Auf Deutsch:
Der Nationalratspräsident Österreichs besuchte die russisch-orthodoxe Kathedrale zum hl. Nikolaus in Wien
In English:
President of the National Council of Austria visits the Cathedral of St Nicholas in Vienna
Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin: Russian Orthodox Church and Economic Ethics at the Turn of the Millennium (II)
En français:
Quinze ans du patriarche Alexis à la tête de l’Église orthodoxe russe
«L'Athos et les moines d'Occidents»: conférence de Dom André Louf à la Représentation de l’Église orthodoxe russe
Le ministre russe des Affaires étrangères a rencontré le Secrétaire d'État du Vatican
Le patriarche Alexis a reçu le Président du Parlement italien
Le primat de l’Église des vieux-croyants: «Nous ferons tout pour mettre fin aux différends avec l’Église orthodoxe russe»
La réunion du Conseil pour la collaboration avec les associations religieuses auprès du Président de la Russie
Der Nationalratspräsident Österreichs besuchte die russisch-orthodoxe Kathedrale zum hl. Nikolaus in Wien
Am 12. Juni 2005 besuchte der Präsident des Nationalrats der Republik Österreich Dr. Andreas Khol die russisch-orthodoxe Kathedrale zum hl. Nikolaus in Wien. Vor dem Beginn des Gottesdienstes erzählte der Vertreter der Russischen Orthodoxen Kirche bei den europäischen internationalen Organisationen der Bischof von Wien und Österreich Hilarion Herrn Khol und seiner Gattin über die Renovierungsarbeiten, die seit September 2003 an der Kathedrale durchgeführt werden. Der Nationalratspräsident besichtigte die Kathedrale von außen und besuchte die dem hl. rechtgläugiben Fürsten Alexander Nevskij geweihte Unterkirche der Kathedrale, wo zu dieser Zeit die Göttliche Liturgie in georgischer Sprache gefeiert wurde.
Anschließend begaben sich Bischof Hilarion und Dr. Khol in die dem hl Nikolaus von Myra geweihte Oberkirche, wo die Göttliche Liturgie in bischöflicher Zelebration in kirchenslawischer und deutscher Sprache gefeiert wurde. Mit Bischof Hilarion zelebrierten der Vorsteher der Kathedrale Erzpriester Vladimir Tyshchuk, der Klerus der Kathedrale Erzpriester Chrysostomos Pijnenburg, Priester Radoslav Ristic, Erzdiakon Viktor Schilowsky, Mönchsdiakon German (Evseev) und Diakon Vasilij Bush.
Nach Beendigung des Gottesdienstes begrüßte Bischof Hilarion den Nationalratspräsidenten herzlich im Inneren der Kathedrale der Diözese von Wien und Österreich des Moskauer Patriarchats: „Diese im Jahre 1899 erbaute Kirche ist das majestätischste russisch-orthodoxe Kirchengebäude in Westeuropa. Heute, mehr als hundert Jahre nach ihrer Weihe, wird die Kirche generalsaniert, das heißt innen und außen vollständig renoviert. Die Kuppeln erstrahlen bereits in Gold, die Kuppeltürme sind bereits vollständig renoviert, zur Zeit wird gerade an der Fassade gearbeitet. Die Hauptarbeiten stehen jedoch noch bevor: sie sind für das heurige und nächste Jahr geplant. Wir hoffen, dass die zum Ruhm Gottes und zur Ehre des heiligen Nikolaus errichtete Kirche nach Beendigung dieser groß angelegten Arbeiten wieder in ihrem vollen Glanz und in ihrer Schönheit erstrahlen wird. Gleichzeitig wird die Kirche zum heiligen Lazarus auf dem Wiener Zentralfriedhof renoviert, wo die bei der Befreiung Wiens gefallenen russischen Soldaten begraben sind. Es ist denkwürdig, dass die Kirche im sechzigsten Jubiläumsjahr des Großen Sieges und im fünfzigsten Jubiläumsjahr der Unterzeichnung des Staatsvertrages zwischen Österreich und den Siegermächten wieder hergestellt wird.“
„Dank diesem historischen Vertrag“, unterstrich Bischof Hilarion, „wurden die gegenseitigen Beziehungen zwischen den Österreichern und Russen auf eine neue, qualitativ andere Ebene gestellt. Auch der Status der zwischenkirchlichen Beziehungen hat ein höheres Niveau erreicht. Nicht zufällig wurde im Jahre 1962 auf dem Territorium Österreichs eine Diözese des Moskauer Patriarchats errichtet, und die Kathedrale zum heiligen Nikolaus wurde zu ihrem Hauptzentrum. Hierher kamen orthodoxe Gläubige aus vielen Teilen Österreichs – Russen, Ukrainer, Weißrussen, Moldawier, Georgier und Vertreter anderer Nationalitäten, für die Österreich zur zweiten Heimat geworden war.“
Wie der Bischof weiter ausführte, nahm in den letzten fünfzehn Jahren die Zahl der aus der ehemaligen Sowjetunion stammenden Gläubigen so sehr zu, dass die Errichtung russisch-orthodoxer Gemeinden in Graz, Linz, Klagenfurt und einer Reihe anderer Städte notwendig wurde. Die Entwicklung der Diözese von Wien und Österreich des Moskauer Patriarchats erfolgte unter ständiger Unterstützung der staatlichen Behörden Österreichs. Die Diözese entwickelt sich in brüderlicher Zusammenarbeit mit den anderen orthodoxen Jurisdiktionen und auch mit den Vertretern der übrigen christlichen Konfessionen, in erster Linie mit der Römisch-Katholischen Kirche. Zum Weihnachtsgottesdienst des Jahres 2004 kam der Erzbischof von Wien Kardinal Christoph Schönborn in die Kathedrale zum hl. Nikolaus, und zu Weihnachten 2005 besuchte der Salzburger Erzbischof Alois Kothgasser die Kathedrale. Die katholischen Bischöfe in den anderen Städten erweisen den Pfarreien des Moskauer Patriarchats vielseitige Hilfe.
Am Ende seiner Ansprache wünschte Bischof Hilarion dem Nationalratspräsidenten und seiner Gattin gute Gesundheit, ein langes Leben und Gottes Hilfe bei allen guten Unternehmungen. Zum Andenken an diesen Besuch überreichte der Bischof Herrn Khol eine Ikone der Heiligsten Dreifaltigkeit.
In seiner Antwort dankte der Nationalratspräsident Bischof Hilarion herzlich für die Einladung und versicherte ihm und allen Pfarrangehörigen, dass er seinerseits das gute Werk des Aufbaus der Diözese und der Renovierung der Kathedrale zum hl. Nikolaus unterstützen werde.
Nach dem Gottesdienst wurde in den Gemeinderäumen zu einem Mahl geladen, bei dem Dr. Khol und seine Gattin die Möglichkeit hatten, das Gespräch mit dem Bischof und dem Klerus der Kathedrale zum hl. Nikolaus fortzusetzen.
President of the National Council of Austria visits the Cathedral of St Nicholas in Vienna
On 12 June 2005 Dr Andreas Khol, President of the National Council (Parliament) of the Austrian Republic, visited the Russian Orthodox Cathedral of St Nicholas in Vienna. Before the service Bishop Hilarion of Vienna and Austria, Representative of the Russian Orthodox Church to the European Institutions, spoke with Dr Khol and his wife about the renovation of the cathedral which began in September 2003. The President of the National Council examined the cathedral from outside and visited the lower church of St Alexander Nevsky, where the Divine Liturgy was being served in Georgian.
Bishop Hilarion and Dr. Khol then entered the upper church of St Nicholas, Archbishop of Myra in Lycia, where a hierarchical liturgy in Slavonic and German was served. Concelebrating with Bishop Hilarion were the cathedral’s dean Archpriest Vladimir Tyshchuk, as well as cathedral clergy members Archpriest Chrysostom Pijnenburg, Priest Radoslav Ristić, Protodeacon Viktor Schilowsky, Hierodeacon German (Yevseev) and Deacon Vasily Bush.
After the Liturgy Bishop Hilarion warmly welcomed the President of the National Council to the Cathedral of St Nicholas: “This church, built in 1899, is the most majestic cathedral of the Moscow Patriarchate in Western Europe. Today, more than 100 years after its consecration, a total renovation of the church is being undertaken, including the complete restoration of both its exterior and interior. The domes have already begun to shine with gold, the dome towers have already been restored and the restoration of the façade is underway. However, most of the work still lies ahead, and is to be carried out this year and next year. We hope that our church, built for the glory of God and in honour of St Nicholas, will appear in all its glory and beauty after this large-scale renovation. Simultaneously the restoration of the Church of St Lazarus at Vienna’s Central Cemetery, where Russian soldiers who died during the liberation of Vienna are buried, is being carried out. It is noteworthy that the church is being restored during the 60-year anniversary of the Great Victory and the 50-year anniversary of the signing of the treaty between Austria and the victor countries”.
“Thanks to this historic treaty”, Bishop Hilarion stressed, “the relations between Austrians and Russians reached a new level. The status of inter-church relations was also raised. It is not by chance that the Moscow Patriarchate’s diocese in Austria was founded in 1962, with the St. Nicholas Cathedral becoming its main spiritual center. Many Orthodox faithful – Russians, Ukrainians, Byelorussians, Moldavians, Georgians and people of other nationalities who have made Austria their second home – come here from all corners of Austria”.
As Bishop Hilarion then mentioned, the number of emigrants from the former Soviet Union to Austria grew so much during the past 15 years that Russian Orthodox communities in Graz, Linz, Klagenfurt and other cities became necessary. The growth of the Diocese of Vienna and Austria of the Moscow Patriarchate is taking place with the continuous support of the Austrian authorities. The diocese is developing in brotherly cooperation with other Orthodox jurisdictions as well as with representatives of other Christian confessions, above all the Roman Catholic Church. At the Christmas service in 2004 the Archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, visited the St Nicholas Cathedral, while on Christmas 2005 the Archbishop of Salzburg Alois Kothgasser was present. Catholic bishops in other Austrian cities render support in many areas to the parishes of the Moscow Patriarchate.
Concluding his speech, Bishop Hilarion wished the President of the National Council and his wife good health, many years and God’s help in all their undertakings. In commemoration of the visit Bishop Hilarion presented Dr Khol with an icon of the Holy Trinity.
In his reply the President of the National Council warmly thanked Bishop Hilarion for the invitation and assured him and all the parishioners that he would render his assistance in the good work of building up the diocese and the renovation of the St Nicholas Cathedral.
After the service a lunch was held in the parish hall, during which Dr. Khol and his wife had the possibility of further speaking with Bishop Hilarion and the clergy of the cathedral.
Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin: Russian Orthodox Church and Economic Ethics at the Turn of the Millennium (II)
3. The Code of Moral Principles and Rules in Economic Activity
The 7th World Russian People's Council, a public forum chaired by His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II and uniting clergy, politicians, leaders of public organizations, representatives of the scientific community and world of arts, took place in December 2002 in Moscow. This time the Council was devoted to the theme “Faith and Labour: Religious and Cultural Traditions and Russia's Economic Future”. In his message to the participants of the Council, Russian President Vladimir Putin wrote in particular, “I am convinced that without strengthening the spiritual principles of our life and its moral foundations it is impossible to ensure a progressive development of Russian society, to form an effective and socially oriented economy and responsible attitude to labour and to improve the well-being of the citizens” (http://www.russian-orthodox-church.org.ru/nr212172.htm).
Among the speakers at the Council were representatives of various political forces and adherents to various views of the ways in which Russian economy should develop. Among them were also representatives of the economic committees of the Russian Federal Assembly and leaders of major trade unions and business associations.
The Council's Word, the final document of the forum, stated in particular, “Today the governmental authorities, scientists, businessmen, public organizations are seeking for ways to overcome the negative developments in the economy. This search cannot be limited only to the field of figures and market laws. National economic problems cannot be solved without taking notice of the moral and spiritual state of society. Indeed, many reasons for the present difficulties are concealed in the human hearts and minds. Scientific recipes and governmental decisions will not make people happy unless the moral foundation of human activity is restored and the rules of behaviour for the businessman, worker, public servant and any other participant in economic processes are established and really observed.
“We have to learn to resolutely reject criminal amorality in economy and refuse to cooperate with dishonest and unscrupulous people. Those who do not pay wages in good time, humiliate the worker and stifle business through red tape deserve persistent and staunch public condemnation… Economy should be not only effective, but also equitable and merciful, addressed to the human being, not only money and goods. We should realize that the goal of economic activity is first of all the welfare of people, young and old, strong and weak, those living now and those who will come to replace them…
“The determination of the fate of national economy however should not become an "appanage" of officials, businessmen and economists. We all, the people, state, Church, trade unions, business associations, scientific community and civil society should see in Russia's economy a field for our care and creative efforts. The country needs an open and comprehensive dialogue on economic and social problems that will influence important decision-making” (http://www.russian-orthodox-church.org.ru/nr212173.htm; English version: http://www.russian-orthodox-church.org.ru/ne212173.htm).
The Council decided to develop a code of economic activity. Soon a working group was formed to draft it. It included representatives of diametrically opposite camps in the Russian socio-economic discussion, such as Sergey Glazyev, State Duma deputy, once a minister in Gaidar's government and now a scathing critic of the liberal reforms; Vladimir Mau, rector of the Academy of Nation Economy, one of the architects of the early 1990s reforms, who remained committed to his convictions, Ms. Yelena Katayeva, deputy chairperson of the Federal Commission for Equity Market. Pavel Shashkin of the Moscow Patriarchate Department for External Church Relations together with the author of this article assumed the functions of the secretariat and technical drafting.
The working group considered several approaches to the code, including a detailed analysis of specific economic realities and developments. It was ultimately agreed however not to duplicate the already existing detailed codes of corporate ethics adopted by business associations or the norms of public law. The document, which was entitled “A Code of Moral Principles and Rules in Economic Activity (http://www.mospat.ru/text/news/id/6353.html; English version: http://www.mospat.ru/text/e_messages/id/6682.html) was formulated on the basis of the ten commandments of the Mosaic Law (the structure of the Code represents a kind of the Decalogue) and the experience of their assimilation by Christianity and other religion traditionally confessed in Russia.
The document deals with a diversity of aspects of economic and social life. It states, in particular, the following concerning the religious ideal and material needs: “In the history of Russia, there have been various approaches to the issue of what takes the priority - the material over the spiritual, or private over public interests. Many a time the spiritual ideal has been sacrificed to utilitarian interests and vice versa. In some periods, things public were preferred to things private, while in other periods, the private to the public… Historically the Russian spiritual and moral tradition has been inclined predominantly to give priority to the spiritual over the material, the ideal of personal selflessness for the sake of the good of the people. However, the extremes of this option would lead to terrible tragedies. Remembering this, we should establish such an economic order as to help realize in a harmonious way both spiritual aspirations and the material interests of both the individual and society (Code, I)
The Code declares: “Wealth is not an aim in itself. It should serve the building of a worthy life for the person and the people. The worship of wealth and morality are incompatible in the human being… The accumulation of wealth for the sake of wealth will lead the individual and his business and the national economy to an impasse. Wealth in itself is neither a blessing nor a punishment. It is first of all is a test… The greater one's property is the more powerful one is over others. Therefore, the use of property in economy should not be of narrow egoistic nature and should not contradict the common interest. Honest economic activity excludes any enrichment at the expense of society. The welfare of conscientious businessmen and workers should correspond to their working contribution and result from their diligence in creating, utilizing and augmenting universally beneficial goods. It is a duty of a wealthy person to do good to people without expecting public recognition” (Code, II). This view of wealth is consonant with the traditional Orthodox perception of wealth as something spiritually dangerous but justified only if a well-off person uses his property to serve people. At the same time, the Code, also along the line of the Orthodox tradition, gives this warning against dangers generated by poverty: “One's poverty or richness in themselves do not speak of one's morality or immorality. A poor person who wastes his abilities or uses them only for selfish purposes is no less immoral than a rich one who refuses to donate some of his income to public needs. Poverty just as richness is a test. A poor person is obliged to behave in a dignified way, to seek to make his work effective, to raise his professional skills so that he may come out of his misery. State, society and business should help him in this endeavour” (Code, II).
The document addresses separately the culture of business relations, faithfulness to the word given and obligations assumed – commitments very relevant for Russia and other post-Soviet countries today. It states in particular, “Observance of verbal and written agreements is a foundation of harmonious relations in economy, whereas the failure to meet one's engagements will undermine the authority of both the business community and that of the country as a whole. Such conduct should be put to public censure. The forms of this censure are manifold, including denial of personal contacts, public boycott, expulsion from professional communities, etc” (Code, III). The document declares it inadmissible to indulge at one's working place and in business relations in such vices as foul language, obscenity towards other sex, assault and battery, drinking and familiarity. It condemns attempts to use the good name of one's firm for one's private purposes, deriving personal benefit at the expense of the common cause. The documents states: “Commercial fraud and service fraud lead to the loss of confidence and often to bankruptcy. Bourishness, laziness, negligence, untidiness of a worker dealing with a customer - all this antagonizes him and does damage to the business. Moral participation in economic activity is expressed, among other things, in politeness and propriety, self-control in critical situations, respect for other's opinion even if it is considered wrong. It was not accidental that the principal motto of the Russian merchants was this: 'Profit is above all, but honour is above profit'. One's fair business reputation is one's long-term asset. It takes a long time to build up, but it is easy to lose. (Code, III)
The Code Section IV speaks of the need to give the worker a time for rest and intellectual, spiritual and physical development, as well as an opportunity for changing the sphere and forms of work. Section V is devoted to social aid to be given to workers and the disabled. It is stated in this section that “state, society and business should be together concerned for a dignified life for workers, especially those who cannot earn their living. Economic activity is a socially responsible type of work” (Code, III). While social aid is believed to be a concern for the whole society, the Code places on the state a special responsibility “for the protection of the life, health and human dignity of old people, the disabled and destitute children. It should not only support the disabled, but also create conditions for developing works of charity undertaken by enterprises, religious and public organizations and individuals. The degree of society's welfare depends directly on its attitude to the disabled and the old. Allocation of a part of income for the support of the old and the sick, the disabled, and deprived children should become a norm for any profitable enterprise as well as any well-off working person, including an employee. An enterprise is called to give special attention to the retired and the disabled who contributed their own labour to its welfare. An employer who acknowledges the past and present working services of his or her employees reconciles the past and the future and increases the strength of his or her business” (Code, V). Section VI states that “work should not kill or cripple a person”. The point in question here is not only safe working conditions, but also the problem of crime. We read in the document: “Enterprisers should reject the unlawful methods of doing business with the use of force or threat of force. A desire of success by all means and disregard for the life and health of others is a crime and vice” (Code, VI).
The section occupying in the “economic decalogue” the place of the commandment “Do not commit adultery” is devoted to relationships between business and politics and to the problem of corruption. The document insists on the need to divide the political and economic power. The Code states: “The participation of business in politics and its impact on public opinion should be open and transparent. The entire financial support given by business to political parties, public organizations and the mass media should be made public and verifiable. Any secret support is to be condemned publicly as immoral. Private mass media should made open the sources, amounts and use of their funds. Production and entrepreneurial structures, which belong to the state fully or partly, should not show any political preferences” (Code, VII). “Zero tolerance” towards criminal and immoral practice is suggested: “Individuals and structures guilty of grievous crimes, especially those involved in corruption, should be unacceptable as business partners or participants in the business community. A morally responsible business cannot have anything in common with such things as traffic in people, prostitution, pornography, medical and spiritual charlatanism, illegitimate trade in arms and drugs, and political and religious extremism” (Code VII).
The commandment “do not steal” is expounded in a number of prescriptions. Thus, the document urges the state, businessman, worker and any citizen to cherish common and any other property. It condemns misappropriation of property belonging to one's business partners, deprivation of their negotiated share of income, unfair distribution of the fruits of work among partners and workers, depreciation of salaries and paybacks, failure to pay taxes, concealment of incomes, illegal withdrawal of the capital to other countries, as well as pollution which robs not only the present but also the future generations. At the same time, the Code urges the government to pursue a reasonable and constructive tax policy, stating, “The state existing on public funds should assess its share in the common wealth proportionally. Not burdensome taxes is one of the foundations of effective and moral economic activity in which citizens can cover public expenses without unreasonable burdens” (Code, VIII).
Very relevant for the post-Soviet economy are the problems of the competition and advertising ethics. It is not accidental that the Code states the following: “In competitive struggle, morally abject methods must not be used. Thus, a businessman should not hurl public insults at his competitors or spread wittingly any false or unverified information about his business partners. Advertisements containing blunt deception, exploiting the sexual instinct, encouraging people to drinking and smoking, using the spiritual immaturity of children and teenagers should be viewed as immoral and should not be supported by the business community. Advertising must not insult people's religious and ethnic sentiments” (Code, IX).
The document gives a separate treatment to the issues of property, declaring respect for this most important economic institute, condemning unlawful confiscation of property, while responding to some negative results of the post-Soviet privitization, stating, “The institution of ownership and the right to own and dispose of property must be respected. It is immoral to envy the welfare of a neighbour and to encroach on his property. Ungrounded requisition of property undermines economic stability and ruins people's faith in justice. The nationalization of private property is morally justified only if the way it is used obviously contradicts the security and life of people. In any case, property may be requisited strictly by law and with an appropriate compensation. This equally applies to the alienation of state and public property. Its usurpation is almost always accompanied with the destruction of national economy and suffering of millions of people. Privatization is not an aim in itself. Legal transfer of public property to private hands is morally justified. This should result in a real improvement of goods and services, lower prices, stronger economy and the building of a dynamic and harmoniously developing society with justice” (Code, X).
The Code of Moral Principles and Rules of Economic Activity, discussed by several conferences with representatives of business, trade unions and public associations and then adopted by the 8th World Russian People's Council on February 4, 2004, was published immediately. It was offered “for voluntary reception by leaders of enterprises and commercial structures, businessmen and their communities, workers, trade unions and all other participants in the economic processes including state bodies and public associations involved in economic activity” (Code, Preamble). The mass media were the first to give their response. In general, the responses were positive; critical voices spoke mostly about a “too general” nature of the document and challenged the very right of the Church to initiate a process of applying moral norms to economy. It should be observed that the Code was not actually designed as a specific list of technical rules regulating economy (these are sealed in public law and corporate codes which are already many in Russia). The role of this document is not to set forth any detailed regulation of the economic process, but to bring to its participants a moral message of the biblical tradition as it has been experienced by the Orthodox Church and other traditional religious communities. But the attempt to deprive the Church of the right to speak on economic and social issues is unacceptable in principle. Such attempts are dictated to a considerable extent by the inertia of the Soviet thinking, which finds support today also among some liberal intellectuals who see any public role of religion as dangerous.
Responses to the Code came from many public and political leaders including Russian federal ministers, the Federation Council members and State Duma deputies. The Minister for Healthcare and Social Development, Mr. Mikhail Zurabov, for instance, wrote that “the Russian Federation Ministry for Healthcare and Social Development, having familiarized itself with the document thoroughly…, gives a profound support to the ways it outlined for forming ethical relations among people in any sphere of work, in economic activity, in healthcare and others… (Archives of the Moscow Patriarchate Department for External Church Relations). The first deputy minister for economic development and trade, Mr. Andrey Sharonov, stated in his response, “in the Ministry's opinion, the implementation of most of the provisions of this document may have a positive impact on the development of business ethics, causing a change of methods in conducting business and in competition policy. It will also serve as a guideline in forming ethical standards in the professional work of self-regulated organizations” (DECR archives). According to the chairman of the State Duma Ecology Committee, Mr. Vladimir Grachev, “In solving economic problems, economic interests often prevail over ecological and ethical ones. Therefore, the solution of conservation problems and the protection of constitutional rights to the favourable environment directly depend on the spiritual and moral state of the whole society and on the principles on which Russian legislation is based. In this connection, the moral principles and rules set forth in the Code should become a basis for the development and improvement of Russian legislation and should be considered by all the committees and factions of the State Duma” (DECR archives). The response from the chairman of the Federation Council Committee for Social Policy, Ms. Valentina Petrenko, states that “the present study, in our view, is profound and structurally meaningful. The rules are intended for a wide range of readers including all kinds of commercial structures, businessmen and their communities, workers and trade unions. The goal is set and to achieve it all sides involved in economic activity should strive for good faith and dignified life not only today but also in the future. As a whole, this document is interesting to read and comprehensible, while being profoundly professional and unique in its own way” (DECR archives). The chairman of the Federation Council Committee for Industrial Policy, Mr. Valentin Zavadnikov, expressed their following idea: “The process of secularization as departure of behavioural manifestations from their religious basis is going on intensively in Russian society, and the farther society departs from the source of moral knowledge, the more it gives oneself over to regulations and prescriptions having their source in human rather than divine knowledge. God's commandments are comprehensive and universal; they have always been and will be above all human prescriptions and the Code of Moral Principles and Rules in Economic Activity is one of the illustrations to it” (DECR archives).
Responses to the Code also came from executives of many major companies, often stating that businessmen are guided in their work by similar principles and rules, which are also echoed in the corporate codes of these enterprises. Thus, the chairman of the Board of Directors of the Systema joint-stock financial corporation, Mr. Valdimir Yevtushenkov, says in this letter that the Code, “which defines the moral and ethical norms of business and relationships between partners and workers, reflects fully the Systema's attitude to this matter. Based on the Ten Commandments given by God and on the age-old spiritual traditions, the Code of Moral Rules will become one of the documents which will guide the Systema Corporation in its work. Besides, in the nearest future the Working Group for Social Responsibility will work out and submit to the Systema Board of Directors an internal document based on the Code of Moral Rules and defining the criteria of socio-responsible behaviour in business to be observed by Corporation” (DECR archives).
On May 28, 2004, a regional economic forum in Tver, held on the theme “Towards the Economic and Social Development of the Tver Region Through Spiritual and Moral Revival”, adopted a statement that stated in particular that “participants in the Tver Economic Forum declare their willingness to follow the Code of Orthodox Principles and Rules in Economic Activity and call upon all businessmen in Tver to join this code of honour so that once interrupted tradition of Russian enterprise may be revived in the Tver land (http://www.mospat.ru/text/news/id/7016.html).
Some journalists, speaking about the Code, presented it as an internal church document intended exclusively for “Orthodox businessmen”. At the same time, it was intended for the broadest possible audience including representatives of various religions and non-believers. It is for this reason that there are no quotations from the Bible or Christian theological arguments in the document. It is not accidental that in his response to the Code, the chairman of the State Duma Committee for War Veterans, Mr. Nikolay Kovalev, writes that “this Code, which expresses essentially the voluntary moral obligations of personal behaviour, will be appreciated, in my view, by all the confessions existing in the Russian Federation” (DECR archives). Moreover, on December 9, 2004, the Code was supported by the Interreligious Council in Russia made up of high-ranking representatives of the Orthodox, Islamic, Jewish and Buddhist communities in Russia. Speaking at a press-conference devoted to the Code, the chairman of the DECR, Metropolitan Kirill, said that the Code “is based on the ten Biblical commandments, which are part of the doctrine for the Orthodox Christians, the Muslims and the Jews. Buddhists' attitude to this document was also positive, since the Ten Commandments given by God to Moses on Mount Sinai express in full measure what is described in non-religious ethics as common human morality. Due to this, the document adopted by the Interreligious Council in Russia is equally significant for all traditional religions in Russia” (http://www.mospat.ru/text/news/id/8204.html). Also in December of that year, the document was supported by the Advisory Council of the Protestant Churches in Russia, which incorporates leaders of the Evangelical Christians-Baptists, the Pentecostals and the Seventh-Day Adventists.
4. Prospects for Orthodox moral influence on economic ethics
It can be hoped that the economic thought only begins developing in the Russian Orthodox Church and will soon experience a flourish unprecedented in the history of our Church even in the pre-revolutionary time, particularly, during “the Solver Age” of Russian religious philosophy in the late 19th – early 20th centuries. This development is expected to go in several directions.
Firstly, the voice of the church hierarchy will continue to be heard both on the level of the Church's profound documents reflecting her world outlook and on the level of responses to various developments in economic and social life. Thus, quite recently the actions in protest against replacing social benefits with monetary payments have prompted His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II to make the following statement: “The Church does not intend to point out to the state what economic mechanisms it should use in pursuing its social policy. What is important for us is that this policy should be fair and effective and understandable to the people. The recent developments have shown that these principles have not been realized in proper measure… Changes by no means should deprive people of a real opportunity to use transportation and communication, to keep their housing, to have access to medical aid and medicines. Otherwise a tragedy will become inevitable for millions of our fellow-citizens – those who worked for the good of the Motherland all their lives and today need care and protection” (http://www.mospat.ru/text/news/id/8397.html).
This statement was widely covered in the mass media, arousing largely a positive reaction, though some politicians and journalists hastened to appeal against the participation of the Church in the discussion on urgent economic and social problems. The most conspicuous statement was made by Vladimir Zhirinovsky's fellow-fighter, State Duma deputy Alexey Mitrofanov, who said that “the Church's interference in real politics is a dangerous process” (http://www.religare.ru/news13579.htm). This attitude was challenged not only by representatives of the Church and some journalists, but also Mr. Mitrofanov's colleagues in the Russian Parliament. The State Duma Vice-Speaker Sergey Baburin stated during the same session: “I would like only to welcome the fact that church ministers identify with their parishioners, with the people, and it is immoral and anti-state to prohibit them from stating their own point of view” (http://www.religare.ru/news13579.htm).
Secondly, various church research centres and Orthodox lay public organizations will continue producing scientific works and public statements concerning socio-economic issues. New studies, papers, analytical reviews and proposals devoted to the Orthodox economic ethics and analysis of economic problems from the Orthodox perspective are expected to appear. Orthodox public lay organizations will apparently give special attention to the economic globalization and international economic relations in general. Already now these themes are actively discussed at religious public conferences, their participants calling for a greater justice in the world economic order and protest against the growing control of the “gold billion” countries and their financial elites over the global market and the economic order in other countries. Criticism levelled against international economic organizations will certainly have an effect on the attitude of Orthodox public organizations towards the economic policy pursued by the governments in Russia and other post-Soviet countries. This criticism has not always been and will not always be competent and professional. It has been dominated by protective emotions. However, it cannot be disregarded either by the church hierarchy or the state.
The thinking on economic subjects will develop in other religious communities as well. Thus, the leaders of Protestant Churches, the Old Believers and the Jews have expressed their views on economy. Moreover, in case of the Protestants and Muslims, conceptual documents are being discussed now to be addressed to public at large.
Thirdly and finally, the state of the economy will be influenced by the gradual growth in faith of a considerable number of businessmen and workers. If in the early 1990s the outburst of religion as a fashion was still accompanied with crying religious ignorance and old women made up an overwhelming majority in churches of all religions and confessions, at the turn of the century the situation has radically changed. Most parishioners now, at least in cities, are families with children and people of middle-age. Many of them are well versed in doctrine, take an active part in church life and observe religious rites practically forgotten in the Soviet period even by many believers. Thus, various sociological polls showed that about 20% of the Russians observed Lent in the early 2000s (according to ROMIR Monitoring, they made up 22% in 2004; see the Blagovest-Info report of March 11).
A fasting menu has become a habitual diet in the canteens of state institutions and large corporations. There are more and more icons in offices of businessmen and at working places of ordinary workers. Finally, many companies give considerable aid to the Church, declaring Christian morality as motivation for their charity. There is a considerable number of enterprises whose entire corporate culture is based on Orthodoxy. One of such firms is described, without giving its name, by the Raschet (Account) economic magazine. According to the company's chief accountant, Ms. Irina Kryuchkova, “our culture implies common responsibility, confidence in other people, full trust in them. Working in this firm, I am sure that I will not be set up or swindled or cheated. I can fully rely on these people. And the most important thing is that I am very calm and comfortable here. Perhaps, it is also the Orthodox culture that tells, the humanity of the leadership and the happy choice of the staff” (http://www.berator.ru/raschet/article/2380). It should be noted that there are also companies in Russia who observe the Protestant and Muslim ethics.
In short, the influence of Orthodoxy and religion in general on the economic life of post-Soviet countries is growing contrary to all the allegations of Communists and liberals about “a near end of the religious renaissance”. The author of this article hopes that this tendency will continue, helping his compatriots still experiencing a moral crisis to fulfil themselves and build a free, fair and effective economy which will be aimed at people's welfare and will be unthinkable therefore without a solid moral foundation.
Quinze ans du patriarche Alexis à la tête de l’Église orthodoxe russe
Le 10 juin 2005 l’Église orthodoxe russe a fêté les 15 ans du patriarche Alexis au siège de Moscou. Le métropolite de Leningrad et de Novgorod Alexis (Ridiger) a été élu patriarche de Moscou et de toute la Russie le 7 juin 1990 par le Concile local, réunissant les évêques et des représentants du clergé et des laïcs de l’Église orthodoxe russe. Le 10 juin 1990 le patriarche Alexis a été intronisé en la cathédrale de Moscou.
Le 9 juin 2005, en la fête de l’Ascension, le patriarche Alexis a célébré la divine liturgie à la cathédrale du Christ Sauveur, entouré du métropolite Germain de l’Amérique et du Canada, du métropolite Vladimir de Kiev et de toute l’Ukraine et de très nombreux évêques de l’Église orthodoxe russe. A la fin de la liturgie le métropolite Vladimir de Kiev a adressé au patriarche les voeux au nom du Saint-Synode et du plérôme de l’Église russe.
Le 10 juin 2005 le patriarche Alexis, accompagné de nombreux hiérarques, s’est rendu sur la tombe de ses prédécesseurs à la cathédrale de la Dormition du Kremlin, au monastère Donskoy et à la Laure de la Trinité et de Saint-Serge. Le même jour il a présidé la réunion du Saint-Synode et a assisté au concert, organisé en son honneur à la cathédrale du Christ Sauveur.
«L’Athos et les moines d’Occident»: conférence de Dom André Louf à la Représentation de l’Église orthodoxe russe
Le 11 juin 2005 Dom André Louf, abbé émérite de l’abbaye du Mont-des-Cats (France), a donné dans la Représentation de l’Église orthodoxe russe à Bruxelles une conférence sur «L’Athos et les moines d’Occident au XXe siècle». Le père André Louf a parlé de ses visites à la Sainte Montagne et des contacts avec les supérieurs et les moines athonites. Ces contacts, a-t-il avoué, n’étaient pas toujours dépourvus d’une critique sévère de la part des moines de l’Athos à l’égard des Latins, mais sans se borner à cette dernière faisaient souvent ressortir les mêmes aspirations et les mêmes idéaux des moines d’Orient et d’Occident.
«L’institution monastique, a conclu Dom André Louf, peut devenir un lieu où l’Église indivise se rend déjà visible. A partir d’elle, des chemins se dessineront pour aborder les domaines plus délicats de la controverse, où cependant les oppositions théologiques apparaissent désormais moins irréductibles que par le passé, et peuvent conduire vers un approfodissement de la grâce propre de chacun. L’Occident y est appelé à retrouver son Orient; et l’Orient son Occident. Un tel chemin, qui part d’une certaine expérience de l’Église indivise, peut sembler emprunter la direction inverse à celle jusqu’alors suivie par l’oecuménisme officiel: s’attaquer de front aux points divergents, dans l’espoir de les réduire progressivement pour retrouver la communion. Le chemin de l’oecuménisme spirituel a le privilège de prendre comme point de départ une communion pour ainsi dire antécédente, déjà clairement prouvée, mais dont il reste encore à explorer toutes les conséquences... C’est de cette façon que les moines demeurent ouverts et disponibles à la grâce oecuménique. Leur contribution n’est pas spectaculaire. Mais elle voudrait se tenir aux sources de l’Église, c’est-à-dire au plus profond de leur coeur».
Le ministre russe des Affaires étrangères a rencontré le Secrétaire d’État du Vatican
Le 7 juin 2005 le ministre des Affaires étrangères de la Fédération de Russie, Serguei Lavrov, a rencontré le cardinal Angelo Sodano, Secrétaire d’État du Saint-Siège. Les deux hommes ont confirmé leur engagement dans l’élargissement de la collaboration politique entre la Russie et le Saint-Siège et dans la contribution au développement du dialogue entre l’Église orthodoxe russe et l’Église catholique. Ils ont souligné également la nécessité d’une coopération plus étroite entre les représentants des deux États dans les organisations internationales et ont soulevé la question de la promotion du dialogue entre les civilisation, destiné à contrer l’extrémisme religieux.
Le patriarche Alexis a reçu le Président du Parlement italien
Le 7 juin 2005 le patriarche Alexis de Moscou et de toute la Russie a reçu dans sa résidence au monastère Danilov le Président du Parlement italien, M. Pierferdinando Casini qui s’est rendu en Russie pour prendre part à la commission interparlementaire russo-italienne. Il s’agit de la deuxième rencontre de ce genre.
Le patriarche Alexis a salué le développement des rapports entre la Russie et l’Italie et a remercié la République italienne pour l’accueil qu’elle réserve aux émigrés orthodoxes et les pèlerins russes. Le patriarche a évoqué la question des valeurs spirituelles et éthiques de l’Europe depleurant leur inversion ou leur disparition dans les déclarations et les actes de l’Union et citant comme exemple les «persécutions» subies par Rocco Butiglione pour ses opinions chrétiennes. «Nous espérons, a affirmé le primat de l’Église russe, qu’ensemble avec l’Église catholique romaine en la personne de son primat en qui nous avons de grands espoirs, nous ferons face aux phénomènes négatifs qui ont lieu dans la société contemporaine». Cependant, le patriarche a souligné une fois de plus que la collaboration entre les deux Églises suppose l’exclusion de toute forme du prosélytisme.
M. Casini a soutenu la position du patriarche de Moscou sur le danger de marginalisation des chrétiens dans la société européenne et a confirmé son engagement d’oeuvrer pour le dialogue entre l’Église catholique et l’Église orthodoxe.
Le primat de l’Église des vieux-croyants: «Nous ferons tout pour mettre fin aux différends avec l’Église orthodoxe russe»
«Nous ferons tout mettre fin aux différends entre l’Église orthodoxe russe et l’Église vieille-croyante», a affirmé le 8 mai 2005 le métropolite Adrien, primat des vieux-croyants, à l’issue de la rencontre avec le représentant du Président de la Fédération de Russie dans la région de Povolzhié et ancien premier-ministre, M. Sergueï Kirienko.
Le 7 juin le métropolite Adrien a eu une rencontre avec l’évêque orthodoxe Georges de Nijni-Novgorod qui, selon le primat des vieux-croyants, a «rendu manifeste la tendance des deux Églises à la communication et au rapprochement mutuel, ainsi que le désir de mieux se comprendre».
Le métropolite Adrien a rappelé l’existence depuis le dernier concile épiscopal de l’Église orthodoxe russe (novembre 2004) d’un Comité pour les affaires des vieux-croyants auprès du Patriarcat de Moscou. «Actuellement, a souligné le métropolite, nous poursuivons l’élaboration d’un règlement. Toute l’histoire de l’Église des vieux-croyants devrait y être analysée en profondeur. Son grand intérêt consiste à démontrer et à affirmer que ce ne sont pas seulement les controverses internes à l’Église qui ont amené au schisme, mais les influences politiques également».
En conclusion, le métropolite Adrien a rappelé que les vieux-croyants demandent la reconnaissance publique de la part du Patriarcat de Moscou de la validité et de la valeur de leurs rites anciens. «La compréhension entre nos Églises s’accroît et cela nous réjouit beaucoup. Le Patriarcat de Moscou n’a désormais rien contre nos rites...».
La réunion du Conseil pour la collaboration avec les associations religieuses auprès du Président de la Russie
Le 1er juin 2005 le Conseil pour la collaboration avec les associations religieuses auprès du Président de la Russie s’est réuni à nouveau sous la présidence du chef de l’Administration du Président de la Fédération de Russie, V. A. Medvedev. La réunion a été consacrée à la question de la collaboration des organes d’État avec les associations religieuses dans le domaine de la tolérance, de la cohésion sociale et du développement du dialogue inter-religieux. Le Conseil a examiné également quelques aspects de l’élaboration de la législation concernant l’activité des organisations religieuses.
L’Église orthodoxe russe a été représentée au Conseil par le métropolite Juvénal de Krutitsy et de Kolomna, le métropolite Clément de Kaluga et de Borovsk, administrateur du Patriarcat de Moscou, l’archevêque Eugène de Vereia, recteur de l’Académie de théologie de Moscou, et le prêtre Vsevolod Tchaplin, vice-président du Département des relations extérieures du Patriarcat de Moscou.
Le Conseil a adopté une déclaration dans laquelle il a réitéré la condamnation de la xénophobie et de la haine religieuse qui «représentent une menace sérieuse à l’intégrité de la société russe multinationale et à l’existence même de notre pays». «Nous rejetons, affirment les membres du Conseil, toute inimitié religieuse et ethnique, parce qu’elle contredit dans son essence l’esprit pacifique et philanthrope des religions qui existent dans notre pays et la tradition vieille de plusieurs siècles de la coexistence paisible des confessions en Russie».