Patriarch Kirill's Weird Understanding of the USSR

[Second Chance]

In his Pascha 2015 address, Patriarch Kirill said:

"When spiritual heroism becomes the substance not only of the individual but of an entire people, when in striving for the celestial world the hearts of millions of people are united, ready to defend their homeland and vindicate lofty ideals and values, then truly amazing, wondrous things happen that at times cannot be explained from the perspective of formal logic. The nation acquires enormous spiritual strength which no disasters or enemies are capable of overcoming. The truth of these words is evidently attested by the Victory in the Great Patriotic War, achieved by the self-sacrificing heroism of our people. We shall mark the seventieth anniversary of this glorious date in the current year." (my emphasis)

Neat trick for an Orthodox Patriarch to ignore that the Great Patriotic War not only saved Russia but allowed Godless Communism to reign for close to 50 additional years. It was just after the Great Patriotic War that Alexander Solzhenitsyn was sent to the Gulag--that supreme example of "lofty ideals and values." I think Patriarch Kirill is a very intelligent man but he seems to lack perspective, an elementary level of wisdom, and respect for the New Martyrs of Russia who were tortured, starved, and killed for the sake of the "lofty ideals and values" of the Soviet Union.

 

[WPM]

Historical? ...

 

[Opus118]

In his Pascha 2015 address, Patriarch Kirill said:

"When spiritual heroism becomes the substance not only of the individual but of an entire people, when in striving for the celestial world the hearts of millions of people are united, ready to defend their homeland and vindicate lofty ideals and values, then truly amazing, wondrous things happen that at times cannot be explained from the perspective of formal logic. The nation acquires enormous spiritual strength which no disasters or enemies are capable of overcoming. The truth of these words is evidently attested by the Victory in the Great Patriotic War, achieved by the self-sacrificing heroism of our people. We shall mark the seventieth anniversary of this glorious date in the current year." (my emphasis)

Neat trick for an Orthodox Patriarch to ignore that the Great Patriotic War not only saved Russia but allowed Godless Communism to reign for close to 50 additional years. It was just after the Great Patriotic War that Alexander Solzhenitsyn was sent to the Gulag--that supreme example of "lofty ideals and values." I think Patriarch Kirill is a very intelligent man but he seems to lack perspective, an elementary level of wisdom, and respect for the New Martyrs of Russia who were tortured, starved, and killed for the sake of the "lofty ideals and values" of the Soviet Union.

Hi Carl

Is there a link to an English translation of Patriarch Kiriil's entire Paschal message? It might make a difference when placed in context.

 

[LenInSebastopol]

"Unto the third, nay the fourth generation........"
Patriarch Krill is only 2nd generation

 

[LenInSebastopol]

"Unto the third, nay the fourth generation........"
Patriarch Krill is still first generation from their abomination.

 

[Asteriktos]

The "lofty ideals and values" he speaks of seem to be spiritual rather than political. Though I'm not sure to what extent the Russian bramble patch of nationalism and desire to be the hands of God in the world can be disentangled, from my reading of the paragraph he doesn't seem to be speaking of the political system in power way back when, so much as the Russian people themselves.

 

[LenInSebastopol]

Not sure of your justification of his language, Justin.
Seems like a dog-whistle speech to me.

 

[Second Chance]

In his Pascha 2015 address, Patriarch Kirill said:

"When spiritual heroism becomes the substance not only of the individual but of an entire people, when in striving for the celestial world the hearts of millions of people are united, ready to defend their homeland and vindicate lofty ideals and values, then truly amazing, wondrous things happen that at times cannot be explained from the perspective of formal logic. The nation acquires enormous spiritual strength which no disasters or enemies are capable of overcoming. The truth of these words is evidently attested by the Victory in the Great Patriotic War, achieved by the self-sacrificing heroism of our people. We shall mark the seventieth anniversary of this glorious date in the current year." (my emphasis)

Neat trick for an Orthodox Patriarch to ignore that the Great Patriotic War not only saved Russia but allowed Godless Communism to reign for close to 50 additional years. It was just after the Great Patriotic War that Alexander Solzhenitsyn was sent to the Gulag--that supreme example of "lofty ideals and values." I think Patriarch Kirill is a very intelligent man but he seems to lack perspective, an elementary level of wisdom, and respect for the New Martyrs of Russia who were tortured, starved, and killed for the sake of the "lofty ideals and values" of the Soviet Union.

Hi Carl

Is there a link to an English translation of Patriarch Kiriil's entire Paschal message? It might make a difference when placed in context.

Great point and I apologize for not including it earlier. Here it is: http://rt.com/politics/official-word/249061-patriarch-easter-address-russia/

 

[Iconodule]

And presumably, when Americans talk about how the USA is the greatest country in the world, land of the free, etc., they are not thinking of slavery, genocide of native Americans, napalming villages in Vietnam, Jim Crow, sending arms to Suharto and other mass murderers, etc.

 

[Minnesotan]

Well, to be fair, had the Soviets lost the war, the Russian people would probably have been subjected to genocide and their land resettled with Germans, since Hitler saw Slavs as an inferior race. His ultimate plan was to build a "greater Germany" that would have included most or all of Russia.

The non-Russian indigenous peoples (such as Tatars, Yakuts, etc.) would have been even worse off for that reason.

 

[Luke]

The "lofty ideals and values" he speaks of seem to be spiritual rather than political. Though I'm not sure to what extent the Russian bramble patch of nationalism and desire to be the hands of God in the world can be disentangled, from my reading of the paragraph he doesn't seem to be speaking of the political system in power way back when, so much as the Russian people themselves.

Agreed.  It reminds me a little of what Fyodor Dostoevsky thought of the spiritual ideals of the peasants.

 

[underzealousconvert94]

Well, to be fair, had the Soviets lost the war, the Russian people would probably have been subjected to genocide and their land resettled with Germans, since Hitler saw Slavs as an inferior race. His ultimate plan was to build a "greater Germany" that would have included most or all of Russia.

The non-Russian indigenous peoples (such as Tatars, Yakuts, etc.) would have been even worse off for that reason.

Good point, if the USSR hadn't managed to turn it around at Stalingrad and begin advancing on the Nazis, Hitler would have been able to focus more of his military resources on repelling the Allies' attempt to retake Western Europe.  If it wasn't for the USSR, the Allies may not have won the European front.  Let that sink in.

I'm not saying the Soviet Regime wasn't evil, but when you compare 50 more years of communism (a relatively small amount of time compared to the 1000+ years of Russia's Christian history, and by that point in time the worst of the persecutions had ended) to what could have been, you have to admit that it wasn't the worst possible outcome.

 

[Second Chance]

Well, to be fair, had the Soviets lost the war, the Russian people would probably have been subjected to genocide and their land resettled with Germans, since Hitler saw Slavs as an inferior race. His ultimate plan was to build a "greater Germany" that would have included most or all of Russia.

The non-Russian indigenous peoples (such as Tatars, Yakuts, etc.) would have been even worse off for that reason.

Good point, if the USSR hadn't managed to turn it around at Stalingrad and begin advancing on the Nazis, Hitler would have been able to focus more of his military resources on repelling the Allies' attempt to retake Western Europe.  If it wasn't for the USSR, the Allies may not have won the European front.  Let that sink in.

I'm not saying the Soviet Regime wasn't evil, but when you compare 50 more years of communism (a relatively small amount of time compared to the 1000+ years of Russia's Christian history, and by that point in time the worst of the persecutions had ended) to what could have been, you have to admit that it wasn't the worst possible outcome.

No, it was not the worst possible outcome for the Russian people in general. Not necessarily so for the people who fell victim to Communism elsewhere. In any case, I suspect that this is yet another indicator of the decline and fall of the Russian Orthodox Church. I have often pointed to Metropolitan Hilarion's (Alfayev) past concerns regarding church-state entanglement, particularly in this essay http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2011/01/atheism-and-orthodoxy-in-modern-russia.html

 

[LenInSebastopol]

And presumably, when Americans talk about how the USA is the greatest country in the world, land of the free, etc., they are not thinking of slavery, genocide of native Americans, napalming villages in Vietnam, Jim Crow, sending arms to Suharto and other mass murderers, etc.

Another one!
Yes, we do know America to be the greatest country ever on the face of the planet; and we do consider all our sins as well even with a feeble attempt at rectifying/repenting; please notice our internal problems like slavery, Jim Crow and Native Americans all of which we have tried to make amends, redress, fix, overcome and work diligently at it, but that does not fit into the communist/populist narrative, does it?
Vietnam was a war issue, and you are right, we never declared war with that as our error. Had we done so, much like the current 'war' status', things would have turned out differently.
I know to little about Indonesian politics, but I trust since his departure everybody is happier now and gov't control has eased up, especially in light of the Muslim population, no?

 

[biro]

And presumably, when Americans talk about how the USA is the greatest country in the world, land of the free, etc., they are not thinking of slavery, genocide of native Americans, napalming villages in Vietnam, Jim Crow, sending arms to Suharto and other mass murderers, etc.

Most other countries have done similar things.

 

[RobS]

And presumably, when Americans talk about how the USA is the greatest country in the world, land of the free, etc., they are not thinking of slavery, genocide of native Americans, napalming villages in Vietnam, Jim Crow, sending arms to Suharto and other mass murderers, etc.

Most other countries have done similar things.

So we are going to trivalize those events that America did by making a comparison to other countries?

 

[biro]

And presumably, when Americans talk about how the USA is the greatest country in the world, land of the free, etc., they are not thinking of slavery, genocide of native Americans, napalming villages in Vietnam, Jim Crow, sending arms to Suharto and other mass murderers, etc.

Most other countries have done similar things.

So we are going to trivalize those events that America did by making a comparison to other countries?

Why say trivialize? Many countries have done a lot worse.

 

[RobS]

And presumably, when Americans talk about how the USA is the greatest country in the world, land of the free, etc., they are not thinking of slavery, genocide of native Americans, napalming villages in Vietnam, Jim Crow, sending arms to Suharto and other mass murderers, etc.

Most other countries have done similar things.

So we are going to trivalize those events that America did by making a comparison to other countries?

Why say trivialize? Many countries have done a lot worse.

That may be true, but that doesn't excuse what America has done either.

Our country has a very ugly past.

 

[LenInSebastopol]

And presumably, when Americans talk about how the USA is the greatest country in the world, land of the free, etc., they are not thinking of slavery, genocide of native Americans, napalming villages in Vietnam, Jim Crow, sending arms to Suharto and other mass murderers, etc.

Most other countries have done similar things.

So we are going to trivalize those events that America did by making a comparison to other countries?

Those things are trivialized with sunlight and talking about them often in the public square.
I do not find most of the Old World rectifying their internal issues other than imprisonment, repression via superior fire power and genocide; of course their history spans centuries which simply means they've been mucking up much longer than US.   

 

[biro]

And presumably, when Americans talk about how the USA is the greatest country in the world, land of the free, etc., they are not thinking of slavery, genocide of native Americans, napalming villages in Vietnam, Jim Crow, sending arms to Suharto and other mass murderers, etc.

Most other countries have done similar things.

So we are going to trivalize those events that America did by making a comparison to other countries?

Why say trivialize? Many countries have done a lot worse.

That may be true, but that doesn't excuse what America has done either.

Our country has a very ugly past.

I don't deny that.

 

[LenInSebastopol]

And presumably, when Americans talk about how the USA is the greatest country in the world, land of the free, etc., they are not thinking of slavery, genocide of native Americans, napalming villages in Vietnam, Jim Crow, sending arms to Suharto and other mass murderers, etc.

Most other countries have done similar things.

So we are going to trivalize those events that America did by making a comparison to other countries?

Why say trivialize? Many countries have done a lot worse.

That may be true, but that doesn't excuse what America has done either.

Our country has a very ugly past.

I gather you've studied world history enough to stand by that statement?
Yes, we, as all countries, have the butt-uglies in our past......a matter of interpretation is part of it, the other part is that currently, for a generation or more, the Providence and Goodness of this country has not been taught to folks under 50.........and what was sewed was anger, socialization towards rectifying the issue by tearing down the best parts and promoting failure ,a la European methods........folks left that rock pile behind for a good reason, and now there are those that wish to import the worst parts of that pile of cold rocks to our sunny shores!
One may only stand aghast!

 

[LenInSebastopol]

And presumably, when Americans talk about how the USA is the greatest country in the world, land of the free, etc., they are not thinking of slavery, genocide of native Americans, napalming villages in Vietnam, Jim Crow, sending arms to Suharto and other mass murderers, etc.

Most other countries have done similar things.

So we are going to trivalize those events that America did by making a comparison to other countries?

Why say trivialize? Many countries have done a lot worse.

That may be true, but that doesn't excuse what America has done either.

Our country has a very ugly past.

I don't deny that.

None should or it would not be fair, right or true.
Out of context it only IS ugly.

 

[Asteriktos]

Great point and I apologize for not including it earlier. Here it is: http://rt.com/politics/official-word/249061-patriarch-easter-address-russia/

I see no way whatsoever that the soviets can be read into that.

 

[Minnesotan]

And presumably, when Americans talk about how the USA is the greatest country in the world, land of the free, etc., they are not thinking of slavery, genocide of native Americans, napalming villages in Vietnam, Jim Crow, sending arms to Suharto and other mass murderers, etc.

Most other countries have done similar things.

So we are going to trivalize those events that America did by making a comparison to other countries?

Why say trivialize? Many countries have done a lot worse.

That may be true, but that doesn't excuse what America has done either.

Our country has a very ugly past.

One thing I would like to do at some point is write a coffee-table style book called "Unlikely Twins" that would be a side-by-side comparison of American and Russian/East Slavic history. The fundamental thesis of the book would be that the United States and Russia have far more in common than citizens of either country would like to admit, and thus a Samuel Huntington-style "clash of civilizations" between them is not inevitable, and the two countries would be better off as friends. It'd also argue that the United States is not, strictly speaking, a "Western" country, and as such it has at least as much in common with Slavic (and Latin American) societies as it does with Western Europe. So it'd be a book with geopolitical significance.

The book would be in Tête-bêche format, similar to an Ace Double Novel, and it would be arranged thematically rather than chronologically, so American historical figures/events/customs would be printed on opposite pages from their Russian/Ukrainian counterparts, accentuating the parallels. Both positive and negative subjects would be covered. These would include:

• Fighting side by side in World War II
• The abolitionist movement in the USA, and the Slavophile movement to abolish serfdom in Russia
• Dostoyevsky with Southern Gothic authors
• Religious history (the denomination that arguably had the most influence in the USA is Methodism, which is similar to Orthodoxy in some ways. Also, the two countries share St. Herman of Alaska in common).
• America's "Wild West" with Russia's "Wild East" (I. e., Siberia).
• KKK lynchings during the nadir of American race relations, with pogroms during the nadir of Russian/Jewish relations (both during the late 1800s).
• The American Revolutionaries with the Zaporizhian Cossacks, and the US constitution with the Bendery Constitution
• Indigenous Siberians with Native Americans (both in terms of culture and how they were treated). The Cossacks also have some similarities with Native Americans, particularly the "Five Civilized Tribes"
• Russian expansionism into other countries with the Mexican-American War
• Both countries had a common enemy (Britain) for a while
• "Manifest Destiny"/"City Upon A Hill" with "Third Rome"
• Marginal religious sects (Molokans, Doukhobors/Tolstoyans, Skoptsy, and "Russian Mormons", with Pentecostals, Quakers, Shakers, and Mormons) and attempts to suppress them (persecution of heretics in Russia, Mormon Wars in the US).
• Industrial Revolution/Gilded Age in the USA with socialist materialism in Russia; these played out in very different ways but both ended up eroding away at tradition and revolutionizing society in their own ways.

 

[LenInSebastopol]

Great point and I apologize for not including it earlier. Here it is: http://rt.com/politics/official-word/249061-patriarch-easter-address-russia/

I see no way whatsoever that the soviets can be read into that.

I don't know what "soviets" mean, but I agree with Carl in the first post. The quote from He Eminence seems that "those that have ears, hear". 
For me it kind of indicates to those in uniform-of-no-identity residing in Eastern Ukraine, "go for it".
But one's milage may vary!

 

[underzealousconvert94]

Well, to be fair, had the Soviets lost the war, the Russian people would probably have been subjected to genocide and their land resettled with Germans, since Hitler saw Slavs as an inferior race. His ultimate plan was to build a "greater Germany" that would have included most or all of Russia.

The non-Russian indigenous peoples (such as Tatars, Yakuts, etc.) would have been even worse off for that reason.

Good point, if the USSR hadn't managed to turn it around at Stalingrad and begin advancing on the Nazis, Hitler would have been able to focus more of his military resources on repelling the Allies' attempt to retake Western Europe.  If it wasn't for the USSR, the Allies may not have won the European front.  Let that sink in.

I'm not saying the Soviet Regime wasn't evil, but when you compare 50 more years of communism (a relatively small amount of time compared to the 1000+ years of Russia's Christian history, and by that point in time the worst of the persecutions had ended) to what could have been, you have to admit that it wasn't the worst possible outcome.

No, it was not the worst possible outcome for the Russian people in general. Not necessarily so for the people who fell victim to Communism elsewhere. In any case, I suspect that this is yet another indicator of the decline and fall of the Russian Orthodox Church. I have often pointed to Metropolitan Hilarion's (Alfayev) past concerns regarding church-state entanglement, particularly in this essay http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2011/01/atheism-and-orthodoxy-in-modern-russia.html

Decline and fall of the Russian Orthodox Church?  While Patriarch Kirill's buddy buddy attitude towards Putin makes me feel a bit uneasy, I don't understand how it constitutes the "decline and fall" of the entire Russian Church.  Considering the past Soviet manipulation of the MP, I'd say today's situation is rather mild.

 

[Second Chance]

Well, to be fair, had the Soviets lost the war, the Russian people would probably have been subjected to genocide and their land resettled with Germans, since Hitler saw Slavs as an inferior race. His ultimate plan was to build a "greater Germany" that would have included most or all of Russia.

The non-Russian indigenous peoples (such as Tatars, Yakuts, etc.) would have been even worse off for that reason.

Good point, if the USSR hadn't managed to turn it around at Stalingrad and begin advancing on the Nazis, Hitler would have been able to focus more of his military resources on repelling the Allies' attempt to retake Western Europe.  If it wasn't for the USSR, the Allies may not have won the European front.  Let that sink in.

I'm not saying the Soviet Regime wasn't evil, but when you compare 50 more years of communism (a relatively small amount of time compared to the 1000+ years of Russia's Christian history, and by that point in time the worst of the persecutions had ended) to what could have been, you have to admit that it wasn't the worst possible outcome.

No, it was not the worst possible outcome for the Russian people in general. Not necessarily so for the people who fell victim to Communism elsewhere. In any case, I suspect that this is yet another indicator of the decline and fall of the Russian Orthodox Church. I have often pointed to Metropolitan Hilarion's (Alfayev) past concerns regarding church-state entanglement, particularly in this essay http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2011/01/atheism-and-orthodoxy-in-modern-russia.html

Decline and fall of the Russian Orthodox Church?  While Patriarch Kirill's buddy buddy attitude towards Putin makes me feel a bit uneasy, I don't understand how it constitutes the "decline and fall" of the entire Russian Church.  Considering the past Soviet manipulation of the MP, I'd say today's situation is rather mild.

Early stage. It may be a good thing that ROCOR exists.

 

[Fabio Leite]

Decline and fall of the Russian Orthodox Church?  While Patriarch Kirill's buddy buddy attitude towards Putin makes me feel a bit uneasy, I don't understand how it constitutes the "decline and fall" of the entire Russian Church.  Considering the past Soviet manipulation of the MP, I'd say today's situation is rather mild.

Early stage. It may be a good thing that ROCOR exists.

All the saints and secular people in the 19th and early 20th century who were warning about the tragedy that was about to fall on Russia always spoke of the need for Russia to *repent* and that only after that the Church would have an actual revival there.

The insistance in saving face about the communist period, the lack of a Nuremberg for past Soviet-leadership and other who were involved, the lack of condemnation of communism, this all shows that Russia has yet not repented.

We will know it has happened when Russia deals with its Soviet-Communist period the same way Germany deals with its National-Socialist past: with tough hard measures against those who were directly involved, clear laws that censor any revival of it, and overrall social shame about it.

And if anyone thinks this would weaken them as a country, just look at Germany now. They have achieved a hegemony in Europe they only dreamed about in the past. But it can *only* be achieved with real contrition for their sins.

While Russia is unable to come to terms with how awfully wrong, evil and misguided they were in the 20th century, this historical age will not pass.

 

[Papist]

Decline and fall of the Russian Orthodox Church?  While Patriarch Kirill's buddy buddy attitude towards Putin makes me feel a bit uneasy, I don't understand how it constitutes the "decline and fall" of the entire Russian Church.  Considering the past Soviet manipulation of the MP, I'd say today's situation is rather mild.

Early stage. It may be a good thing that ROCOR exists.

All the saints and secular people in the 19th and early 20th century who were warning about the tragedy that was about to fall on Russia always spoke of the need for Russia to *repent* and that only after that the Church would have an actual revival there.

The insistance in saving face about the communist period, the lack of a Nuremberg for past Soviet-leadership and other who were involved, the lack of condemnation of communism, this all shows that Russia has yet not repented.

We will know it has happened when Russia deals with its Soviet-Communist period the same way Germany deals with its National-Socialist past: with tough hard measures against those who were directly involved, clear laws that censor any revival of it, and overrall social shame about it.

And if anyone thinks this would weaken them as a country, just look at Germany now. They have achieved a hegemony in Europe they only dreamed about in the past. But it can *only* be achieved with real contrition for their sins.

While Russia is unable to come to terms with how awfully wrong, evil and misguided they were in the 20th century, this historical age will not pass.

+ 1

 

[PeterTheAleut]

Thread locked pending review... People, this isn't the Politics board.

 

[minasoliman]

Forgive me for the lateness of this report.

I split and moved some posts that I considered crossing the line to political discussion into the politics section.  I am unlocking this thread.  Remember, since this is the "Religious Topics" section, please discuss the RELIGIOUS aspects of the original post.  You can also post historical aspects connected to this, but be very careful not to cross the line to politics.

God bless.

Mina

THREAD UNLOCKED

 

[mike]

Well, to be fair, had the Soviets lost the war, the Russian people would probably have been subjected to genocide and their land resettled with Germans, since Hitler saw Slavs as an inferior race. His ultimate plan was to build a "greater Germany" that would have included most or all of Russia.

The non-Russian indigenous peoples (such as Tatars, Yakuts, etc.) would have been even worse off for that reason.

Good point, if the USSR hadn't managed to turn it around at Stalingrad and begin advancing on the Nazis, Hitler would have been able to focus more of his military resources on repelling the Allies' attempt to retake Western Europe.  If it wasn't for the USSR, the Allies may not have won the European front.  Let that sink in.

I'm not saying the Soviet Regime wasn't evil, but when you compare 50 more years of communism (a relatively small amount of time compared to the 1000+ years of Russia's Christian history, and by that point in time the worst of the persecutions had ended) to what could have been, you have to admit that it wasn't the worst possible outcome.

No, it was not the worst possible outcome for the Russian people in general. Not necessarily so for the people who fell victim to Communism elsewhere. In any case, I suspect that this is yet another indicator of the decline and fall of the Russian Orthodox Church. I have often pointed to Metropolitan Hilarion's (Alfayev) past concerns regarding church-state entanglement, particularly in this essay http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2011/01/atheism-and-orthodoxy-in-modern-russia.html

Decline and fall of the Russian Orthodox Church?  While Patriarch Kirill's buddy buddy attitude towards Putin makes me feel a bit uneasy, I don't understand how it constitutes the "decline and fall" of the entire Russian Church.  Considering the past Soviet manipulation of the MP, I'd say today's situation is rather mild.

Early stage. It may be a good thing that ROCOR exists.

ROCOR fell for that sovieto-tsar mix as well (apart from a few folks that still try to rehabilitate Vlasov). Metr. Anthony must be rolling in his grave.

 

[LenInSebastopol]

I wish to thank the moderator, Minasoliman for displaying well something that I just found out about: Symphonia.
What I find curious, as an American maybe, is that such notions grew in an Old World context and the application here in US, has a different slant, no? The latest iteration being the SCOTUS decisions.
In a country where dictatorship (or war lords) was the accidental start and foundation of most all countries on the planet, this country stated with ideals (or is that to Pollyanish?) although we've not lived up nearly as well as all wish.
It is simply I find that relationship designated by that world, Symphonia, to be most curious in my Orthodox-Ameircan walk, as both have hierarchial structures based on deep cultural roots, while Americans have more than a slightly different attitude. Of course in the world, condemnation of all-things-Western, the US takes the brunt of criticism and being a focus for judgmental POVs.

Any case, Thanks, Minasoliman for displaying such.