The effort of freedom

Divided between the choice of opening to ecumenical relations and the temptation to look into its more or less recent past, the Orthodox church is facing today the complex process of religious freedom after 70 years of persecutions by the Soviet Communist regime and 9 centuries of monarchic power. Anatolij Krasikov, former Tass News Agency correspondent from Rome in the years of the Second Vatican Council and director of the Social and Religious Studies centre at the Institute for Europe of the Russian Academy for Sciences, discussed the matter with SIR Europa in Bose, on the occasion of the VX International Conference: “Transfigured Christ in the Orthodox Spiritual Tradition”. A FREE CHURCH. I well remember April 29 1988, the day in which Gorbaciov invited Patriarch Pimen and the members of the Church Council for a meeting. For the first time, an official of the Communist Party said, “Here believers and non-believers are citizens with the same rights and the same duties; together we shared the same past, we are part of the same present and we have the same future”. At the same time, he said he had given directions to prepare the draft-bill on freedom of conscience enacted in 1990. Celebrations for the Millennium of Russian Christianity (888) were under way, and that is where everything began. Shortly after, the Government Council for Worship and the KGB Department, which controlled the Church were both dismantled. At Pimen’s death Alexis II was elected with real elections among several candidates. Today, for the first time in the course of its history the Church enjoys a state of freedom. For nine centuries it was controlled by the monarchic state and then for 70 years it was persecuted and repressed. Affirming religious freedom is extremely important. Believers can pray openly and the Church is free to exert a positive influence on the development of social society. NOSTALGHJA . In the year 2000 the document “Foundations of the social concept” was adopted. Here, for the first time is introduced the social doctrine of the Russian Orthodox Church and the separation between the State and the Church is affirmed. There are however differing positions. A part of the clergy and of the bishops believes that owing also to a lack of well-grounded religious formation, the State should act for the resolution of problems relating to the Church and its mission. In order to erect a barrier to other religions and to religious movements, for example. This is perhaps a tradition of orthodoxy; each time that a new state is created, also a new autocephalous Church is established and often this Church is subjected to political power. These stands are reflected in a state-run structure which has always been marked by monolithic tendencies: first it was governed by Zarist totalitarianism and then by a pseudo-Bolscevic religion in the name of which the central power decided everything and freedom of expression did not exist. Since the change of regime has been pacific, the officials remained in their posts and there are those who would like to see in the Church a new party through which people can be controlled. Olden-times nostalgic supporters are trying to create an alliance with the fundamentalists in the Church. ECUMENICAL PROCESS . Alexis II reiterated on several occasions that it is necessary to follow the path of ecumenism although not everyone agrees; a few months ago the editor-in-chief of a new magazine asked him: “Your Holiness, do you always agree with the decisions taken by the Church?” and he replied sincerely: “not always, but in orthodoxy there is a rule of sinodality and therefore all bishops, including the patriarch, have to abide by this rule”. There are many who believe that ecumenism means submission to Western Catholics. The Third Ecumenical Assembly of Sibiu was even renamed “inter-Christian assembly” since the term “ecumenical” is almost completely forbidden. There is however a mixed Christian-Orthodox theological commission and the work procedes despite different views. In the meantime a pan-orthodox Council is being prepared. The decision to call this council was taken in 1961, after the announcement of the Second Vatican Council. Most of the topics are ready to be discussed, but the day of the meeting has yet been fixed since there are problems relating to the issue of primacy and the orthodox diaspora which worsened after the immigration from Eastern to Western Europe. In the first phase of political change, there was marked interest for religion and for the Church. Many people, a lot of youth entered the Parishes. This awakening might have been greater had there been no mistakes, which are part of the norm. Since nobody had experienced – neither the State nor society or the Church – a life in conditions of freedom.