talkpolitics | The Orthodox Cold War

There's been a struggle for influence between the big and small Orthodox Christian churches for centuries. And that's become very evident in recent days and weeks, as the first All-Orthodox Summit approaches. It's starting as we speak on the Greek island of Crete, but it's not devoid of problems. Actually it shows just how deep the rift between the 14 Orthodox churches of the world is. Some are calling this the Orthodox Cold War. It's a stand-off between the more liberal schools of thought, led by Constantinople, and the conservative faction led by Moscow. It's a conflict that has become particularly acute, now that the Cold War II is underway between Russia and the West.

The Russian Patriarchy, which is the largest Orthodox Christian church in the world, as well as its satellite puppies Bulgaria, Serbia, Georgia, and the Patriarchy of Antioch (in Assad-controlled Syria) have refused to participate in a summit that's been 50 years in the making. The Russians declared there was risk that the summit would split Orthodoxy into two instead of uniting it (quite a cynical self-fulfilled prophecy, really). The Ecumenical Patriarch, Bartholomew I of Constantinople (a Greek) who's officially the Orthodox "Pope" of nearly 300 million people around the world, wields de facto limitless power, and he'll be presiding over the summit.

It all started in a rather petty way. There were debates as early as last months about the distribution of seats of the delegations at the table. The Slavic churches were angry that the place the Ecumenical Patriarch was being given a prime spot next to the Greek church. Another problem was that not all 700 Orthodox bishops would be able to participate, but only 14 delegations with a maximum of 25 envoys each. What's more, every delegation would only have one vote, and the decisions would need full consensus to take effect. This meant the smaller churches would have greater influence than the big ones (Russia among the latter, with 100+ million Orthodox Christians).

Sure, some of these arguments are kind of valid, but the representatives of the defectors should ask themselves why they had initially agreed to participate, they had signed the draft bills and the agenda - and it took them so long to voice their objections.

Another point of contention is the so called ecumenical movement, which is an initiative for uniting the various Christian denominations, an idea which the more conservative churches (ours included) have rejected with the argument that "there is only one true church, and it is the Holy Orthodox Church - everything else is heretics and schismatics, and calling those 'churches' is theologically, dogmatically and canonically wrong".

Of course, it's a shame that the Orthodox churches refuse to sit around the table and start negotiating on the most pressing issues of the day. Sure, there's always competition between these churches - in some cases they seek power, or dominance over the others, or sometimes they act as an extension of their respective national interests. Church and state are often intertwined, as has become visible in Russia in recent years.

The problem with this summit, although it took 50 years to prepare, was that the Orthodox communities were informed too late about its date and agenda. But still, there's no turning back at this point. A possible cancellation or postponement would be a huge blow on Orthodoxy's unity. There've been such summits in the past, and at no point have all the Orthodox churches attended. So that's not a problem of legitimacy. It's a problem of unity.

And it was so important to start talking to each other. The most important thing right now is to start a dialog on the really important questions of the day. If we can't see them even talking to each other, then I can't see how they'd possibly be able to address any issue in a meaningful way. They've missed a fine opportunity to address their own internal problems too, especially the fundamentalist tendencies that have marred Orthodox Christianity as of late. The reformist faction was planning to expand the dialog with the Catholic church and the Protestant churches, and give the possibility of creating a permanent all-Christian synod a chance. An institution of this sort which could convene annually would be very helpful to all denominations.

The first attempts to convene such a summit date back to the 60s. Some of the issues that were valid back then, are part of today's Crete summit as well. But now there are some new questions that need addressing - like bio-ethics, or the Internet. Unfortunately, the summit won't be able to give enough attention to such issues, because it'll be forced to deal with things that should've been solved long time ago. Like the lack of trust and dialog.

We could take an example from the Second Vatican Council in the 50s, although there are some significant differences. For starters, the preparation of that one was perfect. And now, unfortunately, it's too hard to even find some of the necessary documentation for properly conducting the summit. Plus, during the Vatican summit some alternative ideas and new theological tendencies were discussed, while this one will remain stuck in the days of yore. For instance, women will have no representation there. Sadly, those elements who want to build a bridge to the other Christian churches, will also be under-represented. And these ought to find their rightful place in the structure of Orthodoxy.

Of course, all this conflict wouldn't make much sense, unless viewed through the prism of the geopolitical realities. The defectors have been led by Russia, and for a reason. Russia is trying to take the reins of Orthodoxy's leadership, and is now perceiving itself as some kind of paragon of the Eastern (Slavic?) world, and savior of the "traditional (read: conservative) values", in contrast to the "rotten West". The Russian Orthodox Church is but a mere tool of Putin, he keeps it well-fed and wealthy, and very influential, and gets unquestionable support in return. State and church have merged on so many levels in Russia (both institutional and cultural) that Stalin, Lenin and Khrushchev would've never recognized their country if they could see it now.

In their fight with the West, the Russians have turned their version of Orthodox Christianity into yet another powerful tool that's meant to win hearts and minds and keep them in line, and push strategic narratives that are very much akin to political Islam in the Middle East. In result, the Russian people now largely perceive themselves as part of a "civilization" that's separate from the West, alien to Europe ("Gayrope" as some call it), and often openly hostile to anything non-Russian. In this sense, Russia has been moving to the East and further into what they call "Eurasia" (whatever that's supposed to mean), and quite deliberately so. Much of the opposition to that process has been either removed or subdued, there's practically no intelligentsiya to oppose it. What's left is Putin loyalists at all levels, and the Church has done a great job in that respect, too.

That's disappointing, because the Church has refused to evolve along with the time, and has dragged the Russian society into this megalomaniac quasi-messianic delusion of theirs - all for money. Putin has built and rebuilt the Church's glory from pre-Bolshevik times, in exchange for loyalty.

What the future holds for the Russian church is hard to tell at this point. Will it continue to bash the satanic democracy of the rotten West, or will it rather accept it as one among many social evils (radicalization and retrograde backwardness being among those)? Will it stop playing with fire by propping up the personality cult to Dear Leader, and will it quit its subordinate puppy role of being a pillar to authoritarianism? Nobody knows. It doesn't look likely from where I sit. It's evident though that the Russian Orthodox church should heal itself of its chronic diseases of servility and xenophobia. Just like in the 90s, Russia needs an overhaul of its Church, now more than ever, because the Church's main rule is to help people, and preach love and peace, charity and mercy, instead of practicing state-sponsored theocracy and being yet another vehicle for someone's megalomaniac geopolitical aspirations. Then maybe we'll see a REAL All-Orthodox Summit taking place somewhere.