Copyrighted material. For private use only.
Maxim Shevchenko published an article about the plans for creating the Civilian Christian Union (NG-religii, 17 May). Documents that were at his disposal showed that the Civilian Christian Union (GKhS) will be the first of its kind in terms of scale. In the past five years there have been several attempts that gained the support of the patriarch to create a political movement or organization. First there was the Union of Orthodox Citizens (SPG) and then Alexander Burkin, an antique dealer close to the patriarch, created the "Orthodox Russia" movement. In the liberal camp there was one attempt, the All-Russian Christian Union. All of these were initiatives from below. A Christian political party in Russia, as has frequently been written, is impossible and these attempts proved the axiom. The axiom can be overcome in only one situation: if the Kremlin builds the party. And this is what has happened.
The initiative for creation of GKhS introduces a significantly new factor in the political array about the patriarchate. As is known, there are three centers of political ideology in the patriarchate: Metropolitan Kirill, the Presentation monastery (Archimandrite Tikhon Shevkunov) and "Radonezh," which is under the patronage of Archbishop Tikhon. If one briefly characterizes the situation at the beginning of 2000, these are its principal elements.
Metropolitan Kirill has not promoted any new organizational initiatives. He has concentrated on the attempt to maintain his rather lofty status in church-state relations under Yeltsin by means of setting forth a liberal-conservative doctrine which could become the contribution of the church to the formation of the ideological base of the new Russia. Kirill cannot offer serious cooperation and he cannot be adopted by the Kremlin in the capacity of some leader of a Christian political movement, even if it were behind the scenes. His problem is that he is rejected by all camps of the Orthodox public and he can act as the initiator of temporary actions only, like the thematic sessions of the World Russian National Assembly.
Archbishop Tikhon has no political or ideological intentions at all. He is a shelter under which several active leaders have operated in the past four years, which have their own directions: the "Radonezh" society of Evgeny Nikoforov, the antisectarian center of Alexander Dvorkin, Fr Vladimir Vigiliansky with his project of cultivation cadres of church journalists, and others. The attempt to organize a substantial action that would be noteworthy for secular authorities, the Congress of the Orthodox Press, showed that the circle of Orthodox political activists of "Radonezh" is of no interest to the political establishment. And it will not happen in the foreseeable future. Here the problem is not in the ideology. In certain situations the Kremlin needs a source of antiwestern and antiliberal rhetoric, as is clearly shown in the political experience of Zhirinovsky. The problem is that this circle of activists is too irresponsible. It is impossible to make an agreement with them; they cannot be participants in the political process inasmuch as their ideological stance is totalitarian and too volatile. In this sphere there are a few exceptions, for example, Fr Vladimir Vigiliansky, who under other circumstances could make a serious contribution to the creation of a conservative party with a normal face.
The circle around Archbishop Tikhon is in alliance with a third powerful center, the Presentation monastery. Archimandrite Tikhon today aspires to occupy Metropolitan Kirill's place in relations with the secular authorities. Earlier the numerous enemies of Kirill within the church sphere associated such hope with Archbishop Tikhon and later with Archbishop Sergius, especially in the period of the preparation of the bishops' council of 1997. These hopes were not justified for both subjective causes, the lack of political energy, and objective causes, it is not easy to dislodge the clever Metropolitan Kirill from the positions he holds.
Archimandrite Tikhon is the first real competitor of Metropolitan Kirill. In the middle of the nineties he created the conspicuous contemporary church publishing center and then took successful action "for crushing the Kochetkov community," which greatly strengthened his positions in the upper echelons of church power. In 1998-1999 he became conspicuously close to the patriarch. Now he is ready for new chances arising from rumors about his closeness to the Putin family; according to several sources he is the father confessor of the president's wife. Tikhon openly called for voting for Putin on television. The Internet site created by the Presentation monastery, "Pravoslavie-2000" probably is the best informational project of RPTs in the last ten years. Thereby Archimandrite Tikhon has shown that he is much more capable than Metropolitan Kirill to cope with the task of providing information of the activity of the Moscow patriarchate. Archimandrite Tikhon is the best figure for the role of back stage leader of the Christian party. The question is why did the choice not fall upon him? I think it is that today he has already somewhat "outgrown" this role.
In order to answer the question why the choice did fall on Hegumen Ioann Ekonomtsef it is necessary first to say something about the role itself. Why does the Kremlin now need a Christian party? I recall that Yeltsin's second term was marked by active construction in the political space. A great deal was tried but there was no need to create a political organization with the blessing of the patriarch. Now it has appeared. For this there are two interrelated causes.
First, Putin's political will, which was expressed publicly, is directed to a new structuring of the political field. Communists should be turned into "European leftists." "Unity" should become a real equally strong second party that is liberal-conservative. Within it, apparently, there should be a conservative wing. In other words, there should be space for the incorporation of representatives of that part of the national bourgeoisie and strong bureaucrats which identifies itself as Orthodox. It is understood that this is a pragmatic matter and they do not need spiritual leaders who are too outspoken church fundamentalists. Obviously today in the formation of Putin's "party of power" it is necessary to take tactically a somewhat more rightist position than in the time of "Our Home-Russia." In "Unity" there are many advocates of liberal economics and they have the image of "westerners" and "compradors." From these vestiges of Yeltsinism "Unity" must be carefully saved. Speaking more simply, "Unity" needs a hundred percent image of a "national" party, that is, based on "autochthonous" and not on borrowed political sources and ideals. In other words, it can never move from the virtual into real political space and compare in influence with the old or "renewed" left. In this direction the Civilian Christian Union can play an important role.
The second cause, as it is presented, consists in the fact that Putin's administration, as I said already, needs a new source of antiwestern rhetoric. But of a more genuine quality than Zhirinovsky. Crudely put, from Putin's political stance ("we are a European country with a Christian tradition") it follows that in the Russian political space there must be a small, but tightly organized channel for transmitting extremely conservative points of view. It must occupy the same place that the ultra-Catholics do on the political map of Europe. Zhirinovsky does not correspond to this role. Although Zhirinovsky has used nationalistic, Orthodox, Eurasian, etc. repertoires, he is a pretender. He is illegitimate in a spiritual sense. For the new Russian political space it would be good for the criticism of liberalism, the spiritlessness of the society of mass consumption, and the decline of morals to come not from marginal groups which are somehow or another taken in the West to be fascist, but from a legitimate owner of such a political repertoire. This legitimate owner can be precisely a party of the Orthodox national bourgeoisie with the blessing of the patriarch.
I stress that it should be a systemic, responsible party capable of creating political alliances and not falling into hysteria. If one looks around the only prototype of such a structure is the Christmas Readings, conducted for many years by Hegemen Ioann Ekonomtsev, the head of the synodal department on religious education and catechesis. Here is the place for everything, antisectarian centers, antiabortion groups, academics, leaders of the educational system, Solzhenitsyn, Orthodox Internet users, and leftists and rightists, and simply Orthodox children's clubs. Ideologically only the Christmas Readings have never gone beyond the bounds of what the Kremlin hopes to get from an Orthodox conservative party, specifically, a demonstration that Orthodoxy is the basis of the spiritual culture of Russia. The main value of these readings consists in their not being a product of the liberal camp of the Russian Orthodox church but at the same time they are not expected to produce sudden resolutions with the demand to recall the Russian embassy from the Vatican, or cease contacts with MVF, or replace bar codes, and the like. In other words, from the side of the patriarchate politically responsible conduct can be guaranteed only by the Vysoko-Petrov monastery, where Hegumen Ioann's residence now is located. Today he is not a part of the troika of basic ideological centers of the Russian Orthodox church, but he can become a part. This is why Hegumen Ioann will represent the patriarchate in the leadership of the GKhS.
If I correctly understand the course of events, then it is not quite clear to me why Maxim Shevchenko takes such an uncompromisingly negative view of the GKhS project. Sure the start-up money is coming from the nomenklatura of the government and administration. But the problem is that the "soviet" Orthodox public (writers, white guardists, actors, mathematicians) were able to achieve their political potential only in the Front of National Salvation. That's what it did in the middle nineties. Nobody expects more from these folk. They cannot become the basis of a movement which can express the conservative national selfconsciousness of forty-year-old bankers, top managers, and government bureaucrats. But it exists and should find its niche in the political spectrum. Generally speaking, if the Christmas Readings are moved from the public church to the public political level there would not be anything bad in this. Instead this should be welcomed rather than sharply criticized. (tr. by PDS)
(posted 29 May 2000)
Evgeny Komarov in "Novye izvestiia" of 24 May published an article about the session of the commission devoted to the bimillennium. Paraphrasing an address about the upcoming bishops' council he reports: "Among the candidates for Russian canonization there will not be the most famous: the family of Emperor Nicholas II." It is interesting that in the official report of this session it is impossible to find in the words of His Holiness such an affirmation. It is true that the very attentive reader can ponder why Patriarch Alexis in his address, speaking about the canonization of the new martyrs which will be conducted at the council, makes no mention directly of the emperor, especially when many expected such a confirmation. It is interesting that Metropolitan Yuvenaly not long before this declared that the question of the canonization of Nicholas would be brought up at the council and he hoped that the decision would be positive. This report with a reference to ITAR-TASS occupies first place on many Orthodox web pages, in particular, "Pravoslavie-2000." [see next item]
What gives Evgeny Komarov a basis for such a definite affirmation that there will not be a canonization of the family of the emperor among the candidates for canonization at the bishops' council in August 2000? That is unknown. However the words cannot be viewed as a simple mistake or slip of the tongue. In 1990-1995 Evgeny Komarov was press secretary for the patriarch and before that he headed the department of church life in the Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate. Today he is one of the most capable reporters writing on church topics in the secular press. (tr. by PDS)
CANONIZATION OF TSAR-MARTYR: DECISION SHOULD BE POSITIVE
ITAR-TASS/Pravoslavie
2000
The question of enrolling the Emperor Nicholas II and his family in the canon of saints is proposed for discussion at the jubilee session of the bishops' council in August. This was reported in an interview with an ITAR-TASS reporter by the chairman of the synodal commission on canonization, Metropolitan Yuvenaly of Krutitsy and Kolomna.
"I think that the decision will be positive," he said. The bishops' council of the Russian Orthodox church in the year of the bimillennium of Christianity will be held in the church of Christ the Savior at the end of the summer. The great consecration of the church, which again became the cathedral church of the capital, will take place on the eve of the feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord.
According to the metropolitan, one of the main topics of discussion by the bishops will be the "canonization of the assembly of Russia's new martyrs and confessors who suffered for the faith in the twentieth century." In recent times at every session of the Holy Synod the lists which have been submitted by the dioceses of the Russian Orthodox church have been reviewed. Metropolitan Juvenaly also noted that along with the new martyrs, a number of other champions of the faith will be canonized. (tr. by PDS)
(posted 29 May 2000)
The courtroom broadcast "Hearing the case" recognized justice of suit against artists who parodied crucifixion of Christ
by Nikolai Konstantinov
Nezavisimaia gazeta--subbotnik, 27 May 2000
Last Sunday on the TVTs channel on the program "Hearing the case" the virtual suit of the editor in chief of NG-religii, Maxim Shevchenko, against the artist-performer Oleg Mavromati was reviewed.
Let's recall the essence of the case. On 1 April Oleg Mavromati decided on a rather risky event: on a platform he was attached facing pieces of wood that had been put together like a cross and his hands were pierced carefully with nails (like the gypsies do in public markets without breaking the bones and vital blood vessels). On his hairy back the artist shaved the surface sufficient to scratch out on bare skin "I am not the Son of God."
All of this happened in the immediate vicinity of the church of Saint Nicholas on Bersenevka, in the yard of the institute of culturology against the backdrop of the cathedral of Christ the Savior. Television viewers saw excerpts from the film that captured this "crucifixion."
The suit brought by Maxim Shevchenko against Oleg Mavromati alleged the following:
1. One should not conduct public sadomasochistic experiments. If one has an unbearable desire to subject one's self to bodily harm, then it can be done in private circumstances.
2. One should not violate the provision of the law on freedom of conscience and offend the sentiments of believers (it is not important of which religion) by a parody of rituals or subjects that are sacred for them in the immediate vicinity of religious buildings belonging to them.
3. Mr. Mavromati should apologize to believers "for causing them grief," specifically as Orthodox believers take this as a parody of the life of Christ.
We are not going to evaluate in the newspaper the activity of performance artists. We will note only (and this was said at the time of the broadcast of the program but it did not make it on air) that "violating the religious discourse" of Orthodox believers is a matter that is rather safe and profitable. They are not going to kill you or cut your throat. If artists want to conduct a really seriously scandelous act, then perhaps burning the Koran in Riyadh or killing pigs at the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem would be much more effective and would allow those "exploring physical pain" to test the full gamut of the sensations they require.
In the format of the program each of the participants was represented by a real attorney and the role of judge was played by a professional actor.
It seems that editing is an inalienable right of producers of any television broadcast. Probably the participants do not have the right to demand that in the final cut version their requests and desires be taken into account. But they nevertheless have the right to hope for some correspondence between what happened at the filming location and what finally is shown on the screen.
During the broadcast it was constantly and quite distinctly stated that the side of the defense consisted of performance artists. But that the plaintiff was a newspaperman, much less one from Nezavisimaia gazeta, was whispered somewhere in the middle of the program and never repeated. So it seemed that some person came off the street and filed a telesuit against artists.
The testimony of witnesses was given with a clear bias for the defense. Performance artist Oleg Kulik spoke about forty minutes in the studio and about ten minutes on air. And it was about his own artistic achievements, not about the substance of the case. The statement of the famous Muscovite art critic Viktor Miziano was edited in the same way. His monologue about the essence of performance art was both professional and interesting, and it almost completely corresponded to the edited version of the broadcast, but Miziano's affirmative answer to the question of the plaintiff whether such action would subject his relatives to grief if there were believers among them was not included by the editors in the program. After all it would have the most impact upon the jurors. The same kinds of positive, or nearly so, answers of other witnesses for the defense to the same question similarly were cut out (such honesty, it seems, would do them honor).
Witnesses for the plaintiff were given only a few minutes on the air. The famous religious reporter Mikhail Pozdniaev and Archpriest Valentin Chaplin made statements that were emotional and filled with enmity against the artists, whom they viewed as spiritually sick, which also did much to determine the verdict.
In the course of the trial it was shown that the actions of the artists bore the character of deliberate offense to believers (the plaintiff to the surprise of the producers read a manifesto of artists directed to the parishioners of the church of St. Nicholas on Beresenevka declaring the anti-church intention of the act. The artists acknowledged the authenticity of the document).
The editors seriously distorted the sentence of the jurors. Indeed, viewers saw how the accusation of violation of public morality was rejected (which, incidentally, Maxim Shevchenko had not advanced) and the fact of offense against the sentiments of believers was acknowledged. But the fact that the jurors required the artists to make a special statement of apology to believers did not make it into the final cut. After all, it was just such a sentence that was the real victory. (tr. by PDS)
(posted 28 May 2000)
On 22 May at the "President" hotel the fourth session of the Russian Organizing Committee for Preparing Celebration of the Third Millennium and the Bimillennium of Christianity was held. The session met under the cochairmanship of the prime minister of the government of the Russian federation, M.M. Kasianov, and Patriarch Alexis II of Moscow and all-Rus. Participants in the session also included heads and representatives of the traditional Russian religious associations, representatives of the government of Russia and the administration of the president of Russia, responsible officials of various ministries and administrations, scholars, and public leaders.
At the session questions associated with the conduct of the programs of jubilee events were discussed.
The first volume of the "Orthodox Encyclopedia," whose publication is devoted to the bimillennium of the birth of Christ, and the official Internet server "Rossia 2000," which was created by the president's chief of staff, were presented.
"In the recent past we have witnessed many important events in the life of the country. A new State Duma has begun its work, a new president has taken office, the formation of the government of the Russian federation has been completed, and measures have been adopted for strengthening vertical authority in the country," noted M.M. Kasianov in opening the session. "One of the important tasks remains the building of partnership and respectful relations among all layers and structures of our society. In Russia there are strong, centuries-old, spiritual and cultural traditions associated with Christianity, primarily Orthodoxy as well as Islam, Buddhism, Judaism, and other religions and confessions that have their roots in the history of our fatherland. In speaking about the events of the jubilee year 2000 I would like to note that we will give special significance to the suggestions of the Russian Orthodox church that are part of the Organizing Committee's plan for basic events."
Then His Holiness Patriarch Alexis II addressed participants of the session.
"Your excellency, highly respected Mikhail Mikhailovich, esteemed members of the Organizing Committee.
I greet you cordially today and would like to note that we are meeting at a moment of vigorous renewal of the authority of Russian statehood. Taking advantage of the moment I congratulate Mikhail Mikhailovich Kasianov upon assuming the high office of prime minister of the government of the Russian federation. I would like to wish you and the newly appointed government success in your upcoming difficult work and also to express hope for the continuation of vigorous mutual relations between the church and the state for the good of the nation.
Considerable time has passed since the last sessions of the Organizing Committee. I submit that now we have the possibility of evaluating the jubilee events that have occurred and also check our plans for the future.
On 23-25 November of last year in the Russian capital there was the International Interconfessional Conference devoted to the jubilee of Christianity. The motto of that forum was a quote from holy scripture: 'Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today, and forever' (Heb 13.8). Representatives of Christian churches and societies from Russia, other countries of CIS, and the Baltics discussed the condition and prospects of our ministry in the dynamically changing contemporary world. Questions of the mutual relations of religion, state, and society became the topic of profound discussion.
On 6-7 December in Moscow was held the fifth World Russian National Assembly. Bishops and clergy of the Russian Orthodox church, representatives of the supreme governmental authority, leaders of parliamentary fractions, parties, public associations, scholars, artistic workers, and public leaders discussed that topic 'Russia on the eve of the bimillennium of Christianity. Faith. Nation. Authority.'
On 15 December the jubilee session of the Moscow diocese, at which the bimillennium of the birth of Christ was marked by clergy and laity of our capital city and Moscow district, was held in the State Kremlin Palace.
On 31 December a lesser consecration of the cathedral of Christ the Savior was held. I submit that it was profoundly symbolic that on the last day of 1999, at the ending of the dramatic twentieth century, the church entered into the restored cathedral which stands as a symbol of the rebirth of Russia and its return to its spiritual sources. And on the very same day, at the very same hour, the current head of our state, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, became acting president.
At the beginning of the year a delegation of our church led by the patriarch of Moscow visited the Holy Land, where along with primates of other local Orthodox churches and governmental leaders, including the first president of Russia Boris Nikolaevich Yeltsin, we conducted a jubilee celebration of the birth of Christ. At that time I prayed especially for Russia and for all of its longsuffering people, asking God to grant it a better fate. I am convinced that in the new millennium our fellow citizens deserve an abundant life, spiritual prosperity and material well being. The great jubilee will help us to recognize our calling to contribute to this. Thus it is a great delight that our trip to Jerusalem and the subsequent celebration of the birth of Christ in Moscow showed the unity of the church, state, and society.
From 7 to 9 February in Moscow was held the theological conference of the Russian Orthodox church, "Orthodox theology on the threshold of the third millennium." In the jubilee year bishops, and rectors and teachers of ecclesiastical schools from various regions of Russia and the near abroad gave an assessment of Orthodox theology of the past century and formulated topics for theological analysis for the future. This conference was the first of its kind since the revolution and became an important milepost in the development of church scholarship.
I frequently have had occasion to say that the jubilee year should not become just a time of specifically celebrational events. We should also examine the past to draw from it proper conclusions for building our present and future. In this regard I am grateful for the support from the Organizing Committee and high governmental authority for the project of publishing the Orthodox Encyclopedia, the first volume of which recently saw the light of day.
In Moscow and many dioceses there have been creative contests, exhibitions of children's art, and other events associated with the jubilee. A multitude of church publications devoted to the bimillennium of the birth of Christ have appeared in the center and in the provinces. I would like to note the creation in the provinces of jubilee organizing committees, created on the model of the all-Russian committee. Cooperation between the dioceses of the Russian Orthodox church and leaders of the constituent parts of the federation received new impetus in connection with the jubilee, which has become truly a national holiday.
Our participation in celebrations conducted on the inter-Orthodox level has continued. In the course of celebration of the jubilee we have engaged in mutual relationships with other churches and societies, with governmental and public circles of other countries, and with intergovernmental organizations.
The chairman of the Department of External Church Relations of the Moscow patriarchate, Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad, will describe future plans for the church's celebration of the bimillennium of the birth of Christ. The high point of this celebration will come in August. I hope that both the governmental authority and all of society will unite with us in the upcoming celebrations.
From 13 to 16 August the Bishops' Council of the Russian Orthodox church will be held. Of course, it will have a celebrational, jubilee character. But at the same time we hope that at this council decisions that are most important for our church will be adopted. We hope to conduct the canonization of new martyrs and heroes of Russia as well as of some other countries, who mainly served God in the twentieth century. We expect also the adoption of the Project of the Russian Orthodox Church on matters of church-state relations and problems of contemporary society as a whole. I am not afraid to say that such a document is being developed for practically the first time in the history of Orthodoxy. Of course, we expect also to adopt a new edition of the regulations on administration of the Russian Orthodox church.
On 19 August, on the feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord, we will conduct the great consecration of the cathedral of Christ the Savior. On the next day, in the Dormition cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin, we will conduct a divine liturgy with the service of glorification of the saints on whose canonization the Bishops' Council will decide. On the same day there will be the solemn celebration and a concert.
On 13 to 15 November an artistic forum on the relations between traditional religions and culture will be conducted. Its initiator is the Interreligious Council of Russia that unites adherents of Orthodoxy, Islam, Judaism, and Buddhism. A similar initiative has been made by the Ministry on Matters of the Federation and Nationalities. I thank the governmental leadership for providing financial support for this important event.
Esteemed prime minister, esteemed members of the Organizing Committee. Taking advantage of the moment I would like to emphasize the importance of strengthening church-state and church-public relations in connection with the jubilee. This holiday is a common holiday for us, even if some will place the accent on the bimillennium of the birth of Christ and others, on the beginning of the third millennium. Any item of the program that we adopt should become the occasion for close cooperation of all governmental structures and public forces represented in the committee. In particular, I would suggest joint efforts on the church-nation celebration of the bimillennium of the birth of Christ, which should become an unforgettable cultural experience.
I hope that the efforts we expend will not be limited merely to the jubilee period and will not disappear into the past with the start of the new century. The accumulated experience needs to be maintained and developed. I would suggest giving thought to how to achieve this.
Today we also need to discuss the topic of the coverage of the jubilee in the mass media. Without doubt our local reporters have done a great deal to make a worthy presentation of the holiday events. I thank them for this. However as before I would like to see more attention given to the Christian meaning of the date of the holiday. After all it is the most important thing for the Orthodox church, which comprises many tens of millions of parishioners. So we hope for adequate coverage of the church celebrations that are planned for August.
In conclusion I would like to express recognition to the Russian Organizing Committee for the very useful cooperation and variety of aid shown to the Russian Orthodox church in the celebration of the jubilee. I thank it for providing in a number of instances organizational and financial support. I am convinced that our joint efforts will not be in vain, because they will serve the spiritual rebirth of Russia. The rebirth of Russia is our common task."
The address by Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad, chairman of the Department of External Church Relations of the Moscow patriarchate, was devoted to the conceptual bases of church-state and church-society relations in connection with the celebration of the bimillennium of the birth of Christ. In particular, Metropolitan Kirill said, "On 19 July 1999 the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox church adopted the Conceptual Bases of Church-State and Church-Society Relations in connection with the celebration of the bimillennium of the birth of Christ, in which emphasis was made on the comprehension of the course of Russian and world history and understanding of the reasons for global mistakes and crises. The Holy Synod called contemporaries of the jubilee to give thought about who we are, where we are going, and to what we have been called. Celebration and entertainment are not synonyms, and it is very important that this celebration be conducted under a banner of serious consideration of the fates of the fatherland and the common human family.
As the most holy patriarch has noted, at the jubilee Bishops' Council a Program of the Russian Orthodox church on matters of church-state relations and problems of contemporary society as a whole will be adopted. The task entails the need for the church, authoritatively and on the church-wide level, to address the challenges of contemporary social development. Since a whole series of problems that are confronting humanity today do not have formulated answers either in holy scripture or in church tradition, these answers must be expressed in the spirit of holy scripture and holy tradition.
On 14 June a symposium on "Church and society 2000" will be held, at which the approval of the basic provisions of the Program will be proposed. This symposium will be completely open."
The activity of the jubilee commission of the Russian Orthodox church for planning and conducting the celebration of the bimillennium of the birth of Christ was described by its secretary, the chief of staff of the Moscow patriarchate, Metropolitan Sergius of Solnechnogorsk. He noted with satisfaction that the work of the jubilee commission united representatives of the church and Russian science. "The history subcommission of the jubilee commission along with the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences will publish a journal "Istoricheskii vestnik." On 15-18 May in Astrakhan there was a conference on "Christianity and culture" and two volumes of the papers presented there already have been published. At the same time in Samara there was a conference "Christianity and science" at which about 200 papers were presented. Editions of the Bible and other books devoted to the bimillennium of the birth of Christ have been produced, as well as icons, medals, pins, and coins," Metropolitan Sergius reported.
The session also was addressed by the chief of staff of the president, V.I. Kozhin, Minister of Culture M.E. Shvydkoy, Deputy Minister of Finances V.B. Volkov, Moscow Mayor Yu.M. Luzhkov, the St. Petersburg Governor V.A. Yakovlev, the president of the Interregional charity society foundation "Novye imena," I.N. Voronova, the acting vice chairman of the State Committee on Youth Policy, G.V. Kupriianova, the rector of the Russian State Humanitarian University, Yu.N. Afanasiev, and others. (tr. by PDS)
(posted 25 May 2000)
At the end of May in Moscow the first "Angel. The Face of 2000" selection contest of models will be conducted. In all in the course of the year there will be six such selection contests in the capital and twelve in provinces, after which on 23 December in Moscow's Palace of Youth there will be the final show.
Organizers have set as their goal finding a new image in the modeling business that personifies innocence, goodness, and purity. The contest program will be accompanied by charitable activities. Organizers already have received blessings for conducting the event from Patriarch Alexis II of Moscow and all-Rus and the apostolic administrator for Catholics of the Latin rite of the European part of Russia, Archbishop Tadeus Kondrusewicz. Besides this the plan has received the support of the government of Moscow.
The press conference devoted to this event in the secular life of the country was turned into a real show. The singer Sergei Krylov delivered a whole speech in defense of morality. The speech was incoherent and difficult to understand. Krylov declared that the women contestants must become the "equivalent of Russian purity, which still exists somewhere." According to the singer, this purity has remained in the provinces. "There are pure girls there," he said, "but they are forced to engage in prostitution. Where are they, where are the working places that they should occupy?" the singer angrily asked the hushed auditorium.
Discussing the purity of Russians and the depravity of Europeans, Krylov introduced the example of his own life: "I have lived with my wife nineteen years and I do not intend to separate from her. Let's look at how Madonna conducts herself!" . . .
After Krylov numerous sponsors of the event began coming to the microphone to extol innocence and talk about the benefit of puritan education. When the affair came to questions from reporters, nobody wanted to pose any questions. . . .
Then there was an exhibit of clothing from designer Arina Kramer. With each new entrance of the models their attire become more transparent and tight-fitting. But in the final exhibit for viewers out came small girls in snow white dresses. Arina Kramer came out to the audience with a microphone and sang a sentimental song. Sergei Krylov, who had been talking with someone outside, suddenly appeared in the hall and began looking tenderly at the small "angels" who were circling the designer. On this ceremonial note the press conference concluded. (tr. by PDS)
(posted 25 May 2000)
23 May 2000 (Newsroom) -- Turkmen police have expelled the last remaining Russian Baptist missionary in the country, the Keston News Service reported. Authorities ordered the deportation of Vitali Tereshin in March, but the missionary went into hiding to continue his work. He was located in April by Turkmenistan's political police, the National Security Committee (KNB).
Tereshin was expelled to Russia on April 16, one month after his wife and child were deported. Six Baptist missionary families have been deported from Turkmenistan since December. The families are ethnic Russian and Ukranian members of the Council of Churches of Evangelical Christians/Baptists, which was established under the former Soviet Union.
Keston says that the Tereshins frequently had been harassed for their activity in the Dashkhovuz Baptist church. Their home was raided on February 13 by KNB officers and Tereshin was fined for holding an unlawful religious meeting. Police later confiscated his passport.
Turkmen officials had openly declared that they would deport all foreign Baptists and "strangle" local Baptist churches, which are not registered with the government. Keston said that "now that all Baptists have been deported it remains to be seen what further measures the Turkmen authorities will take against local Baptists." Keston said that officials at the government's Council for Religious Affairs in Ashgabad consistently have declined to discuss the deportation of the Baptists.
Dozens of foreigners from other Christian denominations have been deported over the past year, along with the leader of the country's Hare Krishnas. Officials also routinely have threaten to deport Turkmen citizens involved in unregistered religious activity, Keston said.
Under the Central Asian republic's 1996 amendment to its law on religion, a congregation must have at least 500 adult Turkmen citizens before it can apply for reregistration. Only the Russian Orthodox and the officially sanctioned Sunni Muslims have been able to reregister under the new law. Keston notes that the government treats all other religious activity as illegal, despite the absence of any published law specifically banning unregistered religious activity.
(posted 24 May 2000)
If material is quoted, please give credit to the publication
from which it came.
It is not necessary to credit this Web page. If material
is transmitted electronically, please include reference to the URL, http://www.stetson.edu/~psteeves/relnews/.