Feb 2014
Post-Soviet
territories remain heavily, almost one-sidedly dependent on events inside
Russia. Last year was a successful one for Putin’s diplomacy. Russia was able
to regain influence in Ukraine, Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, and it is now using this
influence to actively impose a more aggressive form of economic and military
cooperation. In Belarus and Kazakhstan, which are already members of the
Customs Union, tightening political and religious oppression have appeared in
Putin’s wake. The dependency on hydrocarbons and loans from Russia is blatantly
evident in the replication of religious policy. What Patrick Buchanan rashly
called Putin’s «conservatism,» his defense of «traditional
values» is just a way of legitimizing Russia’s imperial policy towards
neighboring territories and its repressive policies against non-titular or
non-conformist religious groups.
In Russia itself, manifestations of
civil and religious liberty are severely limited for reasons of national
security. Rallies in honor of the Bolotnaya prisoners, gatherings by people
against crime and government inaction, and even meetings held by sympathizers
after the attacks in Volgograd have been violently dispersed. Unprecedented
security measures and restrictions on freedom have been enacted on the eve of
the Olympics in Sochi. At the same time, symbolic concessions have been made to
the international community – December, 2013 saw the release of victims of
political repression: Mikhail
Khodorkovsky and members of the band Pussy Riot – Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and
Maria Alekhina. Amnesty International had
recognized all of them as prisoners of conscience.
Characteristically, the Kremlin’s
tough stance against prisoners of conscience is fully shared by the Russian
Orthodox Church. And this can be explained by its habitual
«symphonic» relations with the state. What is harder to understand is
the sympathy in Russian society and the Christian community toward the rigid
policies out of the Kremlin, the call for a «strong hand,»
anti-Western sentiments, legal nihilism, and anti-democratic fashion. This can
partly be explained by fear, partly by lack of information, and partly by
religious traditions.
Fear compels people to avoid
dangerous topics, to bury their heads in the sand, to focus on the simplest
personal interests. In a society of fear, believers do not talk about social
responsibility, justice, truth, freedom, solidarity, the transformation of
society. They prefer to talk about what is extremely remote and abstract –
about the soul and eternity.
The lack of information justifies
passivity and conformity. As a result of aggressive government propaganda and
restrictions, the independent media has turned into the monopolization of
informational space. This has also affected religious organizations, their
official positions and information policy. As Russian folk wisdom puts it,
«The less you know, the better you’ll sleep.» In an environment where
knowledge is dangerous, they prefer not to know, but if you do know, then don’t
speak, and if you do talk, then it’s only to utter the most mundane phrases.
But post-Soviet religious traditions
themselves restrict civil and even religious activity itself – there where it
intersects the social dimension and touches on painful questions. In local
traditions, the practice is to endure in silence, to make whatever compromises
if only to save the Church. Therefore, even evangelical churches, most of which
were victims of Stalinist repressions, sent congratulatory telegrams to Stalin
as a «great friend of all believers,» and their leaders assured the
West that «the Soviet Union has no prisoners of conscience.» This is
why the Russian Orthodox Church, which was almost completely destroyed by
Stalin in the 1920s and 1930s, publishes an obsequious Stalin calendar in 2014
(by the Dostoinstvo [Dignity]
publishing house of the Holy Trinity-St. Sergius Lavra). This is why the
leaders of the Protestant associations in Russia talk in the very same
Stalinist spirit about the machinations of the West in Ukraine’s Maidan [central square in Kiev], repeat the myths about brotherly Slavic nations and the older
Russian brother and strangle the neighboring republics in these fraternal
embraces.
What lessons
from the past year are worth reaping, so that our attitude to what is going on
in the post-Soviet world is more objective and compassionately active?
The
primary impediment to civil and religious liberties is not the excessively
active intervention of the government, but the passive state of society and
indifference of religious organizations. As the cautious Ukrainians say,
«It’s no concern of mine.» [Literally,
«My hut is on the edge»].
Only a strong society can confront
the state in pursuit of its legitimate rights and freedoms. How to awaken and
strengthen society in the absence of civic institutions? Who can accomplish
this, who is capable of coming up with an inspiring and transformative
initiative? Given a weak civil society, the most effective of its members may
well be the religious organizations. This is why the keys to transforming
society are in the hands of the Church. In turn, the transformation of the
Church, critical self-examination, reassessment, a renewal of its traditions
are possible only in a dialogue of traditions, in close cooperation between
national churches and the global Christian community, through international
partnerships and networking with experts, through educational, informational,
social projects aimed at creating a new generation of leaders for the Church
and society.
Thus, in post-Soviet society, the
path to the transformation of society is through the reformation of the Church.
What can transform the Church? Training new leaders, interdenominational
partnerships, informational accountability by media and society, the activity
of independent experts, quality analytics of trends in relations between the
Church, society and the state, international support for progressive
initiatives, a broad movement of lay Christians extending beyond the mission in
professional spheres.
At the same time, it is now that the
most disturbing trends have emerged in the social and theological positions of
the post-Soviet Churches: The nostalgia of the Church for Soviet stability; the
demonization of Europe, and anti-Americanism; disappointment in Christian
opportunities in social reforms; distrust toward the younger generations, the
preservation of key positions behind the leaders of the Soviet era; the quiet
politicization of the Church («silence implies consent»).
These negative trends are hardly
reversible in the short term. Hope is linked with the new Christian generation
that grew up after the USSR. As Thomas Kuhn put it when speaking about
scientific paradigms, more often than not proponents of new paradigms triumph
not through persuasion, but because the representatives of the old paradigm die
out.
The most
positive sign of the new times, of the new (post) post-Soviet era is, I
believe, the Ukrainian Maidan – as a manifestation of civil society, as a
peaceful form of protest against a corrupt government, as a manifestation of
freedom. The foundation of the protest movement is made up of students – the
generation of the future. They took upon themselves the brunt of the blow by
the police on the night of the violent dispersal on November 30. The second pillar of support is
comprised by the journalists, the fifth and for now the only independent estate
in the country. The third power is the Church. It is Church who opened its doors to the
students hunted by the special police units and protected them. On the night of December 11,
internal military forces from the Berkut special units launched a second
assault on Maidan, and the Churches rang their bells, summoning the people to
help. This is similar
to what happened 800 years ago when the Mongol armies of Batu Khan stormed
Kiev. Then, the last defenders took refuge in Desyatynna Church [the Church of the Tithe]. Today, the last
refuge of freedom and the bulwark of civil society is the Church. It is
regrettable that after twenty years of freedom other institutions of civil
society never took shape. But it is better to support what there is. The
Church, the students and journalists – a worthy triad, and the owners of the
future of the post-Soviet countries. The church bells call the people to defend
their freedom and to be worthy of it. The extreme social situation returns the
Church to a leading role in the development of civil society in post-Soviet
countries. The Ukrainian Maidan was the last important event of the outgoing
year, and there is hope that 2014 will bear the mark of this peaceful
revolution of dignity.
0
0
1
1234
8249
ASR
126
23
9460
14.0
Normal
0
false
false
false
RU
JA
X-NONE
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:»Table Normal»;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:»»;
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-ansi-language:RU;}
We must not
forget that 2017 is drawing near—the 100 year anniversary of the bloody Russian
Revolution and 500 years since the Reformation of Luther. Events could proceed
either along the path of the Revolution, or along the path of the Reformation.
Without the Reformation of the Church and its active social initiatives,
society will go the way of escalating violence, restrictions on freedoms, and
the dictates of the state. The Church can prove to be either the object of
revolution, or the subject of a Reformation. And so the fate of the post-Soviet
history of the Church and the fate of the people are still inextricably linked,
which is why the Church’s social initiatives are critical to the life of the
state and society.
