This is Part I of Archbishop Lazar's presentation to the CEMES symposium in Thessaloniki, Greece (29 March, 2022).
INTENT
The intent of this paper is to explore the general background of the present invasion of Ukraine and then focus on the problem of the ecclesiastical support for the invasion given by Patriarch Kirill of Moscow of the Russian Orthodox Church and others of his hierarchs. Finally, we wish to make a response to the reasons given by the Patriarch and do some hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church for supporting the military invasion of the sovereign nation of Ukraine.
POLITICAL BACKGROUND TO RUSSIA'S INVASION
With regard to the current Russian invasion of Ukraine, I will not discount the ideas that the rapid and radical expansion of NATO had something to do with influencing this. The idea that NATO wished to create a massive naval base on the Crimean Peninsula certainly helped to provoke the Russian seizure of Crimea. However, there is absolutely nothing that will excuse the invasion of the independent republic of Ukraine and the massive war crimes that are taking place with the slaughter of tens of thousands of civilians and the destruction of Ukrainian cities. I will examine the ideological factors, including the religious justification for this horrendous action, even if only briefly.
In addressing the current conflict in the Republic of Ukraine and the roots of this conflict we do have to briefly look back in history. Our national foundational mythologies often explain some of our later tragedies. The idea of the city of Kiev in the beginnings of what would eventually become Russian history should be briefly examined. The city itself was created by Vikings from Scandinavia, and the first principality which existed there was a Norse principality. The idea that there was a nation-state in ancient Kiev is not entirely correct. At the time the Viking colonialists and the local tribes which were gathering around them ultimately formed a series of appanage principalities that were largely entities governed by local warlords. The principality of Kiev, ruled by the Norse Rurik dynasty until it collapsed in the 1100s, was a "city-state" from which the surrounding area was ruled. Both Russia and Ukraine make a claim for their foundation story, and both mythologize it. Presently, this foundation story and the mythos that accompanies it figures into the justification for the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Notwithstanding, both countries are fully constituted independent nations that happened to share a similar foundation story and mythos. This shared origin story and mythos figures into the creation of the mentality and doctrine behind the present invasion of Ukraine by Russia.
A certain segment of both the political and religious elite and Russia has not been able to reconcile itself to the fact that Ukraine is a fully constituted republic, a nation self-contained and independent. This has led to peculiar both political and religious concepts, even novel doctrines about the relationship between Russia and Ukraine. These concepts and doctrines are perverse, but this is not the first time such unstable and catastrophic results have arisen from such foundation mythos. A "mystical" vision of this foundation mythos can prevent the acceptance of present realities and can often cause real tragedies.
In this particular case, this common foundational mythos appears to be being used as one of the perverted pretexts for the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Certain leaders simply cannot come to grasp the reality that Ukraine has developed its own culture and language, some aspects of which it shares with, not only other Slavic peoples but other Eastern Europeans.
THE PROBLEM OF IRREDENTISM
Before I touch on the actually heretical doctrine put forth by religious authorities in Russia to try to help justify the invasion, I want to speak of another disturbing political motion that certainly figures into this matter, and we have heard it voiced by Mr. Putin, and in some ways endorsed by the Russian Orthodox Church. This ideological problem is the concept of irredentism.
Basically, irredentism is a doctrine or concept whereby areas of a country outside your own in which a majority of your particular nationality lives should be united to your country, by force if necessary. The doctrine was first annunciated in Italy in the 19th century. The most famous use of this doctrine was in the Third Reich, Nazi Germany, which is the doctrine of irredentism as a pretext to seize the Sudeten region of Czechoslovakia – a military action that later led to the full invasion of Czechoslovakia by the German army. The same doctrine has been used by Mr. Putin’s government with regard to Luhansk and Donbas in Ukraine, followed by the full invasion of that nation.
THE ECCLESIASTICAL ISSUE
We must begin this discussion by examining a new messianic religio/political doctrine put forth by the Russian Orthodox Church in support of the military invasion of Ukraine--a doctrine that is clearly heresy and that goes well beyond the heresy of phyletism1 the new doctrine of "Russkii Mir."
The heretical doctrine called "Russkii Mir," in essence conceives of the Russian state as having a messianic calling to invade and purify other countries, beginning with Ukraine, a former subservient republic in the Soviet Union. The roots of this new doctrine are found in previous manifestations of Russian mysticism and religious thought. This doctrine reflects back on the two older concepts of "Holy Rus'" and the idea of Moscow as the "Third Rome." These two phyletistic1 doctrines are summed up in the heresy of "Russki Mir," a messianic delusion that accords a special Messiahship to the State and thus makes the State an idolatry. That the Russian Orthodox Church fully endorses the doctrine makes it a genuine heresy.
What has been formed is a straightforward "cult of the State" into which the Russian Orthodox Church has been incorporated. This delusional doctrine accords to the Russian State, and to Mister Putin in particular, a "Mandate of Heaven" to act as a "purifier of nations." This is an extremely dangerous doctrine, and it is shocking that Russian Church officials would accept and advance this idea, surely knowing that it is a heresy and a betrayal of the concept of the Church itself.
It is notable that in the justification for this horrendous invasion of the Republic of Ukraine, reference is being made to the time of Ivan the Terrible. Ivan was a bloodthirsty tyrant who invaded surrounding principalities and territories and incorporated them into the Muscovite State, which was the centre of the future Russian Empire. His deeds are among the most unspeakable in history. However, he is now one of the heroes of the current Russian regime which is invading Ukraine.
Aside from this doctrine, it is one of the most peculiar and devious scapegoating excuses that the Moscow Patriarch and Metropolitan Hilarion of the Russian State Church have given for and hoping to support this war. The justifications given by the Patriarch of Moscow and other senior hierarchy for their support for this immoral and illegal invasion of a sovereign nation by their own nation. A scapegoat refers to the Hebrew practice of ritually placing the sins of the nation on the back of a goat which would then be driven into the wilderness bearing away the guilt for the sins and wickedness of the tribe. Among the peculiarities of this religious practice was the fact that it also took away the responsibility of the people for their sins and wickedness. This is the nature of "scapegoating," it puts the blame for your own actions onto someone else so that you are no longer responsible for your deeds and actions. Simply, it is a way of denying your responsibility and guilt by pointing to someone else. That is what I would like to discuss here.
Patriarch Kyrill and Metropolitan Hilarion Have chosen a small marginalized and, quite frankly, persecuted group of human beings as a scapegoat. They have suggested that the existence of an LGBT community and the possibility of "pride parades" in Ukraine are among the justifications for the slaughter of tens of thousands of Ukrainian citizens of all ages and the destruction of ancient Ukrainian cities. The staggering immorality of this conclusion is self-evident.
Russian Orthodox hierarchs are thus giving this horrendous invasion an aura of more complete messianic ideology by adding a weak theological or spiritual motivation, simply a deadly prelest (spiritual delusion).
The fact that the thousands of people being wantonly and ruthlessly killed are fellow Orthodox Christians only compounds the wickedness of the actions.
The idea of using a remote "moral" issue in order to justify the gross immorality and criminality of the mass murder and the destruction of the cities of the Ukrainian people must make the demons tremble.
[CLICK HERE for the entire paper, which includes Part 2].
SUMMARY
In summarizing the paper which I have presented, I have the following considerations in mind.
I want to focus on something that I consider to be a very dangerous religious/political delusion – delusion as well as ideology. I keep coming to the Chinese expression, "mandate of heaven." I am using the expression, but I feel that I am also expressing a psychological condition which can involve, not just one person or group of people, but even a whole national self-identity. I suppose one should begin with the "temptation on the Mount" as a revelation. We can say that it is a revelation about Antichrist, who would accept all the things which Christ rejected, and perhaps that is its primary revelation.
Perhaps all of the manifestations of hyper-religiosity and a Messiah complex are actually manifestations of a type of antichrist. When people come to think that they have a "mandate of heaven" to be either the "Scourge of God" or the "sword of Allah" for the purification of a nation, mankind, etc., and when that Messiah complex extends to a nations image of itself, or even a particular religion's image of itself, giving either that nation or that religion – or a national religion combination – a sense of righteous privilege or even obligation to dominate others, other nations, other people and enforce what they perceive to be the will of God, the will of Allah, there is a dangerous extremism which that entity can actually perceive as God’s special ministry for them. I certainly feel that there is something coarser and pragmatic behind Mister Putin's actions, but the "mystical andspiritual" justifications of them is especially disturbing. That these justifications are being given even a tacit blessing by the Russian Orthodox Church hierarchy only adds gravity to the matter.
To some degree we did see it in the doctrine of "manifest destiny," and some shade of it in a "British-Israel complex." We certainly saw it in the person of Ivan the Terrible, who slaughtered by day and prayed by night, alternating between his warrior persona and his ascetic persona.
We have seen episodes of this national messiah-ism in Russian history and expansionism before. There are all manner of psychiatric designations which refer to such a condition. I prefer to refer to it as those who are obsessed with having the mandate of heaven and a Messiah complex. I see that at work to one degree or another in this doctrine of "Russkii Mir" and the preoccupation of the Moscow patriarchate with LGBT community, merging it with this doctrine of "Russkii Mir."
In summary, I wish to work out a way of expressing this. When a nation with such a doctrine is intent on the obliteration of another nation and the ruthless massacre of its population, it would be hard to exaggerate the intensity of this demonic messianic complex. It is quite evident that the Putin/Kyril Construct is a, to lesser or greater degree, something that considers itself to have this mandate of heaven, and also to be possessed of a delusional messianic complex. Not only a heresy but a major blasphemy. And possibly a grave danger to the world.
NOTES
1. Phylitism Is a heresy which blends the Church with the State in a way that actually identifies the Church and the state as one. In actual practice, it renders the Church subservient to the State.
Comments