Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk: Break with Constantinople did not hurt either the Russian or Ukrainian Church

Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk: Break with Constantinople did not hurt either the Russian or Ukrainian Church Митрополит Волоколамский Иларион: Разрыв с Константинополем не повредил ни Русской, ни Украинской Церкви print version October 15, 2019 17:41 Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk, Chairman of the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate, gave an interview to the TASS news agency . - About the Bishops' Council of the Hellenic Church , which was held on Saturday, the most conflicting information comes, mainly from anonymous sources. Perhaps you could explain what decisions were made on it, and how the Russian Church evaluates them? “For the time being, we will learn about what the Church of Greece decided at its Council, from the press.” A communiqué of the Cathedral was published; a speech by Archbishop Jerome was published. All this, of course, requires careful analysis before we can draw any conclusions. A reaction to this event will follow, and this reaction will be formulated by the Holy Synod of our Church, which will convene in the near future and consider this and other issues. - In the 10 years that you headed the Department for External Church Relations, much has changed in the relations of the Russian Church with non-Orthodox Christians, with other Orthodox Churches, and with foreign states. What tasks did “church diplomacy” face 10 years ago, and what do you see them now? What is the difference between building the Church’s dialogue with the world and secular diplomacy? - The tasks facing the DECR are always the same. But since the surrounding world is changing, the situation is changing, there are some events that cannot be left unresponsive, so the emphasis in the activities of the Department is shifting accordingly. For example, a significant part of our time and attention was devoted to the preparation of the Pan-Orthodox Council. We expected that it would be a truly pan-Orthodox Council, that important issues for the Orthodox Church would be solved there, but since a number of churches refused to participate in the cathedral, we also had to refuse. After this, events in the Orthodox world began to develop rapidly, and develop, unfortunately, in a negative direction. At the end of the past - the beginning of this year, events took place that actually meant a split in the family of the Orthodox Churches. What happened on Saturday in Athens is a deepening of this split. How far this can go is hard to say now. When the papal legates arrived in Constantinople in 1054 to sort things out with the Patriarch of Constantinople, and sorting out the relationship broke the Eucharistic communion between the Roman Church and the Church of Constantinople , no one could have foreseen that this division would last a thousand years and what dire consequences it would have. . I think it’s very important now to try to look ahead. Among those who play chess, there are people who are able to calculate the situation only one move ahead, and there are those who are able to calculate it many moves ahead. We now need to determine what our next steps will be and what risks they entail. In any case, we should not act emotionally, under the influence of feelings of indignation and bewilderment - we must carefully and calmly weigh everything and prayerfully make that decision, for which we will then be responsible. - Breaking the prayer dialogue with the Patriarchate of Constantinople was a difficult decision for the Church. How did it affect the situation of Orthodox Christians in Ukraine? Is there still hope for a reunion of the divided Church, and what is the main obstacle for him? - I have to say that the break with Constantinople had no effect on the internal life of the Russian Orthodox Church, including its self-governing part of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church . As we lived, we continue to live, as we served - we continue to serve, as we celebrated Easter and other great holidays - we continue to celebrate. We did not feel any damage resulting from this gap. The Patriarchate of Constantinople made a big mistake, and he continues to insist on this mistake, demanding the recognition of the so-called Orthodox Church of Ukraine from other Local Churches. But we see that the PCU did not take place as a church. It was originally composed of two schismatic groups, within a few months of its existence, it managed to split into two parts, and the church people did not follow this group. Patriarch Bartholomew assumed that the episcopate of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church would join this group as soon as she received a tomos of autocephaly. The tomos was received, but the episcopate remains united around His Beatitude Metropolitan Onufry , the bishops of the Ukrainian Church declared their desire to maintain unity with the Russian Orthodox Church, and that they are fully satisfied with the current status of the Church. It is quite obvious that the schism has not been overcome, but, on the contrary, the schism is deepening. - Unity with Constantinople has become impossible for the Russian Church, not only because of the dispute over whose jurisdiction Ukraine belongs to, but also because of the views on the powers of the Patriarch of Constantinople. In that case, will the recall of the Tomos issued by the PTsU about autocephaly be sufficient to restore it, and if not, what will happen? Can unity now be restored at all? “It can hardly be expected that Constantinople will recall the tomos that he issued.” Of course, the Patriarch of Constantinople withdrew the decision of one of his predecessors three hundred years ago, but we do not take such actions seriously, and consider them insignificant from the canonical point of view. I think it’s premature to talk about any improvement in the situation and healing the wound. It seems that some time will pass before the Orthodox Churches together find a solution to the current situation. - Apparently, this will require the Pan-Orthodox Conference, which has already been held, or the Council? In what format can it be found? - It’s hard for me to talk about the format now, because I don’t see the readiness of Constantinople to conduct a dialogue at all. We see only actions aimed at ensuring that this hastily committed act is recognized by other Orthodox Churches, and this is a dead end path, because anyway a significant part of the Churches will not recognize it, and accordingly, these confessions can only deepen the split that has already formed. - Recently , Archbishop John (Renneto) and the clergy and laity of the Archbishopric of the parishes of the Russian tradition in Western Europe were accepted into prayer fellowship. In what form will the former Archdiocese of the Patriarchate of Constantinople exist in the Russian Church and how will it be associated with the Patriarchal Exarchate of Western Europe ? Which of the features of its worship and parish life that have developed over the decades of the existence of the Archdiocese can be preserved? - Those parishes that serve in a new style will continue to serve in a new style. Those congregations that serve in French, German, or another language will continue to serve in the language they are used to. The archbishopric will exist as a single and integral structure led by its archbishop in the bosom of the Russian Orthodox Church. It will not be a part of the West European exarchate, nor a part of the Russian Church Abroad — it will have its own structure, the very one that it has developed, and will retain its traditions. - Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Kirill called this reunion the closure of the theme of the separation of the Russian Church and the Russian diaspora abroad. Does this mean that the catechetical tasks and directions of the missionary work of the Russian Church abroad will change? Could, for example, a service appear in languages ​​other than Church Slavonic? - We already have missionary work in different countries, and worship is conducted in different languages. For example, I headed the Hungarian diocese of our Church for six years, and there in most parishes divine services are performed in Hungarian. And in the Japanese Autonomous Orthodox Church, worship is performed in Japanese, in Moldova - in Moldavian. In parishes of far abroad countries, the practice is different: where the majority of the parishioners are Russian, the Church Slavonic language is used, and the sermon sounds in Russian. Where the majority of parishioners belong to the local population, there, respectively, worship and preaching are performed in the local language. So this practice already exists with us. Our missionary strategy in far abroad countries is based on two basic principles. One principle is that we feed our flock, that is, those people who already belong to our Church. And another principle is that we are open to representatives of other traditions who want to join our Church - regardless of their nationality, their language, we accept them with love. At the same time, we do not engage in proselytism - we do not go to churches of other faiths and do not say that our faith is true, and yours is not. But when people come to us, we, of course, open the doors to them and do not hide the fact that we consider our faith to be true, and not some other. - How are the Patriarchal Exarchates of Western Europe and Southeast Asia, created at the end of last year, developing? - Speaking of the Patriarchal Exarchate of Southeast Asia , it was created in response to the needs and aspirations of our people, and it is developing very dynamically. I visited the Philippines not so long ago and participated in a worship service in which there were many Filipino parishioners and Filipino clergy. And, of course, not only Russian people, and not only Russian-speaking people are ordained in the dioceses of our Church - we have many clergymen who speak only their native language and serve in their native language. The patriarchal exarchate of Western Europe is also developing dynamically, new parishes are opening - literally at every or almost every meeting of the Synod, we decide to open new parishes. And all this is due to the fact that interest in the Church is not decreasing, but increasing - we are observing this both in our Fatherland and beyond. - In the Philippines, the situation is especially interesting - President Rodrigo Duterte, who invited Orthodox missionaries to the country at the Valdai Forum in Sochi, in some statements positioned himself as an atheist, there were even certain conflicts between the authorities and the Catholic Church. Did this apply to local Orthodox? - Missionary activity is developing actively - in the Philippines there are already more than 30 parishes of the Russian Orthodox Church. The difficulties that the Catholic Church has had or are having with local authorities do not affect our missionary work. Moreover, the Catholic Church treats our presence in the Philippines very favorably - I had the opportunity to see this when I met with the Archbishop of Manila, Cardinal Tagle, who leads the Catholic Church of the Philippines. - Did the representatives of the first wave of emigration remain in the Philippines: those who got there from China in the 1940s? - Those parishes that are now in the Philippines - their parishioners are either emigrants of the last wave, or local residents who are interested in Orthodoxy and accept Orthodoxy. Now there is nothing left of the pre-war emigration in the Philippines, because the Philippines turned out to be a transit point for it. Indeed, at some time there was a large group of Russians there, for some time there was Saint John of Shanghai, but then they all went on, and most of them ended up in Australia, and some in America. - Are there any conflicts with the Patriarchate of Constantinople, which considers the canonical territory included in the Patriarchal exarchates of the country? - The Patriarchate of Constantinople has been developing the theory since the 1920s, according to which the so-called diaspora should have only the presence of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, and not the parallel presence of different Orthodox Churches. But the Local Orthodox Churches, which have dioceses and parishes in the diaspora - the Church of Antioch , the Russian, the Georgian , the Serbian , the Romanian , and the Bulgarian - do not agree with this theory - they all have parishes in the so-called diaspora. In general, the very concept of “diaspora” is very controversial, and in the Orthodox world it does not have a single interpretation. Historically, the parishes and dioceses of the Russian Orthodox Church appeared where Russian people or members of our Orthodox Church, belonging to other nationalities, appeared. In total, our Church has more than 800 parishes in the so-called diaspora, and their number is constantly growing. We have no reason to believe that all these parishes and all this flock should go to the Patriarch of Constantinople, especially since we see how much attention he pays to our flock. For example, in Turkey, where until recently the Russian Church was not present at all, since we perceive Turkey as the canonical territory of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, no serious pastoral work was conducted with our believers. There were episodic services, people felt abandoned, abandoned. They appealed to us, but we could not answer these appeals, because we believed that the Patriarchate of Constantinople should deal with the pastoral care of these people. We repeatedly suggested that the Patriarchate of Constantinople send Russian priests there, and we would have given these priests to his jurisdiction, but he categorically refused this. And now the situation has developed in such a way that our believers can no longer receive communion in the parishes of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, therefore, priests of the Russian Orthodox Church perform services in Turkey and are engaged in pastoral care for the parishioners. - Several years have passed since the meeting between the Patriarch of Moscow and the Pope in Havana. How is the dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church going now, and is there a need for repeated meetings of the Primates - for example, in Russia, about the desire to visit which Pope Francis has repeatedly said, or in the Vatican? - The meeting between Pope Francis and Patriarch Cyril was of a historical nature, and this meeting opened up a very wide space for interaction in all areas. We are now working to implement what the Pope and the Patriarch agreed on. So far I have not heard of any new meetings that would be outlined. We are working to help Christians in the Middle East. This assistance is provided in many ways, primarily political support, but also humanitarian actions aimed at improving the situation of those Christians who remain in Syria and other countries of the Middle East who need help. The Catholic Church has long been carrying out its charitable work in the Middle East, but recently we began to coordinate our efforts, and we already see some fruits of this coordination. I think that we will increase our cooperation in this area, as well as in other areas in which this interaction will be in demand. We have a working group on cooperation between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church, this group is led by me and Cardinal Koch, and we discuss various projects that are carried out in the cultural sphere, as well as in the field of charity and social service. As for the assistance that comes from the Russian Orthodox Church together with representatives of other religious faiths in Russia, there have already been several deliveries of entire batches of humanitarian aid, once it was 77 tons , and this aid is distributed among the people of Syria regardless of their confessional accessories. - Theology has recently been introduced into the system of scientific specialties in Russia. Has a Russian academic community of theologians and theologians already formed? How much is the specialty demanded by students of secular educational institutions who do not plan to become clergy in the future? - Such a community is in the process of formation. From the moment that theology has been legalized as a scientific specialty, to the moment when we have a community of theologians in the secular educational space, a certain time must pass. Suffice it to say that when we created the first state-recognized dissertation council on theology, it included more than 20 doctors of science, but none of them was a doctor of theology - for the simple reason that theology as a recognized science in the Russian educational space existed. But now dissertations are being defended in this theological council, there were several such defenses, and it can be assumed that in a few years we will have a sufficient number of certified theologians, from whom, in turn, it will be possible to make new dissertation councils. The development of theological science in the secular educational space is the command of the times. I observe a great interest among the rectors of our leading educational institutions in this area of ​​scientific research, and I really hope that theology will develop not only in denominational theological schools, but also in secular educational space. Interviewed by Pavel Skrylnikov