Paul
Goble
Staunton, June 26 – Taking advantage
of the coronavirus, confusion in the leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church,
and the Kremlin’s focus on the constitutional referendum, Shiigumen Sergiy is assembling around himself “an army from throughout the country”
of thoses unhappy with both the church and the state, Aleksandr Soldatov says.
Flocking
to him, the Moscow commentator says, are various Donbass veterans, Cossacks,
monarchists, anti-globalists, home schooling fanatics, and priests and monks who
have been driven from their positions in the church (novayagazeta.ru/articles/2020/06/26/86030-kuda-privedet-bunt-glubinnogo-pravoslaviya).
“The underwater portion of this iceberg,”
Soldatov continues, “includes criminal leaders who are supported by ‘the elder’”
and who are only too happy to use his ideological cover to promote their own
activities. That all these groups have come together behind Sergiy is a
reflection of his roots in three “subcultures.”
He worked in the interior ministry,
then committed murder and served 13 years in prison, and then joined the church
where he was allowed to follow his own demons in the late 1990s because the
regional church administration didn’t have enough priests and expected pilgrimages
to the site of the murder of the Imperial Family to bring in revenue.
Sergiy was the perfect man to lead
such activities given his links to the conservative wing of the ROC MP and his
own willingness to work with criminal and militarist subcultures, Soldatov
continues. And if one adds to this, his
ability to draw on “the mystical” and “the esoteric,” one can see why he has
attracted the alienated from the patriarchate and the Kremlin.
What many now call “’deep Orthodoxy’”
is nothing new. It goes back to the 16th century or earlier and
reemerges during periods of turmoil, the commentator says, as does the approach
pushed by Sergiy and followed by perhaps as many as a thousand of his followers
of retreating into the taiga and breaking all ties with outsiders, church and
state.
The majority of those who have back
Sergiy, “following the ideology of the movement, are trying to minimize
contacts with state organs and some are even burning their passports.” And that
radicalism itself attracts many who have not yet been willing to take such
dramatic steps themselves.
Sergiy and his movement thus present
serious challenges first to the church and then to the state. The church risks
a split if it comes down too hard against him, but it risks losing its
authority with the state and with more moderate Russians if it fails to do
exactly that. At present, it appears to be using the pandemic to play for time.
Taking into consideration how groups
like Sergiy’s have become political in troubled times in the past, “the
Yekaterinburg bishopric is warning about the danger of disorders up to and
including the self-immolation of Sergiy and his followers if the monastery and
hermitages [he and his followers now control] are stormed.”
Such uncertainty on the part of the church
and state is giving the elder additional chances to attract support and not
just from the deeply conservative but from opponents of the church and the
state more generally. Any protest in
Russia almost inevitably displays that pattern, Soldatov says; and Sergiy’s is
no exception.
That makes the future of his
movement far more unpredictable and thus dangerous than many might think. And
Sergiy for his part is quite prepared to go to the brink. Since Soldatov wrote
his article, the conservative churchman has turned to the Internet to appeal to
Russians to boycott Putin’s constitutional referendum (ahilla.ru/shiigumen-sergij-romanov-zayavlyayu-vsem-narodam-rossii-ne-hodit-na-punkty-golosovaniya/).
No comments:
Post a Comment