevnei Rusi). Medieval chronicles on the events of church history form the basis of the book.

Fr Andrei expanded on his thoughts in a discussion with our Interfax-Religion correspondent. “The apocryphas of Old Russia dealt with the most needful topics, speaking about the faith and biblical subjects. They are a fundamentally-different phenomenon from contemporary “apocryphas”, which relate the intimate life of Alla Pugachyova (a famous Russian singer: editor’s note) or they are about all sorts of pseudo-Orthodox elders and mystics. This is a sign of a terrible drop and degradation in our consciousness, for Christ is uninteresting, even to those who go to church”, he stated. In his view, in Old Russia, “there were only a few sources of information that went from the Church to the faithful and from one person to another. Therefore, any attempt at learning or thinking was important”. Deacon Andrei noted that the apocryphas of Old Russia “were often criticised in the Church, but, they were the evidence of a genuine spiritual search”.

Today, Deacon Andrei believes that “a conscious imitation of apocryphal thinking has now appeared, as is shown by the books Diagnostiki Karmy (The Diagnostics of Karma), Otkroveniya Angelov-Khranitelei (The Revelations of the Guardian Angels), and others like them. It is possible to find hundreds of books, whose covers are decorated with Orthodox symbols, but, their contents are far from actual Orthodox morals and dogma. Their authors are not the naïve creators of the old folklore, who were sincere in their spiritual quest and wrote honestly of them. Rather, they are those who have a mercenary intent, for, sadly, most genuine church writers find it difficult to state things in the language of common people”. He went on to say, “The clumsiness of our writers and pastors in expressing the teaching of the Church leaves people defenceless before the mercenary rapaciousness of these poseurs”.

Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=news&div=27390 (in Russian)

Editor’s Note:

This is why the present Russian situation is so relevant to us in Orthodoxy in America. There is a vile little bit of prelest quite common in Russia. It is called “Young Eldership”. That is, neophytes get their hands on the Fathers before they are ready for them (the worst example being neophytes expatiating on the Philokalia, a spiritual fraud of the first order), or, they get hold of frankly pseudo-spiritual writings. Since such people lack maturity and discernment, they can go down odd roads. In Russia, there are grounded clergy and laity to pull such sorts down to earth.

Unfortunately, in the US, since we are so few, there are fewer constraints on the neophytes. If you wish an object lesson, look at the Antiochians. When you reflect that Frederica Matthewes-Green, one of their main publicists, spoke in favour of Uniatism, one can see how shallow their formation in the faith is. All grounded Orthodox know that Uniatism is a fraud of the Church of Rome, established to seduce Orthodox Christians to papalism. Therefore, this person’s defence of such a questionable institution casts doubt as to her groundedness.

I believe that many of the Anglo-Saxon neophytes are quite sincere folk. Unfortunately, they are promoted far too quickly; one often sees these “shake n’ bakes” ordained soon after their reception. Then, they write tripe full of all sorts of patristic quotes proving nothing. They create works that are, in Deacon Andrei’s words, “It is possible to find hundreds of books, whose covers are decorated with Orthodox symbols, but, their contents are far from actual Orthodox morals and dogma”.

Well said, Deacon Andrei! Let those with ears, hear!

Fr Andrei Kuraev Advocates that We Place the Monuments to the Bolsheviks in a Special “Ghetto”

Deacon Andrei Kuraev (1963- ), professor at the Moscow Theological Academy and popular preacher

Moscow, 18 November 2008 (Interfax):

Deacon Andrei Kuraev, a professor at the Moscow Theological Academy, advocated that we transfer all the monuments to Bolshevik leaders to a “reserve” area. In commenting on the recent destruction of a two-metre-high plaster-cast monument to Lenin in an industrial area of Ryazan, he said “it didn’t bother him that much”. “On the one hand, it is using the weapons of the weak, but, on the other hand, it is necessary to ‘thin out’ the monuments to the Bolshevik executioners and take them to a kind of reserve area, the same way as the Bolsheviks, in their time, transferred churches to the Kizhi reserve”, Fr Andrei was quoted as saying by the newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda (Komsomol Truth) on Tuesday. In his opinion, it is time to get rid of the Soviet names. “I’m tired of driving along Leninsky Prospekt (Lenin Avenue)”, Deacon Andrei confessed.

Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=news&div=27370 (in Russian)

Deacon Andrei Kuraev thinks that the Popularity of the Deposed Bishop Diomid is a Direct Result of the Lack of Missionary Zeal in the Church

Deacon Andrei Kuraev (1963- ), Professor of the Moscow Theological Academy and popular preacher

Tomsk, 29 October 2008 (Interfax):

Deacon Andrei Kuraev, a professor at the Moscow Theological Academy, thinks that the Moscow Patriarchate must intensify its missionary efforts and not concentrate so much on the building of thousands of new churches. “The popularity of this Bishop Diomid fellow in some church circles is the direct result of our lack of missionary zeal in the 90s, when all our efforts in the Church seemed to be focused on bricks and bells”, Deacon Andrei said to our Interfax correspondent at a news conference in Tomsk. He shares the opinion of many in the Orthodox clergy in Russia that the era of building grandiose cathedrals is over, but, he is not sure that he agrees with the proposition that “we must build thousands of small churches in residential neighbourhoods”. Focusing our energies solely on the building of new churches can create a false sense of security and complacency in the church administration, the dioceses, and the clergy, Fr Andrei believes.

“These are some virtues that come perilously close to being sins. For example, here is a priest who does not know how to mix with people; he doesn’t know how to go to the school to talk with the children, so, then, he keeps to the church building according to the rubrics.  I guess one could call this a good deed, but, I would call it a substitute, a sublimation of the real thing”, Deacon Andrei mused.

At present, in his opinion, the Church should be concentrating on publishing solid and canonical material for the general public. “Just go to any bookseller! It’s all trashy pseudo-literature and pseudo-Orthodoxy, there are no solid canonical Orthodox books in the shops”, Deacon Andrei said. “If we were to devote millions of dollars to cope with this problem, to ensure that solid Orthodox literature would be on the shelves of the shops, this would greatly change the spiritual climate in our country”. Today, Deacon Andrei believes that the Church has a choice to make. “We can either fancy up the ‘church ghetto’ or pack up our bags and leave the ‘ghetto’ behind”. He expressed his frustration that, so far, “the first phenomenon rules [in the Church], which shall inexorably lead to a serious crisis, including inside the very ‘church ghetto’ itself”.

Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=news&div=27125 (in Russian)

Deacon Andrei Kuraev Advises Employers to Cut Back on Oysters during Lunch during the Financial Crisis, Not Cut Back Their Workers Pay-Packets

Deacon Andrei Kuraev (1963- ), Professor at the Moscow Theological Academy, one of the most popular preachers in Russia

Moscow, 29 October 2008 (Interfax):

Deacon Andrei Kuraev, a professor at the Moscow Theological Academy, thinks that people should use the events surrounding the economic crisis as a means to grow spiritually. “Under the pressures that come with a crisis, people break down, but, this can lead to a cleansing, as they can come to an understanding of what is real and what is rubbish. It is possible for people to become better after undergoing such a test”, Fr Andrei said to our Interfax-Religion correspondent on Wednesday during an interview.

In his opinion, the main thing in a time of economic crisis is “to retain one’s humane impulses, and not make up such excuses as ’such extraordinary economic conditions force me to be especially stingy’”. He thinks that this applies with special force to employers. “Let them moderate their thirst for profits and limit their appetite, but, they should not make people redundant, for this shall leave them without bread. It is better to cut back on oysters during lunch than to cut back your workers’ pay-packets”, Fr Andrei emphasised. He gave a quote from the Holy Scripture, “Alms given to the poor are a loan to the Lord, and He shall render reward for every good deed”. “Repeatedly, I have seen these words proven correct and true by my own experience”, Fr Andrei noted.

As a case in point, he told of an event that happened to him last week. In St Petersburg, where he flew to take part in a television programme, the producers reimbursed him for the price of the ticket. He met two young seminarians from Piter (like saying “da Big Apple” for New York: editor’s note) who “looked like hungry sparrows. I gave each of them 1,000 roubles (37 USD. 29 euros. 23 UK pounds) and caught a flight from St Petersburg to Kiev. In Kiev, an unknown man approached me and said, ‘Oh, Fr Andrei, I am so glad to see you! I want to help you get by in this financial crisis’. He gave me 2,000 dollars (53,917 roubles. 1,558 euros. 1,224 UK pounds)”, Deacon Andrei said. “Sometimes, if I find myself in a tight squeeze financially and I find a needy seminarian, I give him the money he needs, then, I look up to Heaven and say, ‘Lord, did you see that? You owe me a small debt’”, Fr Andrei joked.

Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=news&div=27129 (in Russian)

Editor’s Note:

Vintage 100 percent pure Deacon Andrei, to be sure! Nevertheless, there is a point to be made. If you make someone redundant these days, you condemn them to poverty. If you can cut back on luxuries so that your employees have the means to support to their families, this is a Christian duty, not an option. How many American employers shall go against Deacon Andrei’s advice? All too many, I am afraid… and the worst ones shall be “born agains”, just you wait and see!

Deacon Andrei Kuraev thinks the so-called “Patriarchate of Kiev” should Question Grand Prince St Vladimir’s Holiness, as it does not consider Russia to be the Successor of Ancient Rus

Mid-19th century statue in Kiev by Klodt of Grand Prince Equal-to-the-Apostles St Vladimir (950-1015), the Baptiser of Russia in 988

Moscow, 11 July 2008 (Interfax):

Deacon Andrei Kuraev, a professor at the Moscow Theological Academy and a popular preacher, thinks that since Philaret Denisenko, the self-proclaimed “primate” of the so-called “Patriarchate of Kiev”, believes that Russia is not the successor of ancient Rus; the next logical step would be to question the holiness of Grand Prince St Vladimir, the Baptiser of Russia. “Since he (Philaret: Interfax) is a deposed cleric, his opinions are of no consequence for the MP. However, if his proposal finds a response [in Orange circles] in Kiev, then, the next logical question for this so-called ‘patriarch’ to raise would be the revocation of the canonisation of Grand Prince St Vladimir”, stated Fr Andrei in an article published Friday in the newspaper Komsolmoskaya Pravda (Komsomol Truth). “This very same person was an occupier and aggressor [in the Soviet period], for he brought troops into Novogorod to ‘restore order’ (this same Philaret who does not consider Rus Russia)”, noted Deacon Andrei.

He expressed regret à propos the fact that “numerous semi-educated ‘historians’ and ‘philologists’” have popped up in the Ukraine “who manipulate the historical evidence any which way they please. They pump up minor episodes such as the Battle of Konotop into major events, because the Cossacks supposedly defeated the Russians. However, they attempt to erase the memory of all the battles where Russians and Ukrainians fought together against external enemies”.

As was reported recently, the “church” headed by Philaret Denisenko held a “Local Council” as part of the celebration of the 900^th anniversary of the St Mikhail of the Golden Domes Monastery and the 1,020^th anniversary of the Baptism of Russia. At this “council”, Mr Denisenko declared that “Today, Moscow is trying to say that Rus refers to Russia and not the Ukraine”. He claims that the “correction” shall be introduced on the basis of old chronicles, particularly those of Nestor the Chronicler. “Ancient chronicles testify to the fact that in the 9th and 10th centuries Rus included the contemporary Ukraine, a part of Byelorussia, the States, and a part of Poland. There was no such city as Moscow then, but, and today, they (Russians: Interfax) consider themselves Rus, but, this is a perversion of history”, Mr Denisenko emphasised.

Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=news&div=25424 (in Russian)

Editor’s Note:

Many are unaware that the demographic situations are reversed in the homeland and in the diaspora. In the homeland, Galicians make up only 2 percent of the population of Greater Russia; they are a tiny minority in an isolated (mainly rural) backwater. In the diaspora, they form a majority of the “Russian” emigration. This is due to many factors, many of which deserve more detailed treatment. Therefore, many are fooled as to the relative strength of their case and numbers. Also, the fanatical nature of the OUN (Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists) must be taken into account.

Be careful of any “Ukrainian nationalist” claims you hear. They are being issued forth by a tiny, but, dedicated and loud, minority within the people of Rus. Caveat auditor. 

Archpastoral Council of the MP: Church Unity

His Holiness Aleksei Rediger (1929- ), Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia, First Hierarch of the Moscow Patriarchate

The Archpastoral Council that took place last week was a graphic demonstration of the unity of the Moscow Patriarchate. For the first time, a delegation from the ROCOR participated in the sessions. Not only intra-church affairs were on the agenda, for one of the main items of discussion was the theme that Patriarch Aleksei II already raised in his speech before the Deputies of the European Parliament in Strasbourg. This was the conflict of modern liberal values with traditional Christian morals. As an example of this, he spoke of the homosexual marriages now legalised in some countries, which forces society to no longer consider such behaviour sinful. As a result, the Council approved a document on the Orthodox understanding of human rights. The bishops know that this position shall be strongly condemned in Europe. However, both the Russian and foreign hierarchs all agreed on this together.

Twenty years ago, they couldn’t even pray together… even simple ordinary everyday conversation seemed impossible. For almost a century, clergy and laity on different sides of the borders of the then-USSR considered each other enemies and were hostile to one another… Soviet Russia versus the White emigration. Each side had its pain… the Civil War, the bloodshed, the foreign lands of exile. When they said “Holy Russia”, it seemed that they were talking of two very different countries.

All thought that a miracle would be needed for reconciliation. However, they united a year ago. Now, they speak about the miracle that happened, how they understand one another thoroughly now, and it seems as if there was never almost a hundred years of separation. This was an Archpastoral Council of the MP graced with the participation of the hierarchs of the foreign church, an event truly out of the ordinary. For the first time, Orthodox Americans, Australians, Kazakhs, Japanese, and Russians spoke, served, and lived together.

A little buffet in a small café in the centre of Moscow… here sits Metropolitan Hilarion of New York and Eastern America. He’s a little troubled by his accent, but, not when he’s praying. Modern Russian… he only learned that relatively recently. His parents emigrated to Canada from Volynia, their native language was Ukrainian, and their mother-church was Russian Orthodox. However, even then, in the middle of the last century, they did not recognise the Ukrainian Orthodox Church that had appeared in the diaspora.

Metropolitan HIlarion Kapral (1948- ), Metropolitan of New York and Eastern America, First Hierarch of the ROCOR

“We were Russian Orthodox because we considered that Russians, Byelorussians, and Ukrainians are one people. Therefore, my parents did not join the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which was a splinter group”, said Metropolitan Hilarion, who is the First Hierarch of the ROCOR. “Orthodoxy is so joined with Russian consciousness that only those people in the emigration who retained a sense of Russianness remained in the Church. Those who stayed outside of the Church were assimilated into the local culture in short order”, noted Archpriest Peter Kholodny, the Treasurer of the Holy Synod of the ROCOR.

Nikolai Sluchevsky, the great-grandson of Pyotr Stolypin was one of those who did not assimilate. Although he was born in California, he considers Russia his homeland. He started a story about parish life in San Francisco with the following words, “How many young people are coming to church! This is a new thing for us”.

Not only pleasant matters were discussed at the Archpastoral Council. There was the whole scandalous affair of Bishop Diomid of Anadyr and Chukotka, more precisely, he was a bishop two days ago, but, now he is deposed from his office. Some of his parishioners came to Moscow to support him outside the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour. They did not hide from the cameras, but, the priests amongst them appeared to be hiding from the photographers.

What does he trouble us with? If Diomid’s protests against passports and taxpayer identification numbers are nothing but simple obscurantism, his calls for conflict with other confessions and nationalities are direct incitements to religious and national hostility. This is a matter covered by the criminal statutes. The church sees this as nothing but schism. The Council called this schismatic to repentance, but, he refuses to answer.

The word “schism” was heard often enough in the Council sessions. “We know that any schism is a tragedy. They shall divide the saints and make them strangers; they shall cause nothing but chaos in the Church. Certainly, the true reason behind the schism is that there is a political scheme to foment a quarrel between the Ukrainian and Russian peoples”, stated Metropolitan Agafangel of Odessa and Izmail.

Metropolitan Vladimir Sabodan (1935- ) of Kiev and all the Ukraine, First Hierarch of the canonical Ukrainian Autonomous Orthodox Church of the MP

The Ukraine… Presidents changed, revolutions occurred, but, the attempts of the leadership in Kiev to separate the Ukrainian Autonomous Orthodox Church of the MP from its mother-church never ceased. The very words, “Moscow Patriarchate” were a red flag to the Ukrainian establishment, as if it were a political choice, for example, between canonical Orthodoxy and NATO.

“In general, the church relates to political boundaries as it does to any human fancy. Today, we have these boundaries. Tomorrow, we may have others. However, the Church has an entirely different concept of history. It recognises a united civilisational space, expressed in a common secular language. But, I would say that Church language follows spiritual-cultural space. Some are attempting to destroy this space, to reshape it. We ask, why? This is the first time this has been attempted in a thousand years”, said Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad, chairman of the MP Department of External Church Relations.   

This is not the first time… in the Ukraine, there have been repeated attempts to destroy Orthodoxy. Even in the 17th century, a Catholic Metropolitan proposed to create in Little Russia an independent Orthodox Church. Then, something happened. Those who grasped independence soon entered the Unia with the Catholics. In essence, they were absorbed by them.  

“Today, in the Ukraine, there is the so-called ‘Ukrainian independent church’ that is headed by the deposed and anathematised Philaret Denisenko. He has already stated several times that union with the Catholic Church is necessary. Why is this a requirement?” asked Archimandrite Tikhon Shevkunov, the superior of the Sretensky Monastery in Moscow.

In order to change the mentality of the people… what shall happen with those who refuse to change and stand for their faith and their conscience?

If there were any disputes regarding the Orthodox understanding of human rights, there are only indirect signs. The concept was approved unanimously, but, there were questions. Should the Church be involving itself in secular matters? Is it necessary to criticise secular laws? It was decided that if the secular law legalises sin, then, yes. In the human sense, homosexual marriage is against nature. In the church sense, it is sinful.

“We are posed the question, what do you want to do? Should we work within existing paradigms to attain certain rights? Or, do you want to change the world? But, I pose this question to homosexuals, what do you want? Do you wish to act within the existing law and tradition? Or, do you want to change the world? They wish to change the world, and they are changing it. If this is permitted for homosexuals, why is it not permitted for believers?” noted Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad.

A priest changes the world by his sermon and missions… in Orthodoxy, the tradition of mission is not as strong as it is amongst Catholics or Muslims. Should we change this attitude? Can we preach the Gospel only in the church?

Deacon Andrei Kuraev (1963- ), Professor at the Moscow Theological Academy, great Orthodox preacher

“A group of priests from Moscow demanded that the Council forbid all non-traditional missions, that is, the only form that mission could take was that the priest would stand in church and speak in Church Slavonic… there would be no more sermons at rock concerts or at sporting events. They wanted to forbid everything. Well… the Council did not give in to these loudmouths. That is good”, said Deacon Andrei Kuraev, professor at the Moscow Theological Academy.

Orthodox priests on the streets of Moscow, Tallinn, Shanghai, or Toronto… you wouldn’t say they are a common sight. However, 20 years ago, there were only 42 churches in Moscow, today, there are over 600. Churches are popping up everywhere. You can buy everything you need for your parish in Sofrino. All the hierarchs from all over the world are buying “church utensils”. True… the word “utensils” does no justice to their splendour.

29 June 2008

Ilya Kanavin

Vesti-Nedeli (News Weekly)

Quoted in Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=radio&div=891 (in Russian)