> http://www.pravoslavie.ru/english/51356.htm

> Is it hard to be Patriarch? [On February 1,
> 2012, the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church celebrated the three
year
> anniversary of his enthronement with Divine Liturgy in the Christ the
Savior
> Cathedral, Moscow. Bishops, abbots and abbesses of monasteries, government
> leaders and civil authorities came from all over Russia and former
republics to
> share in the celebration.
> Last year before his anniversary, His Holiness appeared on Russian
> television to answer questions about religious life posed by TV
commentator
> Dimitry Kiselev. We present several of those questions and answers here.]

> —Your Holiness … what do you consider to be your main accomplishment over
> the past year, and has there been anything that you regret?

> —Of course I have regrets. There is a saying that there are only
twenty-four
> hours in the day. And I regret that there is so little time—first of all,
time
> to read and think. A Patriarch should definitely think. Ideas should come
from
> the Patriarch. He should attentively perceive everything that happens in
the
> world. But this everyday whirlwind of affairs, unfortunately, turns our
> attention away from those issues that should be at the head of the list of
> things the Patriarch has to do—the secondary issues (but in fact, not
> secondary). Therefore, I regret it, but I will keep trying, because I
have to
> accompany my thoughts and prayers with serious reading.

> As for what I have been able to accomplish—I am least of all inclined to
> ascribe what has happened over this past year to my own personal merits.
Of
> course, I have taken part in all of these processes. Many important
events have
> taken place over the past year, but I would particularly emphasize the
> President’s decision concerning the teaching of the fundamentals of
religious
> culture and secular ethics in the schools, as well as the decision to
finally
> allow our clergy to work in the armed forces. If we talk about what is
> important, then of course it would be my trips to the Ukraine, Belorussia,
> Kazakhstan, and Azerbaijan, which helped me to see and understand very
much, and
> mainly, to acutely perceive the fact that the Russian Orthodox Church is
not the
> Church of just one nation, but that belonging to this Church are people of
> various nationalities, living in various countries, and who are involved
in the
> resolution of various problems. All of this is a pastoral call of great
force;
> we have to answer to all of this, and take it all into consideration.

> —Your Holiness, you just said that there is no time for thinking about the
> most important issues. Just the same, everyone knows that Christ’s most
> important commandment is love. But how has love changed over the past two
> millennia, and has it changed?

> —I think that an enormous civilization problem now exists—that is how I
would
> describe it—on the scale of all mankind. It is the total deformation and
> distortion of the concept connected with the word, “love”. For me as
person of
> faith, love is a miracle and gift of God, but this gift is not selective.
It is
> not like a talent: one person was given a gift by God and became a
musician,
> another became a mathematician, a third became a doctor. Love is like the
air
> for all. Everyone receives this gift of God as he is able to do so. One
person
> gets burned by the sun and ends up in the hospital, while another’s
health is
> strengthened by the sun’s rays. One person breathes clean air, while
another
> does everything to pollute it with industrial wastes, so that people are
no
> longer breathing air but toxins. It is the same with love. It is an
absolutely
> amazing gift of God, because love is able to unite people in itself.
Everything
> else—our talents, our self-identity, our national, cultural, and political
> differences—almost all work to disunite us. In this sense, someone may
say,
> “God’s plan for the world is strange. Where do all these differences that
work
> for our disunity come from?” Yes, truly, this would be a strange plan if
it were
> not for love, which is able to unite people. But what is now taken for
> love—human passion and the realization of this passion—has no
relationship to
> love. That is how this understanding is disrupted.

> Now perhaps we will talk about the main thing. Love is a gift of God, but
we
> answer to this gift, and we answer firstly by certain situations of our
will.
> Therefore, love is at the same time a directive of human will, the will
for
> good. I will give a simple example. You think badly about a person, you
don’t
> like him, either inwardly or outwardly; there are a mass of factors that
repel
> one person from another. You can give in to this feeling and live with
it, or
> you can try to overcome it. And there is a way to overcome it—to begin to
think
> well of that person. There is yet another absolutely stunning way—do good
to
> that person. People for whom we do good forever remain in our hearts. Your
> relationship will change toward that person if you do him good. So, love
is,
> among other things, this orientation toward human will, which directs a
person’s
> deeds towards doing good. We know what is it to be in love: young people
meet,
> they like each other—that is a good, bright feeling. Sometimes they say,
“We
> have fallen in love”. But the question is—have they come to love each
other, or
> not yet? life’s trials will show whether there is love or not. But so that
> falling in love would grow into love, they need to direct their will to
the
> good, to share their lives with each other, to give a part of themselves
to the
> other.

> Therefore, love is on one hand a gift, but on the other, a task that God
> gives each one of us. As long as this exists in the human race, then the
> understanding will exist of people’s commonality; even the understanding
of
> something like goodness exists, because love is always at the foundation
of
> goodness.
> God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God (cf. Jn. 4:16). These
> are amazing words. On one hand they are so simple, but on the other,
incredibly
> complicated to fulfill. May God grant that our people today would not
give in to
> the temptation to destroy that gift. If it will be destroyed, I think it
will be
> the end of human history.

> —Your Holiness, the majority of the people in Russia look at the Church as
> something close to them. Nevertheless, how would you explain to a person
who is
> not church-going, why we need the Church?

> —We have already talked about talents. Truly, one may be born with the
talent
> of mathematician, another of a doctor, a third with some other talents.
One may
> be a scholar, a diplomat, or a businessman, while another cannot be any of
> these; but anyone can be believer. Faith gives a person inner support and
the
> ability to become happy. The consciousness of modern youth perhaps has
great
> difficulty combining the idea of happiness with faith. Yes, people come to
> church, they like our liturgical arts; furthermore, many have believing
parents,
> relatives, or friends. And you are right—the majority of the people have a
> respectful relationship toward the Church. But it is probably hard for
them to
> relate and apply what they see in church to their own lives, because they
have
> no personal religious experience. Then it is as if two realities exist
for that
> person: the reality in the church is one picture, while on the street
there is
> another picture. The other picture is his life.

> In fact, when a person immerses himself in the life of the Church, when he
> immerses himself in real spiritual experience, he begins to understand
what
> immense strength is feeding him. We have spoken about the integrity of
the human
> personality, about inner strength—that is what God’s grace gives us, what
we
> draw from the Church, in combination, of course, with human effort. It
seems to
> me that no words, not even the Patriarch’s on television, can help a
person
> understand what is only revealed through deep religious experience. I can
only
> invite people to try this experience, to go through it, and then they will
> perhaps relate better than I can what has happened in their souls, and
why we
> need faith and the Church. But this reveals itself in the depths of
religious
> experience.

> —You invite people to church. A person will come and see how people pray
> there. What is prayer to you?

> —It is all bound up with our previous question. Religious experience comes
> first of all through prayer. Without prayer, there can be no religious
way of
> life. And what is a religious way of life? It is not just the awareness
that God
> exists; it is the clear understanding that God is present in your life.
He is
> not somewhere in heaven, he is not somewhere over the hills, or in some
unknown
> space—He is right next to you. And you have two possibilities. You can
pretend
> that there is no God, but the fact itself does not change from this.
There is
> also another possibility—to try to enter into a relationship with God, to
close
> the circuit. Prayer is the closing of the circuit between man and God.
When we
> press a start button, we close the electrical circuit between the power
source
> and the user. The same thing happens through prayer: a person closes the
circuit
> and enters into a real relationship with God. The person asks God and
receives
> what he asks. What greater proof could there be of God’s existence?

> I have said more than once that the most convincing proof of the
existence of
> God is that people have been praying for thousands of years. Just
imagine: you
> have come to your supervisor, asked him for something, and he promises to
give
> you it but doesn’t. The second time you wonder whether you should go to
him or
> not, but you gather your courage and go another time to him. He again
listens to
> you, but does nothing. Some might go a third time, and some might not. If
the
> heavens were silent, if God never answered prayers, who would have turned
to Him
> over these thousands of years? But when this circuit is closed, a person
> acquires personal religious experience.

> —A real, contemporary person might go to church only on Sundays. Naturally
> we should pray every day, but an old American saying comes to mind that a
person
> believes in God on Sundays, but in the stock market on weekdays. Doesn’t
it seem
> to you that this problem holds true in Russia as well?

> —First we have to fulfill the first part of what has been said—that people
> would go to church every Sunday. I think that would already change things
very
> much. But truly there is a problem of what I call inner secularization,
inner
> worldlification. A person believes in God, recognizes the need for prayer,
> especially in moments of stress, anxiety, sickness, misfortune, or the
death of
> close ones. But life drags him down, and a certain separation of the
> consciousness from this religious experience occurs, a redirecting of the
> attention to present problems, and it begins to seem that everything can
also be
> solved without God. This is a most profound error. We should call upon
God for
> help even in resolving our professional tasks. This does not mean that
the Lord
> will increase the money in our bank account without fail. But God can
prevent us
> from making mistakes, or doing something immoral or sinful. We were
talking
> about car accidents. Well, how can we leave our home and sit behind the
wheel
> without crossing ourselves and saying, “Lord, help me”? This means that
between
> Sundays something appears that is important for a person’s spiritual
life. When
> you arrive at work, say, “Thank God, I arrived”. At the end of the day,
when you
> arrive home, and if the day went well, thank God that everything turned
out that
> way. But if you have done something wrong, then you should analyze what
> happened, and perhaps repent before God. This is the religious way of
life: when
> we continually place ourselves before the face of God and evaluate our own
> actions and life from the point of view of His commandments, His law.

> —You are in fact calling us to a way of life in which morality is an
> important criteria and motive for behavior. It is every Christian’s duty
to be
> moral, but a priest especially so. What for you is the ideal of a modern
pastor?
> What should he be, and what shouldn’t he be?

> —I think that in any country, with any people, and at any time a priest
> should emulate Christ. People sometimes say to us that their priest is not
> behaving properly, that he is too modern, or behaves too simply with
people. But
> wasn’t the Savior modern when he talked to publicans, sinners, and simple
> people? On the other hand, people sometimes tell us that a priest should
always
> recognize his responsibility for what he says and does. This is a correct
> assertion. He can and should be simple, and not create an artificial
barrier
> between himself and the people. But at the same time, a priest should
always
> control his words and even his thoughts. We spoke of a religious way of
life—a
> priest should first of all lead that kind of life. First of all, a priest
should
> pray very much—then he will not make mistakes, then the Lord will hint to
him
> how he should behave, how to build relationships with people, what, and
what not
> to say.

> —Here is the final question for today, Your Holiness. It is hard to be
> Patriarch?

> —I would say, again, not with my own words: God’s strength is made
perfect in
> weakness (cf. 2 Cor. 12:9). I do not think that this service can be
performed by
> relying upon my own strength. I do not want to say very much about this
subject
> right now, but the past year has convinced me very obviously that without
God’s
> help, which is sent down, first of all, through the prayers of millions of
> people, it is practically impossible to fulfill this service. Therefore,
my
> first year was, first of all, a year of certain spiritual shocks—what I
have
> never experienced or felt before.

> I strongly feel God’s hand. I see the support of the faithful who pray
with
> tears for the Patriarch, and the support of their clergy. As long as it
is that
> way, I think that the Patriarch will be able to fulfill his duties.
> —Thank you very much for this talk, your Holiness. We wish you all the
> more strength.

> His Holiness Patriarch
> Kirill, Dimitry Kiselev
> Translation by
> OrthoChristian.com
> 03 / 02 /
> 2012

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> __._,_.___
> Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
> Messages in this topic (1)
> Recent Activity:

> New Members 2

> Visit Your Group
> =========Welcome to the Orthodox-Forum Discussion Group=======>
> Homepage:    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Orthodox-Forum
> Subscribe:   <mailto:Orthodox-Forum-subscr...@yahoogroups.com>
> Unsubscribe: <mailto:Orthodox-Forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com>
> Change your settings: http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
> =============**Only Three (3) Posts A Day Please**==============>
> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use