R.P.Ts. IS OPENING NEW
WAR FRONT
WESTWARD—IN LATVIA
Religia Segodnia, 28
October 2019
Briefest foreword of the
conflict:
In 1836, the structure of
the R.P.Ts
(Riga vicariate) was created on the territory of modern Latvia;
In 1921, the Latvian
Orthodox Church received
autonomous status from Patriarch of Moscow Tikhon;
In 1936, leadership of
the Latvian church
broke off communion with RPTs and announced its transfer into
the jurisdiction
of the ecumenical patriarchate. But by 1940 Latvia was annexed
to the U.S.S.R.
and all decisions regarding transfer into the administration of
Constantinople
were annulled; Latvian church became again a part of the RPTs.
By 1994, the so-called
Latvian Orthodox
Autonomous Church (LPATs) was created, claiming that it was it
that is the
legal heir to all church property of independent Latvia before
its absorption
into the U.S.S.R. And although in the mid 1990s the LPATs was
clearly a
marginal structure, it provided Latvian authorities a trump card
in
negotiations with the LPTsMP [Latvian Orthodox Church of the
Moscow
Patriarchate]. Latvian officials feared the LPTsMP would become
a "fifth
column" in the state, lobbying for Russian interests. Therefore
before the
bishops and clergy of the LPTsMP, an ultimatum was placed:
either you will be
completely loyal to the Latvian authorities or we will transfer
all church
property to the LPATs. The choice was made, and in 1996 the
Latvian Ministry of
Justice ordered that for each Christian confession there can be
registered only
one religious organization. The LPTsMP remained the only legal
Orthodox
organization in Latvia. At that time there were about 300,000
Orthodox living
in Latvia.
In 2011, the ecumenical
patriarchate
began to display interest in the disfavored LPATs. In
particular, it was
permitted to commemorate Patriarch Bartholomew. In 2017, the
LPATs began
defending its right in the Constitutional Court, trying to get
the abolition of
the Ministry of Justice rule "One confession—One religious
organization." In the end, the Constitutional Court took the
side of the
LPATs and ruled the decision of the Ministry of Justice to be
contrary to the
constitution.
For some reason, the
LPATs did not
immediately begin trying to apply for registration and
apparently hidden
negotiations and church intrigues began. This whole process did
not especially
disturb the leadership of the RPTs, but after the outbreak of
the Ukrainian
fire, everything changed.
But now
on 24
October 2019, the Latvian Ministry of Justice registered a new
organization,
the "Latvian Orthodox Autonomous Church in the Jurisdiction of
the
Constantinople Patriarchate." Sources report that the official
ceremonies
for registration of this church are scheduled for 18
November—Latvian
Independence Day.
It is
extremely
likely that it will be on 18 November that the RPTs will open a
new front
westward.
In this
regard, two
points:
1. Constantinople is
again silent, as if
nothing is happening. Although it is hardly likely that the
Latvian authorities
registered an organization with the name ". . . in the
Jurisdiction of the
Constantinople Patriarchate" without the consent of the Phanar.
2.
There is not in
the LPTsMP a figure equivalent to the Ukrainian Metropolitan
Onufry in his
loyalty to Patriarch Kirill. As we wrote earlier, it is likely
that clergy of
the LPTs are leery of a new appointee from Moscow and have
secretly lobbied for
a law on a minimum period of ten years' residence in Latvia for
a potential
leader of the LPTs. It is also being said that on 3 October
there was a
"secret" council in the LPTs at which the charter of this church
was
changed. Now its primate is elected for life. If this is really
so, then the
new charter of the LPTsMP is in direct contradiction with the
charter of the
RPTs, according to which each bishop must submit a request for
retirement upon
reaching the age of 75 years. All this was supposedly done so
that the elderly
Metropolitan Alexander Kudriashov can remain at the helm of the
LPTs and a new
appointment from Moscow can be avoided. Apparently all
participants in the
Latvian adventure agree with Kudriashov. However, even if these
rumors do not
correspond with the facts, there still are no clear
personalities who are ready
to defend the position of the Moscow patriarchate among the
bishops of the
LPTs. So if Constantinople, along with the secular authorities,
wishes to
launch a Ukrainian scenario in Latvia, it is hardly likely to
receive a serious
rebuff from the Latvian Orthodox Church. (tr. by PDS, posted 28
October 2019)
Russian original posted on Credo.Press
portal, 28 October 2019
Editorial disclaimer: RRN does
not intend to certify the accuracy of information
presented in articles. RRN simply intends to certify the
accuracy of the English translation of the contents of the
articles as they appeared in news media of countries of
the former USSR.
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/.