Is the Orthodox Russian Church in cahoots with Putin?

archer75

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Nov 16, 2016
5,930
4,649
USA
✟253,749.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Well, as often happens, @dzheremi, you are more on top of things than I am, but I will venture a response, sort of:

1) Re: comparisons with majority-RC countries, I have zero direct experience of those countries, so I am not even going to pretend here. The "cultural Catholicism" that I am familiar with in the US, however, does not involve people identifying as RC who were never baptized and who never attend services (or maybe a funeral or something every so often). I have never encountered this. "Why do you wear that cross?" "I'm Catholic." "So you were baptized as a child or an adult, right?" "No."

I know nothing about the Coptic context, but I would guess (and you will tell me, I hope, if this is way off) that you, a convert, would be surprised to hear that a 20-year-old from an Egyptian family in the US sometimes attended services and even communed but had never been baptized and this somehow slipped through the cracks. Or that an Egyptian in Egypt was from a Christian family and "identified" openly as a Coptic Christian but had never been baptized.

2) With the language stuff, maybe I am being a dolt, but it seems to me that the situation that I described (not at all universal, but it certainly does occur) was different from your examples. You would not feel a strong need to test people's proficiency if they themselves say they have no / extremely low proficiency, right? "No, I can't speak Spanish, or barely." "Prove it in a laboratory setting!"

In other words, I meant that in this context, with religion (at least E. Orthodoxy), there is a component missing from the local conception that we on TAW would expect is basic -- having been baptized and chrismated at some point. "Yes, I'm an Orthodox Christian, but I was never baptized (and this isn't a problem in need of correction" is a possible sentence or sentiment in that context although we would not expect it to be so.

Similarly, we expect that one has or at least once had some solid, age-appropriate proficiency in one's "native language." But it is possible for someone to claim that language X is their native language and that they don't / can't speak it and never did or could. i.e. - you say "no differently than a Belarusian who can't speak their own language claiming to speak Belarusian natively would be incorrect" but I mean "a Belarusian who can't speak Belarusian (or not well at all) and says she can't speak it (or not well) and says it is her native language [родной язык]" is clearly not "lying," so must mean something other than what we expect by "native language."

In other words, I am saying that in East Slavic countries, in my experience, there is a current of a kind of "tribal identity" that allows people to claim as part of "who they are" although they themselves recognize and openly state that they lack something that we would expect is foundational to that claim.

None of which means that there are not baptized EO Christians, even lots, in the Russian Federation. But that in such a context, notions of religious identity are more slippery than we, with our focus on reception into a Christian confession / communion, tend to expect, and that therefore a survey of what people identify as means less, in our terms, than we expect.

In other words: yes, it is probably true in many places that more people claim faith X than go to church and do anything about it. But if we affirm that Baptism and Chrismation are necessary to be received into the faith...and some folks who claim that faith are not baptized and chrismated...then how are we counting people, again?
 
  • Informative
Reactions: anna ~ grace
Upvote 0

dzheremi

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
Aug 27, 2014
13,500
13,648
✟426,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Well, as often happens, @dzheremi, you are more on top of things than I am, but I will venture a response, sort of:

1) Re: comparisons with majority-RC countries, I have zero direct experience of those countries, so I am not even going to pretend here. The "cultural Catholicism" that I am familiar with in the US, however, does not involve people identifying as RC who were never baptized and who never attend services (or maybe a funeral or something every so often). I have never encountered this. "Why do you wear that cross?" "I'm Catholic." "So you were baptized as a child or an adult, right?" "No."

It's usually people who were baptized as children, maybe attended first communion, and then did nothing else ever again. Not a single mass attendance, not a single confession, no "hail Marys", etc. They probably still have a votive candle and a picture of the Virgin of Guadalupe somewhere in their house, but actually going to church, unless maybe it's for their wedding? Nah. But that says more about laxity in the parents' case, as unlike the case of the Russians and other Slavs under communism, there wasn't massive social pressure to not do these things with your children in Mexico. Such oppression, when you do find it, with the exception of outbursts of anti-clerical 'revolutionary' (communist/marxist) fighting in isolated areas that already had such problems for other reasons (e.g., Chiapas), is mostly a matter of Mexican history, pretty far removed from people's lives today. The last major outburst, the Cristero War, occurred in 1926-28 (it's probably what spurred my own grandmother's and great-grandmother's exit from the country, now that I think about it), as a reaction against the secularist and anti-clerical provisions of the Mexican constitution of 1917. That ended with a peace treaty between the Cristeros (Catholic faction) and the government, reestablishing the Catholic Church in Mexico by the end of the 1920s, even if technically some of the limitations placed on it (mostly in the area of land ownership) were still on the books until the 1990s. In the Soviet case...well, you know how that went, with the many, many martyrs and the destruction of churches and so forth.

I know nothing about the Coptic context, but I would guess (and you will tell me, I hope, if this is way off) that you, a convert, would be surprised to hear that a 20-year-old from an Egyptian family in the US sometimes attended services and even communed but had never been baptized and this somehow slipped through the cracks. Or that an Egyptian in Egypt was from a Christian family and "identified" openly as a Coptic Christian but had never been baptized.

Considering that weekly communion is the standard in the Coptic Orthodox Church, I have a very hard time envisioning a set of circumstances under which this would happen. For sure, you can go an not commune (heck, I knew several people back in NM who did just that, as they had married outside of the communion upon coming to the US, so they were canonically forbidden from receiving), but it's taken to be a sign that there is something very wrong, and people do notice it, and comment on it. We had an Ethiopian woman with us for my first year in NM, and the Egyptians, who didn't know that it is not the norm for Ethiopians to regularly receive in their own Church, bothered abouna so much about her (out of concern as to why she wasn't receiving with us) that he told them to leave it alone and never ask about it again. So if there was some kid who people knew wasn't baptized for whatever reason, maybe he could get away with it once (say, with a visiting priest who didn't know his background), but eventually someone would probably complain to the priest, bishop, or just among themselves loudly enough that it would get back to the kid in question, and next time he would be outright refused.

I've run into exactly one "Coptic atheist" online, but never this sort of "I'm Coptic but not baptized" thing. I can't really see how that could work. Being Coptic in Egpyt, Libya, Sudan, etc. I suspect is not like being Eastern Orthodox in an Eastern Orthodox-majority country. For sure, plenty probably go inactive and stay that way for years (I knew at least one guy in my parish who, according to his own admission, didn't go to liturgy or practice at all for 9 years while he was living in some island in the tropics somewhere), but they were still baptized, they still carry Christian names, they were still tattooed with the cross on their wrists as toddlers (as is custom), etc. You can't really 'blend in' in the same way that you might as one of 300 million Eastern Orthodox or whatever. It's sort of like the difference between an EO missionary parish and a huge RC parish: the smaller parish of only a few families isn't going to get away with not having their children baptized, while the giant RC parish of 600 families is just too big, administratively, to see to it that absolutely every one of the 4,5, 6 kids from every one of these large Catholic families has met all the milestones that religion places before communion. (Generally speaking.) Add to that innovations like "extraordinary eucharistic ministers" (laypeople who give out the eucharistic host in a conveyor belt like fashion...how they would know that the person receiving had recently confessed or was even Catholic is beyond me) and yeah...you see where I'm going with this.

I'm not going to say that it would never happen. I am going to say that here is one Coptic bishop's (HG Bishop Abanoub of Mokattam) response to people who have ideas about going to church not for communion, but out of cultural attachment or for other reasons:


Granted, the context here was different than in Russia: the Protestants had infested the cave-church of St. Simon the Tanner with their nonsense for some time and HG had to clean house (thanks be to God, he did exactly that), but his point that any who go anywhere else should be witnessed that they confess and are communed (in repentance, as a condition of returning to Orthodoxy from Protestant heresies previously preached there), and especially his story about the woman who had been influenced by the Protestants to the point of going to church for months in a row to "grow" with no connection to communion whatsoever is instructive as to your hypothetical. Could such a person exist? For sure. I believe HG's example is one such person; but then pay attention to the response: "No, you can't do that", basically. So it's as though in Egypt there is not the 'room' to be such a person. Maybe there are too few Coptic Orthodox to begin with. You will be found out and thrown out, eventually. You don't get to blend in as some nobody.


Translation (from the video uploader; emphasis mine): "Here we will sing Orthodox hymns, which all 20 million Coptic Orthodox rejoice in... He who wants to sing Protestant, or non-Orthodox, hymns... is free to leave along with those we have already sent out, and we here will sing Orthodox hymns."

2) With the language stuff, maybe I am being a dolt, but it seems to me that the situation that I described (not at all universal, but it certainly does occur) was different from your examples. You would not feel a strong need to test people's proficiency if they themselves say they have no / extremely low proficiency, right? "No, I can't speak Spanish, or barely." "Prove it in a laboratory setting!"

Sorry, I could've been clearer as to how this related to what you wrote. I only meant it as an example that, yes, people can be wrong about what we would take to be basic components of definitions of what it means to 'be' whatever it is they say they are -- but, at the same time, language is not such a good point of comparison, as fluency, usage, etc. are all measurable according to this or that metric. What similar metric is there to measure whether or not someone who is claiming to be Orthodox actually is? And even if it were found and agreed upon, how would that change people's self-identification on surveys, which is how they come up with stats regarding religion in countries and populations anyway?

In other words, I meant that in this context, with religion (at least E. Orthodoxy), there is a component missing from the local conception that we on TAW would expect is basic -- having been baptized and chrismated at some point. "Yes, I'm an Orthodox Christian, but I was never baptized (and this isn't a problem in need of correction" is a possible sentence or sentiment in that context although we would not expect it to be so.

Yeah, I can see that. I've been here long enough to see enough inquirers change their listed faith as soon as they begin inquiring, rather than after they are baptized and charismated. Again, what can you really do? You have a stronger ethos regarding such things on the internet, I suppose, because it's like a phone survey that never stops running: those who reply are those with the time and inclination to do so, so they have more opinions about these things. Again, my only point is that doesn't actually change how people self-identify, and if you'd want to get at a number that goes by something other than self-identification (which would probably still rely on self-reporting, so it's the same basic problem,just shifted over slightly), you'd have to create a litmus test that would be very unlikely to be all that informative or agreeable across the board outside of your group of like-minded folks who already thought the same or nearly the same regarding who can/can't or should/shouldn't call themselves Orthodox and why.

Similarly, we expect that one has or at least once had some solid, age-appropriate proficiency in one's "native language." But it is possible for someone to claim that language X is their native language and that they don't / can't speak it and never did or could. i.e. - you say "no differently than a Belarusian who can't speak their own language claiming to speak Belarusian natively would be incorrect" but I mean "a Belarusian who can't speak Belarusian (or not well at all) and says she can't speak it (or not well) and says it is her native language [родной язык]" is clearly not "lying," so must mean something other than what we expect by "native language."

Yes, I see your point.

In other words, I am saying that in East Slavic countries, in my experience, there is a current of a kind of "tribal identity" that allows people to claim as part of "who they are" although they themselves recognize and openly state that they lack something that we would expect is foundational to that claim.

Yes. Again, since everything is by self-identification, this shouldn't be too surprising.

None of which means that there are not baptized EO Christians, even lots, in the Russian Federation. But that in such a context, notions of religious identity are more slippery than we, with our focus on reception into a Christian confession / communion, tend to expect, and that therefore a survey of what people identify as means less, in our terms, than we expect.

Eh, maybe. Most polls or other means of data collection worth their salt will mention collection methods, margins of error, often attach examples of the questionnaires, etc. so that you can be relatively confident in their results. But there's nothing that won't suffer some kind of error, again due to the nature of the survey. At some point I guess you just have to say "Okay; we have different ideas of what this entails" and either leave it at that, or if you particularly want to make a big stink with the Russian Church and government,you could try going that route. I wouldn't, but that's just me.

In other words: yes, it is probably true in many places that more people claim faith X than go to church and do anything about it. But if we affirm that Baptism and Chrismation are necessary to be received into the faith...and some folks who claim that faith are not baptized and chrismated...then how are we counting people, again?

By self-identification, for lack of a better way. (Assuming that baptismal records were not kept/lost/destroyed or otherwise became inaccessible over the long years of the communist repression.)

What is the realistic alternative to get a more accurate count on the ground in Russia?
 
  • Informative
Reactions: anna ~ grace
Upvote 0

A Shield of Turquoise

Active Member
Apr 29, 2019
72
37
Southeastern Pennsylvania
✟15,080.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
As an institution, the ROC is pretty well engrafted with the state. Bear in mind that the present incarnation of the Moscow Patriarchate was created as a Soviet intelligence apparatus and this relationship seems to have continued more or less smoothly once the Soviet elite transformedinto oligarchs and mobsters. That doesn't mean of course that all clergy or laity of the ROC are Putinists or corrupt- there are many who, to varying degrees, are unhappy with this relationship. But the ROC is a very top-down organization and there's no indication that the top hierarchs have any interest in independence from the state.
 
Upvote 0

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,394
5,011
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟432,491.00
Country
Montenegro
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
The young women in the "Riot" performance / rock group are best understood, in the Russian context, as holy fools—Christians who, without regard for what others think of them or what humiliation they may have to endure, deliberately behave in a ridiculous, shocking, or outrageous manner in order to draw attention to "hypocrisy, brutality and thirst for power and gains" (list from Wikipedia).

Certainly the young women suffered deeply for their "irreverence" (being separated from their children, for one thing) which, as it called attention to aspects of the culture of the ROC that are deeply unChristian, was actually a more Christian and more Christlike act than is building unnecessary cathedrals and churches in a country where only a miniscule portion of the population ever goes to church at all.

There IS something that can be argued, criticism that can be leveled at the Church, specifically, over its silence at their imprisonment. But there is no justification for their behavior and certainly no comparison on any level whatsoever to saints or holy fools. Some of these same women did something in public so indecent with a chicken I am unwilling to describe it here, and performed a public act of sexual intercourse in a museum, to boot. If they were moved by a spirit, it was not the Holy Spirit, but a demon. Even in their misguided attempt to criticize the Russian government, their actions were unholy and disdainful of what is holy.

The government ham-handedly did what the government does: imprisoned them. The official Church was silent. It was the best opportunity ever to speak about forgiveness and the uselessness of forgiveness without repentance, but to insist that we do forgive them, because we must, and they totally blew it. I personally advocated 6 months of weekend community service 9 to 5 with an Orthodox hospice, orphanage, soup kitchen or whatever as an alternative to imprisonment, so that they might see love in action and have their hearts softened, allowing them to live their lives, but making them look at who and what they were really offending, which sure wasn’t Putin.
 
Upvote 0

StanU

Active Member
Jun 10, 2019
260
25
44
Toronto
✟16,907.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
There IS something that can be argued, criticism that can be leveled at the Church, specifically, over its silence at their imprisonment. But there is no justification for their behavior and certainly no comparison on any level whatsoever to saints or holy fools. Some of these same women did something in public so indecent with a chicken I am unwilling to describe it here, and performed a public act of sexual intercourse in a museum, to boot. If they were moved by a spirit, it was not the Holy Spirit, but a demon. Even in their misguided attempt to criticize the Russian government, their actions were unholy and disdainful of what is holy.
Gah, THIS argument again.
PR was engaged in political speech. Not "holy fool" nonsense; if you read the lyrics of that song, it is pretty standard-issue (I'd say boring) anti-clerical, progressive feminist rant (chief accusation is clergy living in luxury, a simplistic statement 80% of Russians would repeat). It is pretty direct towards Putin and, in one place Kirill, but tries to stay away from insulting the Church and religion (as well as de-facto atheists know how). In general, it was a silly stunt. What the DIDN'T do is commit an act they were convicted for, "aggravated hooliganism". This is a serious charge that involves bodily harm to someone or damage to property, not recording a video in an empty church and have some janitor's feewings huwt. So what the State did, and ROC participated in here, was clear injustice. For all their faults, PR have higher moral ground here compared to their persecutors.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: archer75
Upvote 0

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,394
5,011
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟432,491.00
Country
Montenegro
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Gah, THIS argument again.
PR was engaged in political speech. Not "holy fool" nonsense; if you read the lyrics of that song, it is pretty standard-issue (I'd say boring) anti-clerical, progressive feminist rant (chief accusation is clergy living in luxury, a simplistic statement 80% of Russians would repeat). It is pretty direct towards Putin and, in one place Kirill, but tries to stay away from insulting the Church and religion (as well as de-facto atheists know how). In general, it was a silly stunt. What the DIDN'T do is commit an act they were convicted for, "aggravated hooliganism". This is a serious charge that involves bodily harm to someone or damage to property, not recording a video in an empty church and have some janitor's feewings huwt. So what the State did, and ROC participated in here, was clear injustice. For all their faults, PR have higher moral ground here compared to their persecutors.
From this, I infer that you do not hold a church to be a sanctified place, and believe it to be a legitimate place to hold a political protest. That’s not an Orthodox understanding of what a church is.
And when you say “empty”, you evidently mean “Liturgy was not being conducted”. Granted. But there WERE (and almost always are) people praying in there. And all of that is irrelevant to the fact that the church is a holy place.
And again, I AGREED that the state acted wrongly and that the Patriarchate was guilty of silent acquiescence and not stating the Church teaching on forgiveness and the necessity of repentance to make the forgiveness effective.
None of that gives those women “high ground”. They broke into a holy place for an unsanctioned, unholy performance of the profane in a sacred place. And yes, even politics is profane and not sacred.
 
Upvote 0

StanU

Active Member
Jun 10, 2019
260
25
44
Toronto
✟16,907.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
From this, I infer that you do not hold a church to be a sanctified place, and believe it to be a legitimate place to hold a political protest. That’s not an Orthodox understanding of what a church is.
And when you say “empty”, you evidently mean “Liturgy was not being conducted”. Granted. But there WERE (and almost always are) people praying in there. And all of that is irrelevant to the fact that the church is a holy place.
And again, I AGREED that the state acted wrongly and that the Patriarchate was guilty of silent acquiescence and not stating the Church teaching on forgiveness and the necessity of repentance to make the forgiveness effective.
None of that gives those women “high ground”. They broke into a holy place for an unsanctioned, unholy performance of the profane in a sacred place. And yes, even politics is profane and not sacred.
I infer that you failed to comprehend "compared to their persecutors" line.

Politics is almost by definition "profane" ("of the Caesar"). It still can be said that people willing to speak out for things in the low-security Gulag with Internet connection that's modern Russia are already ahead of the moral curve of most people there. Even if one isn't 100% behind their particular brand of politics (though it IS still superior to the protoFaschistic stuff official Kremlin feeds to their loyal 86%).

What the Church could have spoken against is convicting people on a trumped-up charge (something that most Western media missed. There are no harsh laws against misbehaving in Church, we're not talking Pakistan; they were jailed for "aggravated hooliganism", a charge that does not fit what they actually did). Not only the State used employees of Christ the Savior Cathedral Ltd. as the "victims" in the trial (what did the Church had to say about that?), ROC actively helped the media campaign demonizing the women. Also, I haven't heard the Church position on the "expert witness" of people calling themselves "Orthodox researchers" that was the basis of the trial. There was a too-little-too-late letter calling for "clemency" for "clearly guilty" PR members. Not enough after helping jail three young women (one young mother), in my book.

People are wrongly accused by police all the time in Russia, and the courts convict in over 99% of cases. Prisoners effectively have no rights while in the system, and corruption is rampant. Personally, I don't much care except for Ukrainian POWs and other hostages in their "justice" system - but shouldn't ROC? One of the PR members (Samutsevich? I could be wrong) spoke out for inmate rights (most of whom, by her admission, have it worse than she did). Again, higher relative moral ground.

I did say the "performance was a dumb stunt, didn't I? To be clear: the cathedral WAS effectively empty, and PR didn't "desecrate" anything as people kept claiming. Still, it WAS insensitive and religiously and spiritually illiterate. Stop for a minute and think about it: the women are Russian, and at least one profess Othodox faith. Yet they revealed themselves to be effectively unchurched - as are the vast majority of Russians. Don't you think ROC, with all its platform and all its privilege, is responsible for that? Not even a little bit? They're complacent being Caesar's pocket Church.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: archer75
Upvote 0

Not David

I'm back!
Apr 6, 2018
7,356
5,235
25
USA
✟231,310.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
I infer that you failed to comprehend "compared to their persecutors" line.

Politics is almost by definition "profane" ("of the Caesar"). It still can be said that people willing to speak out for things in the low-security Gulag with Internet connection that's modern Russia are already ahead of the moral curve of most people there. Even if one isn't 100% behind their particular brand of politics (though it IS still superior to the protoFaschistic stuff official Kremlin feeds to their loyal 86%).

What the Church could have spoken against is convicting people on a trumped-up charge (something that most Western media missed. There are no harsh laws against misbehaving in Church, we're not talking Pakistan; they were jailed for "aggravated hooliganism", a charge that does not fit what they actually did). Not only the State used employees of Christ the Savior Cathedral Ltd. as the "victims" in the trial (what did the Church had to say about that?), ROC actively helped the media campaign demonizing the women. Also, I haven't heard the Church position on the "expert witness" of people calling themselves "Orthodox researchers" that was the basis of the trial. There was a too-little-too-late letter calling for "clemency" for "clearly guilty" PR members. Not enough after helping jail three young women (one young mother), in my book.

People are wrongly accused by police all the time in Russia, and the courts convict in over 99% of cases. Prisoners effectively have no rights while in the system, and corruption is rampant. Personally, I don't much care except for Ukrainian POWs and other hostages in their "justice" system - but shouldn't ROC? One of the PR members (Samutsevich? I could be wrong) spoke out for inmate rights (most of whom, by her admission, have it worse than she did). Again, higher relative moral ground.

I did say the "performance was a dumb stunt, didn't I? To be clear: the cathedral WAS effectively empty, and PR didn't "desecrate" anything as people kept claiming. Still, it WAS insensitive and religiously and spiritually illiterate. Stop for a minute and think about it: the women are Russian, and at least one profess Othodox faith. Yet they revealed themselves to be effectively unchurched - as are the vast majority of Russians. Don't you think ROC, with all its platform and all its privilege, is responsible for that? Not even a little bit? They're complacent being Caesar's pocket Church.
So should ROC force everyone to go to church or what?
I know you are Ukranian and that means you hate everything Russia does, but maybe you can try to be a little bit objective.
 
Upvote 0

StanU

Active Member
Jun 10, 2019
260
25
44
Toronto
✟16,907.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
So should ROC force everyone to go to church or what?
I know you are Ukranian and that means you hate everything Russia does, but maybe you can try to be a little bit objective.
No? Thought so.
It is actually not any kind of secret that ROC is failing the domestic mission; even people who reach out to them often remain unenlighted. As the Scripture says, serving two masters is... challenging.
ROC collaborates widely with Russia's law enforcement and prison community, on central and eparchial levels. There are tons of agreements, committees, and everything. Yet, the person who tries to do something for inmates is an apostate whom they themselves labeled "antichurch" and thrown to jail? Why is that? Because ROC is busy collaborating with LE and prison guard community, and they wouldn't want to embarrass their "partners" now would they?

In short, yes, they are in cahoots with Putin, they really are.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: archer75
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,394
5,011
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟432,491.00
Country
Montenegro
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I’ve tried to say that I agree on a number of points - the case of Ivan Golunov being a case in point where I do think you are right about how the Russian government behaves. I have also said that I think you are right that the Patriarchate has been wrongly silent at times when they ought to speak up. And I do agree with you that (having spent time in prison) it is a morally good thing to speak up for prisoners’ rights, and that the government was wrong to punish the women as they did.

You, on the other hand, do not admit the history of those ladies, how they committed an act of public copulation in a museum, or stuffed a small frozen chicken in their private parts to make their political points. Yes, we should respect mothers and motherhood. But it is wrong and false to make out the women of PR as noble heroes with a noble mission. Maybe they are becoming so NOW. I doubt it. The government’s treatment was the sort that guaranteed increased enmity toward both Church and state, and the Church blew its one huge chance to evangelize its enemies in a big public way, and to even bring those ladies into the Church. Nor do you admit that it is in fact evil, on its own, to mock divine worship. You immediately leap back to the evils I already admitted were evil.

The upshot is that you consider only one side of these stories, and single sides only serve specific political agendas, and do not aim at getting at the complete truth.
 
Upvote 0

Sorgen

Active Member
Jun 13, 2019
40
19
34
Seattle
✟730.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The West slanders Russia and Putin.

No, the west reports the fact that Putin is corrupt and authoritarian. Putin is unreasonably defended by some Orthodox because of the links he makes with ROC.

It is the same defense that evangelicals give Trump.
 
Upvote 0

Not David

I'm back!
Apr 6, 2018
7,356
5,235
25
USA
✟231,310.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
No, the west reports the fact that Putin is corrupt and authoritarian. Putin is unreasonably defended by some Orthodox because of the links he makes with ROC.

It is the same defense that evangelicals give Trump.
Tell me how Trump has helped Christianity in the US?
 
Upvote 0

Lukaris

Orthodox Christian
Supporter
Aug 3, 2007
7,838
2,533
Pennsylvania, USA
✟745,293.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
The crux of the matter is the Christian has to know Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. We must live out our faith within His Church in general obedience to the offices He established ( Leviticus 8, Ezekiel 3:16-27, John 20:19-23 etc.). Corruption within the Church is endemic ( see Ezekiel 34 etc.). We must know the Good Shepherd ( John 10) or we may fall into despair or worse. We must persevere ( John 16:33) & we have right to not be shafted but still the Lord stresses obedience ( Matthew 10:16).

I am nothing but I just felt a sense of realization to share something that might be helpful.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

StanU

Active Member
Jun 10, 2019
260
25
44
Toronto
✟16,907.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
You, on the other hand, do not admit the history of those ladies, how they committed an act of public copulation in a museum, or stuffed a small frozen chicken in their private parts to make their political points. Yes, we should respect mothers and motherhood. But it is wrong and false to make out the women of PR as noble heroes with a noble mission. Maybe they are becoming so NOW. I doubt it. The government’s treatment was the sort that guaranteed increased enmity toward both Church and state, and the Church blew its one huge chance to evangelize its enemies in a big public way, and to even bring those ladies into the Church. Nor do you admit that it is in fact evil, on its own, to mock divine worship. You immediately leap back to the evils I already admitted were evil.

Whether or not PR qualify as "noble heroes" have no bearing on their right to fair trial, does it? They would be pretty standard, unoriginal SJWs in US; thing is, they do look pretty good on Russia's usual background. Even if you would disagree with the substance or the prioritization of their message (I think they were protesting the crackdown on LGBT anchored in "gay propaganda" censorship law). Which is more of a statement on the state of society than on them.

As someone who actually listened to the offending... let's call it "song" - what "mockery of divine worship"? It's a punk rock song that sounds nothing like divine worship. The one line where they "pray" is meant to sound sincere. (BTW you don't have to listen to it, it's a pretty bad song). I actually think they tried to make it not too offensive; of course they're pretty ignorant, so it didn't work. The one profanity in it shouldn't be said in church (and a practicing Christian perhaps wouldn't use it at all), but would be considered mild by most Russians. Seriously, they suffered enough, you don't need to slander them. Or, for that matter, keep giving the platform for this PR disaster not only for ROC but, sadly Orthodoxy in Russia.

Now, of course, things get progressively worse; there are people getting criminal rap for retweeting an anti-government social media post.
 
Upvote 0

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,394
5,011
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟432,491.00
Country
Montenegro
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I don’t think there's much I can say to you, Stan. Your partisanism speaks more loudly than you do.

People who’ve known me here long enough know that I am no Putin fan boy, I don’t go around singing about how wonderful, how perfect, and how Christian Russia is, because it’s not, and I’ve said so often enough. Their government does evils - so does ours. I’ll even say that some of the evils offered are more brutal than the ones ours does.

When you talk about Russian invasions, you talk like a young person with no experience whatsoever of the Soviet Union, of the basic fact that it was a single united nation for most people’s lifetimes until quite recently. You’d have to imagine an analogous break-up of the US, and then erecting borders, and saying that Miami Beach is closed to New Yorkers, you need a visa to visit San Francisco, etc, then imagine California forbidding English in schools and government as a minority language, and the disenfranchising of a particular class of people in order to emphasize the nationality of the local majority. Then California invites the Chinese to build Chinese military bases on its borders, and how people in neighboring Nevada, Oregon, etc, would feel about that.

If I could, I would roll back, not only the Russian annexation of the Crimea, but all of the events you seem to ignore which preceded and provoked it (and there were evils on both sides, I remember the treatment of Timoshenko and dissidents as well as the growing disenfranchisement of Russians).

It’s the simple ability to imagine the tables being turned and putting yourself in the other guy’s shoes, to see and admit where your opponent is right. I can do it. I can do it for Russia, for the Ukraine, as well as for for Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria, and other places that the US has invaded. I think I can show that I’m fair-minded and can concede points with people I disagree with. I’m not getting that from you, and that indicates that we probably won’t arrive at common understandings.
 
Upvote 0

StanU

Active Member
Jun 10, 2019
260
25
44
Toronto
✟16,907.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I don’t think there's much I can say to you, Stan. Your partisanism speaks more loudly than you do.

People who’ve known me here long enough know that I am no Putin fan boy, I don’t go around singing about how wonderful, how perfect, and how Christian Russia is, because it’s not, and I’ve said so often enough. Their government does evils - so does ours. I’ll even say that some of the evils offered are more brutal than the ones ours does.

When you talk about Russian invasions, you talk like a young person with no experience whatsoever of the Soviet Union, of the basic fact that it was a single united nation for most people’s lifetimes until quite recently. You’d have to imagine an analogous break-up of the US, and then erecting borders, and saying that Miami Beach is closed to New Yorkers, you need a visa to visit San Francisco, etc, then imagine California forbidding English in schools and government as a minority language, and the disenfranchising of a particular class of people in order to emphasize the nationality of the local majority. Then California invites the Chinese to build Chinese military bases on its borders, and how people in neighboring Nevada, Oregon, etc, would feel about that.

If I could, I would roll back, not only the Russian annexation of the Crimea, but all of the events you seem to ignore which preceded and provoked it (and there were evils on both sides, I remember the treatment of Timoshenko and dissidents as well as the growing disenfranchisement of Russians).

It’s the simple ability to imagine the tables being turned and putting yourself in the other guy’s shoes, to see and admit where your opponent is right. I can do it. I can do it for Russia, for the Ukraine, as well as for for Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria, and other places that the US has invaded. I think I can show that I’m fair-minded and can concede points with people I disagree with. I’m not getting that from you, and that indicates that we probably won’t arrive at common understandings.

Awesome. Way to bring Libya and Iraq (and Syria, another theatre of Russia's "hybrid" adventurism). into the topic titled "Is the Orthodox Russian Church in cahoots with Putin?". It's not weird, not weird a lot.
Thanks for the russocentric twist on the history; funny how even this betrays the lie that were "15 national republics". Ever thought how that setup felt for anyone NOT willing to assimilate into the dominant russophone group of good commie drones? Say, did your father by any chance had to baptize you 500 miles from home so he doesn't lose his job? Had to stop using your native language for a chance to have an education and career? Bullied for speaking your native language in your own motherland? Beaten up for a desire to honor your favorite poet? Marched in a forced parade under fresh radioactive fallout?
For the peanuts gallery: "growing disenfranchisement of Russians" means that they are not automatically privileged anymore. Even in the Baltics where they have a "noncitizen" status it is not that simple (and yes, I have plenty of ethnic Russian relatives each of whom could vote in every election 1991-present - all competitive and mostly-free BTW, save for the aborted attempt at widespread fraud in 2004). So no, I don't have to swallow this propaganda, as I'm sure not many people in Russia in 1943 read Mein Kampf.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums