The iron pact between Putin and the Orthodox Church – Francesco Peloso

What is underway in Ukraine is not a war of conquest, nor a military aggression motivated by nationalistic or geopolitical interests to enlarge Moscow’s sphere of influence: it is rather the umpteenth version of the clash of civilizations; at stake is the survival of a Russian Christian society, rich in ancient values, which is at the antipodes of a West prey to the decadence of morals, its consumerism, its acceptance of sin as if it were just one of the many forms of human diversity that make up existence; for this we are faced with an irreducible conflict between light and darkness, between god and whoever wants to obscure his face.

It seems the reasoning of a mullah who was a follower of Osama bin Laden and instead to support these arguments was on March 6, on the Sunday of forgiveness (the beginning of Lent), the Orthodox patriarch of Moscow Kirill who broke, in this surprising way, the prolonged silence maintained on the war in Ukraine in the first weeks of the conflict. In fact, appeals were made from various quarters to the highest Russian religious authority to intervene publicly – also considering his strong bond with President Vladimir Putin – to say a word of reasonableness and peace on such dramatic events. On the contrary, Kirill justified the war in an apocalyptic perspective, within a nuanced scheme of total clash between good and evil, for which in Donbass – the rest of Ukraine in the words of the patriarch did not even exist – survival itself was at stake. of Russian Christian civilization.

Symbol of the poisoning of values ​​insinuated by the West towards the East was none other than the gay pride, the lgbtq + parade, emblem of that global perversion that raises sin as a model of coexistence. “For eight years there have been attempts to destroy what exists in the Donbass,” said Kirill. “And in the Donbass there is a rejection, a decisive rejection of the so-called values ​​that are offered today by those who claim world power. Today this power demands a proof of fidelity, a sort of pass for that ‘happy’ world, a world of excessive consumption, a world of apparent ‘freedom’. What does this test consist of? The question is very simple and at the same time terrifying: it is a parade of gay pride ”. “If humanity accepts that sin is not a violation of God’s law, if humanity accepts that sin is a variation of human behavior, then human civilization will end there,” said the head of the Russian Orthodox Church. . “And the gay pride parades are meant to show that sin is a variant of human behavior.” In Ukraine there is therefore a fight to stop “the denial of God and his truth about people”.

These are not new arguments in the area of ​​Christian (and also Islamic) religious fundamentalism; the contrast between two worlds – a pure “we” and an impure “them”, dominated by sin – is the basis of various political-religious visions that converge in a relentless attack on pluralist, democratic, open societies, however imperfect they are are. This is the same background that accompanied the attackers of the Capitol in Washington, which can be found in certain fringes of the US pro-life movement or in anti-conciliar movements in Europe. In this context, one can better understand the significance of that sentence pronounced by Pope Francis in conversation with journalists in the early days of his pontificate: “Who am I to judge a gay person?” A very simple but actually disruptive statement, compared to an absolutist and, ultimately, authoritarian binary scheme.

Kirill’s interpretation of Christianity, on the other hand, is strongly tinged with nationalism, and is inscribed in a throne-altar pact with the Kremlin which is a guarantee for both parties. For this reason, beyond the denial of God, the expansionist aims of the two institutions coincide: for Putin, Ukraine does not exist, it is a mistake in history, and it is part of Russia; for Kirill it falls within the canonical territory of the patriarchate of Moscow without further delay (and it does not matter if two Orthodox churches coexist in Kiev, one faithful to the Russian one and one independent, recognized by the patriarchate of Constantinople, in addition to the fact that there is a Greek church- Catholic in communion with the Holy See and other minor religious traditions).

Disagree
It is no coincidence then that Kirill’s words, all too political beyond appearances, have also been contested by orthodox sectors. Three hundred Russian Orthodox priests signed an appeal for peace, while Metropolitan John of Dubna (of the archdiocese of traditional Russian Orthodox churches in Western Europe) wrote an open letter to the patriarch of Moscow in which, among other things, writes: “Your Holiness, in your homily for Forgiveness Sunday you intend to justify this war of cruel and murderous aggression as dealing with ‘a metaphysical fight’, in the name ‘of the right to be on the side of the light, on the side of truth of god, of what the light of Christ reveals to us’… With all the respect that is due to it, and from which I do not depart, but also with infinite pain I must bring to your attention that I cannot subscribe to such a reading of the Gospel. Nothing can ever justify that the ‘good shepherds’ that we must be, cease to be ‘peacemakers’ whatever the circumstances “.

Finally, in such a context, the tiring fabric of ecumenical dialogue risks being overwhelmed by events. In this sense, the Vatican secretary of state, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, spoke of the risk of “a verbal escalation”, also with regard to Kirill’s speech; however, the Holy See, despite Putin’s clear condemnation of the war, tries to keep an open window for dialogue and negotiation.

In this perspective, Francis remains faithful to a model of the church untied from preferential bonds with this or that power, no longer an expression of an exclusively Western vision and whose vocation to dialogue and listening is not only a formal principle but an authentic option. to build peace and coexistence; for this reason the Vatican has been able to maintain diplomatic channels of communication open with Moscow even in dramatic situations such as the current ones.

Parolin, for his part, reaffirming the willingness of the Holy See to carry out a work of mediation in the conflict, said: “We must do everything to stop the war, which does not seem to end at all, indeed it is showing an increasingly cruel face, as evidenced by the bombing of the Mariupol children’s hospital. It is essential to start negotiations that allow solutions to be found “, because, the cardinal observed,” there is always a solution, if there is the good will of the parties and the willingness to make compromises. You must also be able to give up something important if you really want to reach the goal of peace ”.