RUSSIA RELIGION NEWS

Monitoring news media reports about religion in Russia and other countries of former USSR
Copyrighted material. For private use only.
If you quote material, please credit the publication from which it came. It is not necessary to credit this Web page for any print use of the material. If any electronic reproduction is made, please acknowledge the URL: http:www.stetson.edu/~psteeves/relnews/


Archive of News Items	Abbreviations

Patriarchal spokesman defends teaching Orthodoxy

MEDICINE FOR EXTREMISM. ORTHODOX "WAHHABIS" AND TOLERANCE TOWARD OTHER FAITHS
by Deacon Andrei Kuraev
Izvestiia, 14 January 2003

The prospects of introducing the "Fundamentals of Orthodox Culture" subject into the schools has evoked a stormy discussion: talk-shows, open letters, pickets. I would like to get beyond the cycle of the usual arguments and replies. I would like to put the question differently: is there really a choice? Religion can cripple the fate of people too radically for this sphere of life to remain without public and state supervision, control, and evaluation. Does it really not matter for society which classes and what kind of faith children get?

From both the Bible and the Quran one can extract a "theology of love" and one can construct a "theology of hate." It all depends on the interpreter whether he makes the theme of his preaching a call to "go and kill" or a call to peace.

Wahhabis and Oprichniki

History produces unexpected surprises. Who could have thought that at the beginning of the twenty-first century the fate of humanity would wind up in the hands of theologians? But that's the way it is; to be sure, with the qualification that we are talking about Muslim theologians. The Muslim umma (church) is organized differently than Orthodox or Catholic parishes. The umma is run by scholars; personal education means more than going through a ceremony of ordination. The voice of Islam is the voice of the ulema, experts in theology. Upon them today depends how the Quranic command of jihad will be interpreted. Upon them depends whether they will bestow the high name of "shakhid" (martyr) on terrorists who blow up themselves along with the children of the "infidels," or they will call terrorists terrorists and suicides, murderers of children. The Muslim leaders of Russia consider in a politically correct way that terrorism in the name of Islam is first of all terrorism, and thus in its essence it is anti-Islamic activity. But there is another position, too.

Of course it is not pleasant to live in a world in which such discussions about your life are conducted, but it would be yet worse if these discussions were not held and the Muslim world retained a medieval, monolithic opinion.

But should we simply be observers? Or can we take part in these discussions? The state has an extremely simple path: creating conditions so that in the Russian educational space within the schools there resound the voices of those who give Islam its peace loving interpretation and restricting the preaching of those Muslims who are inclined to militancy. However it would be dishonest not to note that there also are "Wahhabis" among Orthodox believers. They like to call themselves "Oprichniki."

Here is the fairy tale of the new "Oprichniki": "Once the Russian people woke up, rejoiced, and prayed to God, and he gave them the Terrible Tsar. Now in this kingdom the Terrible Tsar will burn at the stake all wizards and soothsayers. The end; and praise God!" (The Orthodox Patriotic Herald, Sergiev Posad, no. 16, 2001). And here is their little song: "And there will be no colony, camp, and prison; all enemies of Russia will be executed. We shall follow the enemy's tracks and tear him to pieces, praise the Lord" (Zhanna Bichevskaia). And here is their press: "We believe that the time is coming when the betrayers of Christ will simply be killed in the streets by cleavers and saucepans" (Irkutsk cossack, no. 6, 2001).

One can only plead: Lord, save Orthodoxy from such "defenders," and we then will deal with the sectarians ourselves.

Enthusiasts for "Orthodox" pedagogy

There is a sad sociological law: one hooligan can spoil the mood of a whole bus. A person with a mania is always more active than ordinary people. We can project this law into relations between the schools and the church. Does Russian legislation permit conducting religious teaching in the schools? Yes. Does the legislation prescribe control by a religious organization over those who teach in its name in the public schools? No. In the end it is the "people with a mania" who often turn up next to the children. At least that's what anticlerical propaganda claims. Our priests are such zealous preachers that they are dreaming about how they can "carry off our youth in the church's nets."

Priests will not burst into the schools. The only ones who will be interested are those who received a university education (and most often a pedagogical education) before they entered the church. But such priests do not by any means constitute a majority.

In the Russian tradition, a "good priest" is not required to be a "golden tongue." We do not value more the priest who speaks well but rather the one who listens well. In addition, a person of tradition is used to a calm and smooth course of life. He does not strive to remake the whole world into his faith and after his liking.

The neophyte is dangerous. He has recently changed his views, and thus it seems to him that he is capable of bringing about the same change in other people. The desire is a good one. But it is just that such an energetic preacher does not always understand himself just what that change should consist of that he is trying to effect in the life of persons he meets.

"What does it mean to be a Christian?" The answer to this question can appear rather shocking.

In one of the schools of Krasnoiarsk territory in December 2001 the children poured out to me the grief of their confusion: it turned out that in the Law of God classes they were given a complete encyclopedia of Orthodox superstitions. They were informed that the individual tax number is the seal of the antichrist, that a dog banishes grace from a home, and that Ivan the Terrible and Grigory Rasputin were saintly people. Finally, they were informed that before the universal flood people carried flasks of water (and this was a sign that the world soon would be flooded), while today it is a fad to carry cigarette lighters, and this is a sign that the world soon will burn up. They were taught this nonsense by a teacher with a diploma. Their diplomas are genuine. But they have not decided to subject their knowledge to critical thinking to test the church gossip. And as a result the children were given uncensored nonsense.

Here is an example of this uncensored "Orthodox" pedagogy that the "enthusiasts" come to the children with: A boy went to a priest. He asked with a sigh, "What is 'good' and what is 'bad' and what is an individual tax number?"

"We do not have any secrets; the individual tax number is spiritual servitude. One must understand this. They won't drag us into the prison of the bar code, like into hell's darkness. Soon, very soon, it will be impossible to buy and to sell."

"How will people live on the planet then? . . .

This long story ends in this way: . . . The happy boy went, and the kid decided: 'With God it's very good, with the tax number, it's bad!"

It would be unconscionable to say that all, or even a majority, of those teachers who now teach the Law of God give such revelations to children. But it also is impossible not to see the problem.

Principle of dual control

The problem consists in that the present form of relationship between the schools and the church gives an opportunity to the "Oprichniki" to enter the schools in the name of Orthodoxy. But it does not give the children the opportunity to learn about other understandings of Orthodoxy independent of the views of the local parish activists, or about that which engendered the great and brilliant Orthodox culture. The choice is actually very simple: either we leave people (both small and large, both children and teachers) alone with elemental religious irrationality in a world without culture and a world of the most primitive religious and magical practices which today are preached on every corner, or we give them the opportunity to have contact with the tradition of human thought on religious topics.

When we were talking about introducing into the schools a curriculum of sex education, the innovating teachers bewailed: "Well how will the children learn about this on the streets? Let's enlighten them!" But when we talk about religious education, then they turn out to be against it!

On the contrary, I think that it is wrong to leave this part of human life in the realm of the spontaneous. If Russia does not want to be shaken with interreligious conflicts and does not want to pay for the spiritual defects of one or another religious activist with its children's fate, then it should take under its control the acquainting of the children with the bases of religious culture, both Orthodox and Muslim. There are too many threads that tie the church to Russian society and thus our defects have already begun to threaten entirely marginalized people. If one thinks logically, the alternative (that is, the negation) of the "Fundamentals of Orthodox Culture" is "baseless, non-Orthodox culturelessness." One of the manifestations of culturelessness is religious extremism.

In order that nonsense, in the guise of Orthodoxy, not be brought into the state schools, I propose that a dual control is necessary. On one hand, the church should take responsibility for the ones it sends into the schools. On the other hand, the state must not throw poor, neophyte teachers into the stream of stormy, modern information, and it should help them master the culture of thought on religious topics.

How not to be lost in church

Well I have said this problematic word, "neophyte," "new convert." There are fundamentals of Orthodox culture. And there are its summits. And there is a real multimillion Orthodox church. Do these three circles coincide? Unfortunately, no. Many people who live a church parish life maintain in their still uneducated and untransformed state a rather small element of their own mind and heart. A mastery of the culture of Orthodox life presupposes acquisition of the ability to live in the church. Not simply to attend and not simply to return. But precisely, to live.

When a person enters the world of the church, faith is naturally sown in him. He experiences a crisis: his former total alienation is transformed into total acceptance. This is normal. This readiness is a sign of a normal spiritual formation. In this confessional crisis even a professor of secular sciences should understand that that there is something for him to learn from the simplest parishioner. But in time a most serious crisis grows out of the total acceptance. Orientation is lost in the world in which everyone is of equal weight and value. When all of heaven is of one color, it is impossible to get one's bearings from it. If one considers the advice of an old attendant for the third candelabrum and the words of the apostle Paul to be equal, the advice of a "secret nun" who is known to the whole city equal to the words of the patriarch, an anonymous pamphlet equal to the works of St. John Chrysostom, then the head very quickly begins to spin in this equally sacred world.

In order to escape this headspin it is necessary in time to pose the question about the criteria of truth and about which hierarchy correlates with the diverse sources of the word of the church. And today I do not have the kind of fully clear and distinct "method" of clarifying church truth. Orthodoxy is a complex construction. Just like every normal, living organism. But in any case, in the twenty years of my life in the church there has developed in me a steadfast antipathy for the popular phrase "the holy fathers teach" ("the holy fathers say"), especially when along with it someone begins his own assessment of some entirely modern problem. Until I see a specific reference to a specific text of one or another father I will not know whether this text really has the sense that the speaker imposes upon it, and I also will not know whether his voice was supported by other church fathers. Until this I prefer to withhold agreement with these generalized and thus anonymous theses. In past years careless (or ironic) technological students in examinations on ideological subjects glibly reported: "Karlmarxfriedrichengles wrote." And the examiner had to unglue this fusion.

That's how today it is necessary to teach people not to identify the opinion they heard casually with the church's teaching. For this a church education is necessary.

In order not to multiply the ranks of "Wahhabis," it is necessary to explain to a person that the world of each religion is internally complex. The fundamentals of Orthodox culture are, in particular, an account of how not to get lost in the church. It is an account about complexity. And about what even the saints were not always in agreement among themselves. And that it is not necessary today to fear discussion. The person who is warned about this complexity is cautious about committing his fate to the advice of some monk he meets accidentally who calls, in view of the onset of the "last times," for breaking up the usual pattern of life and the family and quitting work or school. The person who knows the fundamentals of Orthodox culture is prepared to say upon meeting such exhortations: there also are other opinions on these questions in the church.

But the one who knows that there are diverse opinions in his own tradition is also cautious, upon meeting the stupidity spoken by those who bear another tradition, about placing an equals sign between this "Wahhabi" and that tradition in whose name he is speaking. The person who knows what kinds of stupidity his fellow believers are capable of speaking will be able to restrain himself from equating the stupidity spoken by the believer of a different faith with that faith as such. It means, he will be cautious also in his reactions to that different faith. It means that from this point of view the "Fundamentals of Orthodox Culture" are a medicine for extremism. The state approved textbook on "Fundamentals of Orthodox Culture" is a preventive, educational stroke against extremism.

* * *

Andrei Kuraev graduated from the philosophy faculty of MGU in 1984 in the department of the history and theory of scientific atheism. He enrolled as a graduate student in the Institute of Philosophy of the Academy of Sciences of USSR. In 1985 he moved on the work in the Moscow Ecclesiastical Academy. In 1988 he graduated from the Moscow Ecclesiastical Seminary, after which he enrolled in the Bucharest Theological Institute. After returning to Russia he worked as a reviewer for Patriarch Alexis II of Moscow and all-Rus. At this time he graduated from the Moscow Ecclesiastical Academy. He holds the kandidat of philosophy degree and is a professor of theology. At the present time Deacon Andrei Kuraev serves at the church of St. John the Forerunner in Presno. (tr. by PDS, posted 14 January 2003)

Russia Religion News Current News Items

Court rules against Orthodox textbook

RIGHTS DEFENDERS ACT FOR CHURCH. PROSECUTOR MUST STUDY CONTROVERSIAL TEXTBOOK
by Kirill Mikhailov
Vremia novostei, 14 January 2003

It was learned Monday that the Meshchansky district court of Moscow ruled that the refusal of the Ostankino district prosecutor's office to open a criminal case regarding the publication and distribution of the "Fundamentals of Orthodox Culture" textbook written by Alla Borodina was illegal.

Now in accordance with the petition from the Russia-wide "For human rights" movement of 18 June of last year, the prosecutor's office must study the new text resource and determine whether the contents of the textbook really arouse ethnic and religious enmity.

Alla Borodina's textbook, which has received approval in Moscow, was granted the stamp of approval, "recommended by the Coordination Council for Relations between the Ministry of Education of Russia and the Moscow patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox church" and is already being used actively in the schools of several regions of the country. In the opinion of the director of the "For human rights" movement, Lev Ponomarev, this textbook "crudely violates the secular character of the state and the contents of the textbook are biased; this is more like the 'Law of God,' which contradicts the secular character of education." Responding to questions from a "Vremia novostei" reporter, Mr. Ponomarev stressed that the rights defenders are not acting against the Russian Orthodox church. "On the contrary, we are defending the church from incompetent textbooks."

At the time of the hearing of the case in court the rights defenders who had filed the suit against the Ostankino prosecutor's office were supported by specialists from the Center for the Study of Religions of the Russian State Humanities University; in Mr. Ponomarev's opinion this guaranteed the plaintiffs' victory. Expert religious studies specialists confirmed that Alla Borodina's textbook contains "elements of clerical propaganda." For example, on page 114 pupils are directed to answer the question: "Why did the Jews crucify Christ and cannot receive the Kingdom of Heaven?" On page 31 students of secondary and higher classes are given the question: "What is the heresy of the monophysites?" And on page 159 the textbook reports that members of the Armenian Apostolic church are doctrinally among the monophysites, which, in the opinion of the rights defenders, can lead to incitement of ethnic and religious hostility. On page 10 school children are directed to reflect on the question: "What is occultism, satanism, and magic?" Mr. Ponomarev thinks that Orthodox Christianity is the dominant confession of Russia, and therefore there is every basis for teaching "Fundamentals of Orthodox Culture" on a voluntary basis. However the rights defender insists that the state should work for the observation of the constitution that guarantees the secular character of public school education. (tr. by PDS, posted 14 January 2003)

Russia Religion News Current News Items

State subsidies of faith-based services proposed

CHURCH WILL ENTER STATE SERVICE IF DRAFT LAW PASSES
by Pavel Korobov
Kommersant-Daily, 14 January 2003

Yesterday in the duma's Committee on Public Associations and Religious Organizations preparations were begun on an expert conclusion regarding a new version of a law on social partnership between the state and religious organizations. If the law is adopted, then selected religious organizations in Russia will receive priority rights for training and education of its citizens at state expense. The draft of the law "On social partnership of the state and religious organizations for the purposes of maintaining national religious traditions and providing social protection of the population of Russia" was introduced at the very end of December in the State Duma by a deputy of the communist fraction, Sergei Glaziev, and yesterday it fell into the possession of Kommersant-Daily. In the opinion of the author of the draft law, the time has come for formalizing the mutual relations between the state and church in a legal agreement form, and thus put an end to the practice of the church's participating in the life of society while the state ignores it or through decrees of the executive branch and other nonlegislative acts.

If the draft law passes through parliament and is signed by the president in its current form, then "in the spheres of health protection, education, and social protection" and "other areas of activity aimed at the strengthening of the spiritual and physical health of residents of Russia" "departments and services within religious organizations" will be opened up.

In the sphere of education they will be opened in child care centers, schools, and institutions of higher learning (article 16 of the draft law). In the sphere of strengthening national security, they will be in the armed forces and prisons (art. 22-26). In the international sphere they will be in embassies and missions of the Russian federation abroad (art. 27).

In addition, the draft law provides that in the sphere of news media, religious organizations that have the status of traditional religions will get the right to conclude agreements with the management of television and radio broadcasting companies for granting them air time free of charge or at privileged rates (art. 19). Similar privileges should be created by the government of the Russian federation also for publications of literature and periodicals that are directed to the maintenance and development of religious traditions, culture, and the customs of the peoples of Russia (art. 21).

Agreements will be concluded in the name of the state by leaders of offices of the executive branch of the Russian federation and its component elements, offices of local administration and of municipal education, and by the ministries and departments of Russia and its component elements, as well as by state enterprises, institutions, and organizations. They will be concluded in the name of religious organizations by persons authorized by their own religious organizations (art. 4). According to the new law, in order to implement the social programs of religious organizations, the state will grant to clergy legal, credit, financial, and personnel aid (art. 14). The aid will consist of allotment of subsidies for constructing institutions, personnel security, financial disbursements for expenses, and exemption from taxes (art. 14).

And all of this will be, as article 12 of the draft law says, "for the good of the citizens of Russia and for society as a whole." More precisely, for that part of society and those citizens who profess Orthodoxy, Islam, and Buddhism, which are the only religions that fall in the new legislation into the category of "subjects of agreements about social partnership" (art. 4).

But what is most interesting is that the "subjects of agreements" of Sergei Glaziev's draft know nothing about it. "I am hearing this for the first time from you," Archbishop Tadeusz Kondrusiewicz of the Mother of God archdiocese in Moscow said, with surprise. "We do not know anything, and what kind of law is this?" President Vasily Stoliar of the West-Russian Union of Churches of Christian Seventh Day Adventists said, in alarm. "I have heard something about it, but I have still not seen it," Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad told Kommersant-Daily. (tr. by PDS, posted 14 January 2003)

Russia Religion News Current News Items

Patriarch reviews church life

PATRIARCH ALEXIS II: MANY AREAS IN CHURCH-STATE RELATIONS NEED CORRECTING
by Pavel Korobov
Kommersant-Daily, 9 January 2003

On Tuesday Orthodox Christians celebrated the holiday of the Birth of Christ. On the eve of the holiday His Holiness Patriarch Alexis II of Moscow and all-Rus gave an interview to Kommersant-Daily.

--Your Holiness. In the past year much was said about the necessity of creating a state agency on religious affairs. In your view, does Russia need such a body?

--Such a structure existed over the course of a long time. I have in view the Council on Religious Affairs under the Council of Ministers of USSR, which performed the function of an intermediary between the state and religious organizations. This agency continually interfered in the internal life of religious societies and such interference was accompanied by abuses, violations of believers' rights, and sometimes outright extortion. Not one priest or bishop, including the patriarch, had direct access to offices of state power without the mediation of this structure, which blocked real dialogue of the church with the authorities. That is the negative experience that we do not have the right to forget.

Unfortunately, some people even today are trying to make the case that the state and religious organizations simply cannot and do not have the right to do without their mediation services and "consultations." Usually we are talking about bureaucrats and "experts" at the intermediate levels who are greedy for unlimited power, money, and influence. Of course, they exploit real problems for their personal goals, for example, the problem of extremism that hides under the cover of religion. But the state can even now solve this problem by turning to the experience and knowledge of many state employees and also to the enormous intellectual potential that has been accumulated in recent years by Russian religious organizations. Incidentally, I am completely convinced that in contemporary Russia any "religious policy" that is formulated without the decisive participation of the religious organizations themselves will be doomed to failure.

Many areas of church-state relations need correction. For example, the right of citizens to religious education has not been implemented fully; there is a need for the development of the educational, cultural, and social programs of the church. However such matters can best be resolved with the free and direct interaction of the church with various branches of the government at all levels. If some, in violation of the principle of the separation of powers, want to monopolize contacts between the state and religious organizations and to have the "veto power" over any decision, the church is quite capable of refusing to cooperate with such bureaucrats.

--Now there is a great deal of talk about the question of the introduction of the fundamentals of Orthodox culture into the curriculum. What is your attitude on this question? Do you think that it is necessary to introduce religious subjects into secular education?

--It is amazing that the question about the teachings of the fundaments of Orthodox church has become so acute at just this time. Hundreds of state schools throughout Russia have had many years of positive experience of the teaching of this topic. This has not caused alarm on anybody's part until now. According to our information, an absolute majority of parents and teachers welcome the teaching of such a subject. And the school children like it.

Fundamentals of Orthodox culture is a subject that is not especially religious but it is in the area of cultural studies and it is taught on a strictly voluntary basis. Its critics intentionally confuse the concepts, frightening people with "obligatory introduction of the Law of God." Exploiting the atheistic habits that were imposed upon society over the course of seventy years, these people speak out directly against the active presence of a religious culture in modern Russian life.

But it is not for them to decide, but for the people. Nobody has the power to deny that the establishment of our country was integrally tied with Orthodoxy. And if we want to understand the history and culture of our motherland, we must know the fundamentals of Orthodox spirituality. This will help understand better also the culture of other Christians countries since, you know, Orthodoxy is first of all Christianity.

One should not be afraid that there may be children of Muslims, Jews, and Buddhists among the pupils since the achievements of Russian culture (which is historically Orthodox) are an inherent part of the world's spiritual heritage.

The suggestion has been made that instead of fundamentals of Orthodox culture, a course in religious studies be introduced, in which there would be a "even handed," skeptical presentation of all religions of the world. But following this logic, the school must reject even our own history or literature as separate subjects or give them no more attention than, say, the history and literature of New Zealand, a country that is doubtless interesting but still far away from Russia.

Religion is present in the curricula of a majority of European states. And this is not simply a thing of the past. They understand over there that without attention to the spiritual bases of life, without moral education and without God, it is impossible to give a person a full and harmonious existence. And if Russia wants to be a respected member of the family of European nations, it is necessary to look closely at their pedagogical experience.

--Is an increase in the number of church educational institutions planned?

--The time is passing when the number of church schools has grown intensively. This delightful, although at times almost hidden growth was accompanied by difficulties both internal--shortage of teaching personnel, experience, educational resources--and external--financial problems created by the social and economic crisis. At the present time the educational committee of the Holy Synod is trying to raise the quality of religious education. This goal is connected with the developing of a new educational standard for church seminaries and academies. The adoption of such a standard will permit a substantial elevation of the level of education in a number of church schools, especially those located far from the traditional centers of theological studies. Among the priorities are the establishment of horizontal communications among church educational institutions. This will facilitate an exchange of experience, scholarly and methodological resources, and mutually useful communication among teachers and students.

However, "work in depth" does not at all mean that the number of church schools will not grow. The specific needs of one or another region will be taken into account. As a rule, first there is created in a diocese a church school which after several years and after the accumulation of experience and the attainment of a certain level can be transformed into an ecclesiastical seminary.

--In the past year there has been a discussion of the question of the return to the Russian Orthodox church of real estate that was confiscated after the revolution. What is your view on the question of the restitution of church land?

--There is no talk of a full-fledged restitution. We have not put forward any demand to return all lands that were church property before the revolution. Cities, buildings, and factories have been built on many of these lands. The church would not want for its property demands to infringe upon the interests of people who even without this are suffering impoverishment.

Much more critical is the problem of the status of lands that are already being used by the church, that is, occupied or worked by parishes and monasteries. Before the adoption of the new Land Code these lands were used by the church without charge and for an indefinite period of time, but henceforth the land is supposed to be either leased or owned, and the latter case is impossible when a monument of architecture that belongs to the state stands on a parcel. This topic requires careful joint study be representatives of the Russian Orthodox church, other religious organizations, and the ministries and offices of the economic block and legislative bodies of the Russian federation.

--What kind of charitable programs does the Russian Orthodox church have today and what does it plan to do in 2003 in the area of charity? Will the social ministry of the church develop? Will social centers for the care of the elderly, invalids, and orphans be opened up?

--The social ministry of the church is a very broad concept. It goes beyond the framework of charity. The love of God extends to society and the nation just as it does to an individual person. Recalling this, the church calls its people to help their neighbors and thus give life to the standards of Christian morality. Unfortunately, today millions of our countrymen are beyond the pale of poverty. Single elderly folk, severely ill people, invalids, refugees, and orphans are suffering especially. It is a delight to see that the policy of the state is becoming more socially directed. But the efforts of government alone are insufficient. And the Russian church, by following centuries-old traditions, shows active care for those who lack what they need.

The basic work in this direction is done by the dioceses, monasteries, parishes of our church, brotherhoods and sisterhoods, church charitable organizations, and humanitarian services. Orphanages and almshouses, soup kitchens and overnight facilities have been opened. Nursing homes have been built. Conducting charitable events at Christmas and Easter has become a good tradition.

I will give just a few delightful examples. In the village of Toporkovo near Sergiev Posad there is a boarding school that houses 250 children who lack parental supervision. The care of the school is conducted by monks of the Saint Sergius Holy Trinity lavra with the support of the Ministry of Transportation. Besides providing general secondary education the school provides the opportunity of mastering several trades. In the fall of last year, at the Khotkovsk convent of the Protection in Moscow province an orphanage for girls was opened. In the Vladivostok diocese, the Mary and Martha convent of mercy provides care for the territorial children's tuberculosis hospital, children's dispensary, the department of abandoned infants in the city hospital, other children's institutions, and even the military base. Clergy and nurses of the Rostov diocese help wounded soldiers in the regional military hospital. At the Nicholas Chernoostrov monastery in the city of Maloyaroslavets of Kaluga province the "Otrada" orphanage has been operating for girls from unfortunate families. The church participates in a program of aid to the victims of the flood in the south of Russia. In Moscow, Minsk, and St. Petersburg work has begun for giving aid to victims of AIDS. Such examples could be multiplied many times.

The church has many volunteers who help their neighbors selflessly. But their ministry could be much wider if religious organizations that are conducting charity were granted the full status of charitable organizations.

--What is the evangelistic activity of the Russian Orthodox church like now? What are the main tasks the church faces in this area? Are there enough clergymen to serve Russia?

--The church has always tried to fulfill the missionary call of the savior: "Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" (Mt 28.19). This was done even at the time that organized evangelism was forbidden. Now we have to revive completely traditional forms of Orthodox evangelism and work out and master new forms of this ministry. We have a broad mission field among the Russian people and other traditionally Orthodox peoples who live on the canonical territory of the Moscow patriarchate, that is, the majority of countries of CIS and the Baltic. In essence, we have to preach Christ anew to those who have Orthodox ancestors and even have been baptized but who have not received a Christian education and remain outside the churchyard.

The evangelistic efforts of our church in recent years have been conducted under the slogan "To every heart to the ends of the earth." Tens of thousands of kilometers have been covered by Orthodox missionaries in specially outfitted vehicles. The church-traincar in honor of the "Pointing" icon of the Mother of God made the trip from the west to the east of Russia, visiting more than twenty dioceses. In many settlements where the evangelists spent time, people had never before seen an Orthodox priest. A special direction of Orthodox mission is work with the nonreligious youth. The growth of drug addiction and alcoholism among young people testifies to the spiritual vacuum that rules in their souls. Some young men and women have fallen into the webs of totalitarian sects. Thus the antisectarian polemic and rehabilitation of victims of pseudoreligions constitute important parts of our mission.

Evangelistic labors have developed at an impressive rate. In November 2002 outside Moscow the Third All-Church Evangelistic Congress was held. All of the topics I have just enumerated were the object of discussion by congress participants, who came from various regions of Russia and the near and far abroad. The recommendations adopted by the congress lie at the base of the Orthodox mission for the near future.

--Do you hope for an improvement of relations with the Catholic church?

--I have such hope, and it is based on our continued cooperation with Catholic dioceses, monasteries, charitable and educational institutions, and public organizations. Many right-thinking people in the Catholic church realize that the confrontation of the two great Christian traditions---the eastern and western--is pleasing only to those who are trying to weaken the Christian testimony in modern society and put it into parentheses of public life.

However the Vatican's position continues unchanged. In addition, 2002 was marked by a number of actions that delivered substantial blows to our mutual relations. In the first place one must name the transformation of the apostolic administrations into dioceses with centers in Moscow, Saratov, Novosibirsk and Irkutsk that the Roman Catholic church undertook. This decision was made by the Vatican leadership without any consultation with the Russian Orthodox church and seems more like an attempt to create a "parallel authority" in a hostile country than relations with a sister church which, according to the formulation of the second Vatican council, our church is for the Catholic church. It is our conviction that such steps were predicated on the Vatican's desire to conduct active proselyting activity among the population of Russia, a country with a thousand-year independent Christian tradition. Such activity is in profound contradiction with the apostolic principle of "preaching the gospel not in places where the name of Christ was already known, so as not to build on other's foundations" (Rm 15.20).

Our concern also is evoked by the policy of the Uniate church authorities in Ukraine. We have noted the creation in that country of a Uniate patriarchate with its center in Kiev, "the mother of Russian cities" and the cradle of Orthodox Christianity in our land, and it is yet one more step backward in our mutual relations with the Vatican and reverts to the level of the twelfth century.

Summing up, it is necessary to say that the Russian Orthodox church is open to dialogue aimed at taking realistic account of our wishes and the feelings of our believers. The prospects for improving relations now depends entirely on the Vatican's will.

--How are relations of the Russian Orthodox church with other traditional religions of Russia developing nowadays?

--Interreligious relations in our country can be called propitious. Centuries of living together within the boundaries of a single state and society have taught Orthodox Christians, Muslims, Jews, and Buddhists to live in peace, working together for the good of the fatherland and defending it from external enemies while respecting each other's views and traditions.

Questions that the present moment places before us are similarly acute for Orthodox and Muslims, Jews and Buddhists. We have to a great extent a common point of view on the problems of war and peace, the economy, international relations, and patriotic education. The object of our common efforts is concern for the moral health of society, support for the family, and many other matters.

It is the necessity of a consolidated approach to the socially significant topics that produced the creation in 1998 of the Interreligious Council of Russia that united the leaders of religious organizations that are traditional for our country. The years that have passed since the creation of this structure have shown the usefulness and effectiveness of its work.

And finally, taking advantage of the occasion, I would like to send my sincere greetings on the birth of Christ to the employees and readers of the "Komersant" daily newspaper. In the past decade the newspaper has acquired a reputation as an authoritative and informative publication, one of the most influential in the country. I note with satisfaction that this decade was marked by fruitful cooperation between the newspaper's reporters and the Russian Orthodox church.

I wish to the employees of "Kommersant" creative success and God's help in every good work and to every reader, peace, joy, health, and good luck. I hope that the collective of the newspaper will always inform society about the life of the church, about its holidays, efforts, and concerns in a timely and detailed manner. (tr. by PDS, posted 10 January 2003)

Russia Religion News Current News Items

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/.