September 11: Russian view

Official reaction of Moscow Patriarchy on September, 11th.

Patriarch Alexy Ridiger in his statement concerning New-York tragedy wrote:

"This is one more attempt forcedly impose to others one's own idea of world order, based on one's own world-view and religion anf on absolutization of one's own way of life." (Quoted in "Trud," September 20, 2001.)

Many Western observes have noticed bellicose statements of Metr. Kyrill Gundyaev. But the statement of Patriarch is much more eccentric: he put the actions of terrorists on a par with the "american new world order" and "globalism."

Poor Patriarch Alexy! First he stated that Americans must refrain from any attack on Afganistan. But after Putin supported U.S. government, Moscow Patriarchy changed her course and declared that Americans have the right to use military force.

This is the second case during this year when church nomenclature is obliged to change the course radically in order to follow secular nomenclature. First time was when Metr. Kyrill declared that Church approves capital punishment. Then Putin said that capital punishment will not be restored and Kyrill immideatly said that Church is against capital punishment.

Reactionaries reaction on September, 11th.

Yury Vorobyovskiy in "Pravoslavnaya Moskva" ("Russian Orthodox Moscow") (#252, p. 4):

"As Christian I feel pity to deceased and their relativers, but we must remember that USA made a lot of evel during last years. As Eastern Orthodox Christians we can remember Serbia. [One Serbian monk from Afon told to the author that] America will perish soon. Her downfall will be dreadful, and those in America who will manage to understand what's going on, will seek refuge in the Eastern Orthodox countries.

As concerns American evil, we must remember that this country is for long under the rule of free-masons, represantatives of satanism. All satanists sooner or later ... perish in dreadfel catastrophes, because they are more intimate to the one who is called in th Bible "father of lies."

I was a bit amazed to meet such an article in this newspaper, because "Pravoslavnaya Moskva" is usually less reactionary and anti-Western than "Radonezh."

Another, more reserved and official view on September, 11th, in the same (see below) issue of "Pravoslavnaya Moskva" ("Russian Orthodox Moscow") (#252, p. 5). Fr. Vsevolod Chaplin, speaker of Metr. Gyrill Gundyaev:

"Present conflict is a clash not of Christians and Muslims but pf the adherents of globalization, based on secular humanism and monoculturalism and integral religious worldview."

Chaplin admits that it is necessary "to struggle with terrorism." But his own logic dictates another idea: Russian Orthodox enemies of secularism must help to Muslims who struggle with secularism. From Chaplin's view (which is also the position of the Moscow Patriarchy) America is monocultural country and religious fanatics are multiculturalists! I always suspected that integrism (either in Christian or Muslim form) is a sort of irrationalism, religious perversion.

Certainly, Chaplin. who never saig a word against atrocities of Russian soldiers in Chechnya, warns West not "to punish whole nations" while struggling terrorist. Such hypocritical pacifists are worse than militarists.

Russian Orthodox columnists of "Izvestiya" (pro-Putin's newspaper) Alexandr Arhangesky and Maksim Sokolov promotes idea that after the explosions in New-York Western civilisation is finished, Muslim extremism won. Western Christianity and democracy have shown their inefficiency. The world is on the brink and nothing can save it. It is important to remember that these governmental propagandists has bitterly criticised NATO during war on Balcans. They represent anti-liberal wing of Russian Orthodoxy.

I hope West will not agree to unit with Russian anti-liberal ruling majority in order to oppose terrorism. Some other ways must be

What puzzled me more is that Fr. Veniamin Novik, prominent liberal theologian from Petersburg, wrote that now U.S. must "introduce inner passports"--common Russian practice--in order to oppose terrorism. Fr. Novik is known for his struggle for Christian modernism and freedom of consience, still, his understanding of democracy has obvious limits.

Russian Orthodoxy against Russian terrorism

October 14 for those Russian Orthodox Christians whose church calendar is old-style is the feast of "Pokrov," "Cover"" It commemorize the escape of Constantinopole from the assault of Russians in 866, which was ascribed by Byzantines to the Mother of God who covered the city with her mantlet.

The feast was most popular in Russian countryside because it coincided with the end of autumn agricultural works. The season of weddings began. Sometimes girls said a sort of conjuration: "Cover the land with snow and me with fiance."

In modern Russia the feast has less pragmatic character. Personally for me it is important that we celebrate the defeat of our ancestors (although most Russian don't understand that "barbars" were Rus'.)

When I hear that Western world is struggling with terrorists and evil, I always think that this struggle is first of all halved. Russia is still more terroristic state that Iraq or Afganistan.

Its government occupies Japan islands, German Eastern Prussia, Western part of Georgia (Abhazia), the Western part of Moldavia (so called "Pridnestrovian republic.")

Blessed but mistaken are those who think that Russia doesn't support cannibalistic regimes any more.

Russian government is still terroristic in its dealing with Russia's own population. This government is still illegitimate, because all elections since 1917 have been forged. The result of voting for Russian Constitution in 1993 or for Putin in 2000 were forged.

Russian government is bombing the part of Russia killing dozends of thousands people. Russian militia illegally killes more people than Russian mafia.

Western democracies pounce upon the second-rate terroristic regimes but are quite tolerant to Russia or Belorus'. Certainly, this can be reasonable from the military point of view: Russia is too dangerous an enemy. And it is not A-bomb which makes Russia dangerous, but its size. Western countries also avoided to the last moment confrontotation with Nazi Germany.

America entered into the struggle with Hitler only after Pearl Harbor. Western Europe entered the struggle with post-Communist tyranies only when her own interest in Balkans were concerned. America began the striggle with terrorism only after the explosions in New Yourk. The death of 7 thousands Americans became more important to her than the death of 50.000 peaceful citizens of Chechnya.

My country is spared, although it is my country, my Moscow, my home which must be bombed first of all by those who want to root out evil and terror.

This can be prudent but then all the rethoric about the war with evil and terrorism is complacency and/or hypocrisy.

Certainly, as an animal I prefer Afganistan to be bombed, not my country.

As human I understand inconsistency, irrationalism and scantiness of any use of military force.

As Christian I am afraid of supporting any violence: are we sure that we are correct in our constarining the words of Lord Jesus Christ about love?

So let us be more reserved in our readiness to struggle evil with force and let us ask God to reveal us some other, less bloody way.