Russian Orthodox as Deeply Split as at Any Point in History, Naryshkin Says

Paul Goble

            Staunton, February 28 – The Russian Orthodox Church likes to present itself as a monolith, but “this is not so,” Artyom Naryshkin says. Instead, it is deeply split between fundamentalists and liberals and may now be no less divided than it was at the time of Patriarch Nikon’s reform in the seventeenth century.

           

            “The ambitions of the Moscow Patriarchate are based on a myth about the unity of the faith. Church speakers insist that Orthodox unite the Russian people,” the Moscow commentator says; but “in reality, there is no agreement in the ROC on the most important ethical questions” involving “good and evil” (snob.ru/entry/189444/).

                Occasionally, Naryshkin says, this division attracts widespread notice as it did last September when 182 priests signed a letter in defense of political prisoners and other churchmen attacked this step as anti-Russian or even the work of the devil.  But most of the time, this division simmers outside the view of the broader society.

            “In the church,” he continues, “there are two diametrically opposed worldviews, what Erich Fromm called the authoritarian and the humanist. In his view, humanist religion is focused n man and his abilities while the authoritarian on the higher power which requires from man subordination.”

            According to Fromm and Naryshkin, “these are not simply different types of religiosity. Their bearers view relations in the family, the rights of citizens and the obligations of the state differently.” Each bases itself on the Bible but on different parts: the fundamentalists focus on the vengeful God of the Old Testament; the liberals on the loving and forgiving one of the New.

            “For Christian humanists, the love of God for people and the recognition of human freedom are the main thing,” but for fundamentalists what is important is the idea of divine power,” of a God who can act “like an oriental despot” and employ “any means” to enforce his will.

            “Liberals and authoritarians are grouped around various congregations, well-known pastors, and Orthodox media outlets.” These focus on different issues and take different positions on key issues.  The former approach the world rationally and seek to understand complexity; the latter insist on a religious approach and deny that there can be any other worthy of respect.

            The liberals “see the main value in the freedom and dignity of the individual,” while the fundamentalists subordinate those things to the majesty of God and his representatives on earth including the Orthodox state, something they believe Russia to be because its leaders occasionally attend church and declare that they are believers.

            The Orthodox media and educational system are clearly divided. Pravoslavie.ru and Tsargrad “express the conservative ideology and condemn the sins of the West.  Pravmir, on the other hand, is a bastion of liberalism and is often attacked by the fundamentalists for violating Orthodox norms.

            The most prominent church liberals are Georgy Kochetkov, Aleksandr Borisov, Aleksey Umnsky, Georgy Mitrofanov, and Petr Mesherinov. “The most important figure in the camp of the authoritarians is Metropolitan Tikhon Shevkunov, the founder of Pravoslavie.ru and the Sretensk Seminary.

            The two sides differ profoundly on their attitude toward the state, Naryshkin says. As long as it is formally Orthodox, the fundamentalists say it must be beyond criticism. Liberals in contrast assess the actions of the authorities “from rationalist positions and without any mysticism.” If it does right, it should be praised; it not, not.

            The two also disagree on how to treat scientific theories. The conservatives insist that no one should accept scientific findings if they contradict the Bible; the liberals believe that it is entirely possible to combine science with theology. They defend evolution rather than attack it and believe that as God gave human beings brains, he intended for them to use them.

            “Church conservatives are especially focused on traditional family relations” because they believe that “real Christians can grow up only in a patriarchal multi-child family where the roles of husband and wife are defined by God himself.” Family planning is thus “a horrible sin.” And parents must have the right to beat children.

            “For liberal Christians, large families are not a goal” in and of themselves. Some couples want and should have them; others, not.

            According to Naryshkin, “the leadership of the ROC does not try to maintain neutrality; it is entirely on the side of the fundamentalists” with Patriarch Kirill setting the tone and hierarchs and priests “understanding that a conservative position is useful for their careers. Only a few clergy are brave enough to oppose this official position.

            “Not all priests,” the commentator says, “are liberal or conservatives. Many have a contradictory mix of views in their heads.”  And all but a few believe they must stay in the ROC because they do not have any other church.  That gives the fundamentalists the upper hand now, but there is no guarantee that the liberals will not gain ground in the future.