Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Pussy Riot in the Cathedral
68 views
Skip to first unread message
Steve Hayes
Aug 9, 2012, 12:51:37 PM8/9/12
to
Pussy Riot in the Cathedral: cultural revolution, blasphemy, or hate speech?
http://su.pr/2wtBqo
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
http://su.pr/2wtBqo
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Oleg Smirnov
Aug 9, 2012, 1:06:49 PM8/9/12
to
Steve Hayes, news:vfq728hr8lhjl66tb...@4ax.com
> Pussy Riot in the Cathedral: cultural revolution,
> blasphemy, or hate speech?
>
> http://su.pr/2wtBqo
http://is.gd/rCV5y1
This is a provocation to attack the Church and Russian
traditional values (archly presented to English-speaking
public as a 'protest of youngs against Putin').
> Pussy Riot in the Cathedral: cultural revolution,
> blasphemy, or hate speech?
>
> http://su.pr/2wtBqo
This is a provocation to attack the Church and Russian
traditional values (archly presented to English-speaking
public as a 'protest of youngs against Putin').
++
Aug 9, 2012, 2:11:49 PM8/9/12
to
On Aug 9, 1:06 pm, "Oleg Smirnov" <ve...@gde.ru> wrote:
> Steve Hayes,news:vfq728hr8lhjl66tb...@4ax.com
been discussed around the time it occured. Also discussed have been
the various trial updates, statements of the RUssian Orthodox Church,
and the recent protest, in solidarity with Pussy Riot, of the
Ukrainian group FEMEN, at the arrival of Russian Patriarch Kiril in
the Ukraine to honor Metropolitan Volodymir on his 20th anniversary of
service to the Russian Orthodox Church and to head the celebration of
the Christianization of Rus / Saint Vladimir Day
> Steve Hayes,news:vfq728hr8lhjl66tb...@4ax.com
>
> > Pussy Riot in the Cathedral: cultural revolution,
> > blasphemy, or hate speech?
>>
> > Pussy Riot in the Cathedral: cultural revolution,
> > blasphemy, or hate speech?
>>
> This is a provocation to attack the Church and Russian
> traditional values (archly presented to English-speaking
> public as a 'protest of youngs against Putin').
This is truly old news as far as this newsgroup is concerned, having
> traditional values (archly presented to English-speaking
> public as a 'protest of youngs against Putin').
been discussed around the time it occured. Also discussed have been
the various trial updates, statements of the RUssian Orthodox Church,
and the recent protest, in solidarity with Pussy Riot, of the
Ukrainian group FEMEN, at the arrival of Russian Patriarch Kiril in
the Ukraine to honor Metropolitan Volodymir on his 20th anniversary of
service to the Russian Orthodox Church and to head the celebration of
the Christianization of Rus / Saint Vladimir Day
++
Aug 9, 2012, 2:13:49 PM8/9/12
to
Please post often in the Orthodox newsgroup here.
Steve Hayes
Aug 9, 2012, 10:13:01 PM8/9/12
to
On Thu, 9 Aug 2012 21:06:49 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov" <ve...@gde.ru> wrote:
>Steve Hayes, news:vfq728hr8lhjl66tb...@4ax.com
>
>> Pussy Riot in the Cathedral: cultural revolution,
>> blasphemy, or hate speech?
>>
>> http://su.pr/2wtBqo
>
>http://is.gd/rCV5y1
>
>This is a provocation to attack the Church and Russian
>traditional values (archly presented to English-speaking
>public as a 'protest of youngs against Putin').
Perhaps, but different cultural responses, both in Russia and in the West,
>Steve Hayes, news:vfq728hr8lhjl66tb...@4ax.com
>
>> Pussy Riot in the Cathedral: cultural revolution,
>> blasphemy, or hate speech?
>>
>> http://su.pr/2wtBqo
>
>http://is.gd/rCV5y1
>
>This is a provocation to attack the Church and Russian
>traditional values (archly presented to English-speaking
>public as a 'protest of youngs against Putin').
show that there is a sense in which Orthodoxy is countercultural in both.
Oleg Smirnov
Aug 10, 2012, 3:34:51 AM8/10/12
to
Steve Hayes, news:0cr828lssuhm4kmnu...@4ax.com
a way to be more cultural in spite there is a sense in
which many Russia-related things are countercultural.
> On Thu, 9 Aug 2012 21:06:49 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov" <ve...@gde.ru> wrote:
>>> Pussy Riot in the Cathedral: cultural revolution,
>>> blasphemy, or hate speech?
>>>
>>> http://su.pr/2wtBqo
>>
>> http://is.gd/rCV5y1
>>
>> This is a provocation to attack the Church and Russian
>> traditional values (archly presented to English-speaking
>> public as a 'protest of youngs against Putin').
>
> Perhaps, but different cultural responses, both in Russia
> and in the West, show that there is a sense in which
> Orthodoxy is countercultural in both.
Elimination of misinformation would indeed become
>>> Pussy Riot in the Cathedral: cultural revolution,
>>> blasphemy, or hate speech?
>>>
>>> http://su.pr/2wtBqo
>>
>> http://is.gd/rCV5y1
>>
>> This is a provocation to attack the Church and Russian
>> traditional values (archly presented to English-speaking
>> public as a 'protest of youngs against Putin').
>
> Perhaps, but different cultural responses, both in Russia
> and in the West, show that there is a sense in which
> Orthodoxy is countercultural in both.
a way to be more cultural in spite there is a sense in
which many Russia-related things are countercultural.
Oleg Smirnov
Aug 13, 2012, 5:44:41 AM8/13/12
to
http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_08_12/Pussy-Riot-punk-prayer-carefully-calculated-action-expert/
"The case itself was about the reaction, not about the case."
http://www.newsru.com/russia/13aug2012/zavtra.html (in Russian)
"Director Andrei Griazev, who created a documentary about the
life of activist art group "War", explained why he has quarreled
with people who have lived side by side and a half years.
Get to know the scandalous activists, he came to the conclusion
that the young rebels pursue only one goal - to shocking .. Not
wishing, according to the director, to withdraw "advertising"
film he appeared in the list of "War"'s "traitors".
The "War" is a clear example of media actionism. Their actions
only exist in the media. They are not finished when they were
actually performed, but only after receiving extensive coverage
in the media ... Here are the driving force - the scandal, rather
than sharp political statement. The group never openly declared
his political allegiances and requirements. Its actions did not
contain direct accusations and criticism ..
.. The "War" agreed to work with Griazev in exchange for the
service - he had to edit video on their promotions to publish on
the Internet. Thus, as well as due to the film, the young people
wanted to achieve fame, says the director. When the result of
Griazev was not propaganda, the relationship soured."
Newsru.com is not pro-Kremlin, this is an independent Israeli
media in Russian. This article also informs that now these 'art
activists' demand to prohibit public display of the movie. As
one can see this is a pretty chip tabloid-like stir which has a
little with the 'free speech' and pretentious things like that,
and every participant here just tries to promote himself in the
light of the media scandal.
The 'Pussy Riot' girls have branched out from this 'War' group
since they found a 'solid' buyer for their 'shocking' but still
fruitless activism, - I mean those actors of Russian internal
politics who contracted them and directed them in this mockery
action to deliberately insult the believers and the Church.
...
"The case itself was about the reaction, not about the case."
http://www.newsru.com/russia/13aug2012/zavtra.html (in Russian)
"Director Andrei Griazev, who created a documentary about the
life of activist art group "War", explained why he has quarreled
with people who have lived side by side and a half years.
Get to know the scandalous activists, he came to the conclusion
that the young rebels pursue only one goal - to shocking .. Not
wishing, according to the director, to withdraw "advertising"
film he appeared in the list of "War"'s "traitors".
The "War" is a clear example of media actionism. Their actions
only exist in the media. They are not finished when they were
actually performed, but only after receiving extensive coverage
in the media ... Here are the driving force - the scandal, rather
than sharp political statement. The group never openly declared
his political allegiances and requirements. Its actions did not
contain direct accusations and criticism ..
.. The "War" agreed to work with Griazev in exchange for the
service - he had to edit video on their promotions to publish on
the Internet. Thus, as well as due to the film, the young people
wanted to achieve fame, says the director. When the result of
Griazev was not propaganda, the relationship soured."
Newsru.com is not pro-Kremlin, this is an independent Israeli
media in Russian. This article also informs that now these 'art
activists' demand to prohibit public display of the movie. As
one can see this is a pretty chip tabloid-like stir which has a
little with the 'free speech' and pretentious things like that,
and every participant here just tries to promote himself in the
light of the media scandal.
The 'Pussy Riot' girls have branched out from this 'War' group
since they found a 'solid' buyer for their 'shocking' but still
fruitless activism, - I mean those actors of Russian internal
politics who contracted them and directed them in this mockery
action to deliberately insult the believers and the Church.
...
++
Aug 14, 2012, 4:46:17 PM8/14/12
to
On Aug 13, 5:44 am, "Oleg Smirnov" <ve...@gde.ru> wrote:
> http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_08_12/Pussy-Riot-punk-prayer-carefully-ca...
interesting information on the news.
> http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_08_12/Pussy-Riot-punk-prayer-carefully-ca...
>
> "The case itself was about the reaction, not about the case."
>
> http://www.newsru.com/russia/13aug2012/zavtra.html(in Russian)
> "The case itself was about the reaction, not about the case."
>
Steve Hayes
Aug 18, 2012, 10:30:56 PM8/18/12
to
On Thu, 09 Aug 2012 18:51:37 +0200, Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>Pussy Riot in the Cathedral: cultural revolution, blasphemy, or hate speech?
>
>http://su.pr/2wtBqo
There have been some interesting comments on this blog post, including one
>Pussy Riot in the Cathedral: cultural revolution, blasphemy, or hate speech?
>
>http://su.pr/2wtBqo
from someone who defends the actions of Pussy Riot as a legitimate protest
and exercise of freedom of speech.
Jim Forest, bosser-up of the Orthodox Peace Fellowship, disagrees.
Jim knows something about protest, having been jailed for burning draft
cards in Milwaukee during the Vietnam War, but he nevertheless says this:
Partly because to the trial that ended yesterday in Moscow and also the
simultaneous action of a Pussy Riot supporter in Kiev cutting down a large
crucifix that had been raised in the post-Soviet time to commemorate
victims of Stalin, I�ve been thinking about protest actions and how easily
they can widen distances between people.
It seems to me that, if one is trying to help opponents change their
minds, to see things in a different light, whether the opponent is a
bishop, a president or a very ordinary person, one does one�s very best to
show respect for the other, not to treat him as an object of contempt --
and it was contempt that has struck me as being the driving force for the
Pussy Riot group. Great care also needs to be taken about use of important
social symbols.
Thomas Merton was at times critical of tactics and attitudes of the US
peace movement during the sixties. I attach a letter of that he sent me in
1962. I found it -- still find it -- very helpful.
Jim
* * *
One of the problematic questions about nonviolence is the inevitable
involvement of hidden aggressions and provocations. I think this is
especially true when there are ... elements that are not spiritually
developed. It is an enormously subtle question, but we have to consider
the fact that, in its provocative aspect, nonviolence may tend to harden
opposition and confirm people in their righteous blindness. It may even in
some cases separate men out and drive them in the other direction, away
from us and away from peace. This of course may be (as it was with the
prophets) part of God�s plan. A clear separation of antagonists.... [But
we must] always direct our action toward opening people�s eyes to the
truth, and if they are blinded, we must try to be sure we did nothing
specifically to blind them.
Yet there is that danger: the danger one observes subtly in tight groups
like families and monastic communities, where the martyr for the right
sometimes thrives on making his persecutors terribly and visibly wrong. He
can drive them in desperation to be wrong, to seek refuge in the wrong, to
seek refuge in violence.... In our acceptance of vulnerability ... we play
[on the guilt of the opponent]. There is no finer torment. This is one of
the enormous problems of our time ... all this guilt and nothing to do
about it except finally to explode and blow it all out in hatreds, race
hatreds, political hatreds, war hatreds. We, the righteous, are dangerous
people in such a situation.... We have got to be aware of the awful
sharpness of truth when it is used as a weapon, and since it can be the
deadliest weapon, we must take care that we don�t kill more than falsehood
with it. In fact, we must be careful how we �use� truth, for we are
ideally the instruments of truth and not the other way around.� (Letter
to Jim Forest, February 6, 1962; published in The Hidden Ground of Love,
pp 263-64.)
See also:
https://khanya.wordpress.com/2012/08/18/pussy-riot-the-verdict/
and
https://khanya.wordpress.com/2012/08/17/orthodoxy-and-culture/
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
For information about why crossposting is (usually) good, and multiposting (nearly always) bad, see:
http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm#xpost
Oleg Smirnov
Aug 19, 2012, 9:32:22 AM8/19/12
to
Steve Hayes, news:iqj038l9akn5f6jb7...@4ax.com
afaik nobody still got a severe (if ever) punishment for
that. However there were no precedents to arrange mocking
performances right within cathedrals in accordance with
involved journalists who then will promote this in media.
The social symbolism of that action was to come to their
(symbolic) home, to insult them at their home, and then
proudly go with it. The majority has agreed this is not an
acceptable form of the 'freedom of expression'.
A large part of Western audience can't share such opinion
due to number of reasons. Western people don't feel well
the overall sociohistorical context in Russia. Also many
tend to consider this story solely as a story around Putin
as a kind of 'sacred evil' demonized by Western media.
Meanwhile this story may turn out to be an 'epic fail' for
some leaders of 'democratic opposition' in Russia. Instead
of to build better bridges to Orthodox community they have
decided to marginalize themselves by participation in this
cavalry attack on the Church with only hope for support
from the West. Thus they once again have put themselves in
traditionally losing position of 'Western agents'.
> On Thu, 09 Aug 2012 18:51:37 +0200, Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net>
> wrote:
> been thinking about protest
> actions and how easily they can widen distances between
> people.
>
> It seems to me that, if one is trying to help opponents
> change their minds, to see things in a different light,
> whether the opponent is a bishop, a president or a very
> ordinary person, one does
> one's very best to show respect for the other, not to
> treat him as an object of contempt --
> and it was contempt that has struck me as being the
> driving force for the Pussy Riot group. Great care also
> needs to be taken about use of important social symbols.
Anti-church protests is quite normal thing in Russia,
> wrote:
> been thinking about protest
> actions and how easily they can widen distances between
> people.
>
> It seems to me that, if one is trying to help opponents
> change their minds, to see things in a different light,
> whether the opponent is a bishop, a president or a very
> ordinary person, one does
> one's very best to show respect for the other, not to
> treat him as an object of contempt --
> and it was contempt that has struck me as being the
> driving force for the Pussy Riot group. Great care also
> needs to be taken about use of important social symbols.
afaik nobody still got a severe (if ever) punishment for
that. However there were no precedents to arrange mocking
performances right within cathedrals in accordance with
involved journalists who then will promote this in media.
The social symbolism of that action was to come to their
(symbolic) home, to insult them at their home, and then
proudly go with it. The majority has agreed this is not an
acceptable form of the 'freedom of expression'.
A large part of Western audience can't share such opinion
due to number of reasons. Western people don't feel well
the overall sociohistorical context in Russia. Also many
tend to consider this story solely as a story around Putin
as a kind of 'sacred evil' demonized by Western media.
Meanwhile this story may turn out to be an 'epic fail' for
some leaders of 'democratic opposition' in Russia. Instead
of to build better bridges to Orthodox community they have
decided to marginalize themselves by participation in this
cavalry attack on the Church with only hope for support
from the West. Thus they once again have put themselves in
traditionally losing position of 'Western agents'.
Steve Hayes
Aug 19, 2012, 1:29:10 PM8/19/12
to
I gather, from some of the Western comments on this, as that "freedom of
expression" does not include the corollary of "freedom not to listen".
It would mean that a group like Pussy Riot, in the west, would have the right
to match ininvited into a broadcasting studio uninvited, trake over the
microphones and cameras, and broadcast whatever they wanted.
It would be quite OK, say, to hack The Guardian's web pages, and replace
whatever was there with something else, in the name of "freedom of
expression".
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Message has been deleted
Steve Hayes
Aug 19, 2012, 6:47:03 PM8/19/12
to
On Sun, 19 Aug 2012 14:22:04 -0700, Pete <b...@sod.cal> wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Aug 2012 19:29:10 +0200, Steve Hayes wrote:
>> It would mean that a group like Pussy Riot, in the west, would have the right
>> to match ininvited into a broadcasting studio uninvited, trake over the
>> microphones and cameras, and broadcast whatever they wanted.
>>
>
>This is also highly illegal in America with dire consequences. However,
>America has set up certain channels of cable TV for activists to spew out
>their garbage. No doubt you would sign up for monthly or weekly shows.
That can't possibly be true.
�The United States is concerned about both the verdict and the
disproportionate sentences� and the negative impact on freedom of expression
in Russia,� said State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland.
�We urge Russian authorities to review this case and ensure that the right
to freedom of expression is upheld.�
The US would not be so hypocritical as to ask the Russians to uphold freedom
of expression if they did not uphold it themselves, would they?
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
>On Sun, 19 Aug 2012 19:29:10 +0200, Steve Hayes wrote:
>> It would mean that a group like Pussy Riot, in the west, would have the right
>> to match ininvited into a broadcasting studio uninvited, trake over the
>> microphones and cameras, and broadcast whatever they wanted.
>>
>
>America has set up certain channels of cable TV for activists to spew out
>their garbage. No doubt you would sign up for monthly or weekly shows.
>
>> It would be quite OK, say, to hack The Guardian's web pages, and replace
>> whatever was there with something else, in the name of "freedom of
>> expression".
>
>In America it is illegal for a variety of reasons.
>> It would be quite OK, say, to hack The Guardian's web pages, and replace
>> whatever was there with something else, in the name of "freedom of
>> expression".
>
That can't possibly be true.
�The United States is concerned about both the verdict and the
disproportionate sentences� and the negative impact on freedom of expression
in Russia,� said State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland.
�We urge Russian authorities to review this case and ensure that the right
to freedom of expression is upheld.�
The US would not be so hypocritical as to ask the Russians to uphold freedom
of expression if they did not uphold it themselves, would they?
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Message has been deleted
Steve Hayes
Aug 24, 2012, 1:44:29 AM8/24/12
to
August 23, 2012
Hitting the Commercial Jackpot
The Secret History of Pussy Riot
by ISRAEL SHAMIR
Moscow.
Universally admired, Pussy Riot (or PR for short) have been promoted as
superstars. But what are they? A rock or punk group they are not. A British
journalist marvelled: they produce no music, no song, no painting, nada, rien,
nothing. How can they be described as �artists�? This was a severe test for
their supporters, but they passed it with flying honours: that famous
lover-of-art, the US State Department, paid for their first ever single being
produced by The Guardian out of some images and sounds.
We are able to stomach obscenity and blasphemy; I am a great admirer of Notre
Dame de Fleurs by Jean Genet, who combined both. However, the PR never wrote,
composed or painted anything of value at all. Chris Randolph defended them in
Counterpunch by comparing them with �the controversial Yegor Letov�. What a
misleading comparison! Letov wrote poetry, full of obscenity but it still was
poetry, while the PR have nothing but Public Relations.
Hell-bent on publicity, but artistically challenged, three young women from
Russia decided � well, it sounds like a limerick. They stole a frozen chicken
from a supermarket and used it as dildo; they filmed the act, called it �art�
and placed it on the web. (It is still there) Their other artistic
achievements were an orgy in a museum and a crude presentation of an erect
prick.
Even in these dubious pieces of art their role was that of technical staff:
the glory went to a Russian-Israeli artist Plucer-Sarno of Mevasseret Zion,
who claimed the idea, design and copyright for himself and collected a major
Russian prize. The future PR members got nothing and were described by Plucer
as �ambitious provincials on the make�, or worse.
Lately they have tried to ride on a bandwagon of political struggle. That was
another flop. They poured a flood of obscene words on Putin � in Red Square,
in subway (underground) stations � with zero effect. They weren�t arrested,
they weren�t fined, just chased away as a nuisance. And they did not attract
the attention of people. It is important to remember that Putin is an avowed
enemy of Russian oligarchs, owners of the major bulk of Russian media and
providers of the Moscow literati, so they print on a daily basis so much
anti-Putin invective, that it�s lost its shock value. You can�t invent a new
diatribe against Putin � it has been already said and published. And Putin
practically never interferes with the freedom of the press.
My foreign journalist friends are usually amazed by the unanimity and ferocity
of the anti-Putin campaign in Russian media. It can be compared with the
attacks on G W Bush in the liberal papers in the US, but in the US, there are
many conservative papers that supported Bush. Putin has practically no support
in the mainstream media, all of it owned by media barons. A valuable exception
is TV, but it is expressly apolitical and provides mainly low-brow
entertainment, also presented by anti-Putin activists like Mlle Xenia
Sobtchak. So PR failed profoundly to wake up the beast.
Eventually the young viragos were mobilised for an attack on the Church. By
that time they were willing to do anything for their bit of publicity. And the
anti-Church campaign started a few months ago, quite suddenly as if by
command. The Russian Church had 20 years of peace, recovering after the
Communist period, and it was surprised by ferocity of the attack.
Though this subject calls for longer exposition, let us be brief. After the
collapse of the USSR, the Church remained the only important spiritual
pro-solidarity force in Russian life. The Yeltsin and Putin administrations
were as materialist as the communists; they preached and practiced social
Darwinism of neo-Liberal kind. The Church offered something beside the elusive
riches on earth. Russians who lost the glue of solidarity previously provided
by Communists eagerly flocked to the alternative provided by the Church.
The government and the oligarchs treated the Church well, as the Church had a
strong anti-Communist tendency, and the haves were still afraid of the Reds
leading the have-nots. The Church flourished, many beautiful cathedrals were
rebuilt, many monasteries came back after decades of decay. The newly
empowered church became a cohesive force in Russia.
As it became strong, the Church began to speak for the poor and dispossessed;
the reformed Communists led by the Church-going Gennadi Zuganov, discovered a
way to speak to the believers. A well-known economist and thinker, Michael
Khazin, predicted that the future belongs to a new paradigm of Red
Christianity, something along the lines of Roger Garaudy�s early thought. The
Red Christian project is a threat to the elites and a hope for the world, he
wrote. Besides, the Russian church took a very Russian and anti-globalist
position.
This probably hastened the attack, but it was just a question of time when the
global anti-Christian forces would step forward and attack the Russian Church
like they attacked the Western Church. As Russia entered the WTO and adopted
Western mores, it had to adopt secularization. And indeed the Russian Church
was attacked by forces that do not want Russia to be cohesive: the oligarchs,
big business, the media lords, the pro-Western intelligentsia of Moscow, and
Western interests which naturally prefer Russia divided against itself.
This offensive against the Church began with some minor issues: the media was
all agog about Patriarch�s expensive watch, a present from the then President
Medvedev. Anti-religious fervour was high among liberal opposition that
demonstrated against Putin before the elections and needed a new horse to
flog. A leading anti-Putin activist Viktor Shenderovich said he would
understand if the Russian Orthodox priests were slain like they were in 1920s.
Yet another visible figure among the liberal protesters, Igor Eidman,
exclaimed,�exterminate the vermin�- the Russian Church � in the rudest
biological terms.
The alleged organiser of the PR, Marat Gelman, a Russian Jewish art collector,
has been connected with previous anti-Christian art actions which involved
icon-smashing, imitation churches of enemas. His � and PR�s problem was that
it was difficult to provoke reaction of the Church. PR made two attempts to
provoke public indignation in the second cathedral of Moscow, the older
Elochovsky Cathedral; both times they were expelled but not arrested. The
third time, they tried harder; they went to St Savior Cathedral that was
demolished by Lazar Kaganovich in 1930s and rebuilt in 1990s; they added more
blasphemy of the most obscene kind, and still they were allowed to leave in
peace. Police tried their best to avoid arresting the viragos, but they had no
choice after PR uploaded a video of their appearance in the cathedrals with an
obscene soundtrack.
During the trial, the defence and the accused did their worst to antagonize
the judge by threatening her with the wrath of the United States (sic!) and by
defiantly voicing anti-Christian hate speeches. The judge had no choice but to
find the accused guilty of hate crime (hooliganism with religious hate as the
motive). The prosecution did not charge the accused with a more serious hate
crime �with intent to cause religious strife�, though it could probably be
made to stick. (It would call for a stiffer sentence; swastika-drawers charged
with intent to cause strife receive five years of jail).
Two years� sentence is quite in line with prevailing European practice. For
much milder anti-Jewish hate talk, European countries customarily sentence
offenders to two-to-five years of prison for the first offence. The Russians
applied hate crime laws to offenders against Christian faith, and this is
probably a Russian novelty. The Russians proved that they care for Christ as
much as the French care for Auschwitz, and this shocked the Europeans who
apparently thought �hate laws� may be applied only to protect Jews and gays.
The Western governments call for more freedom for the anti-Christian Russians,
while denying it for holocaust revisionists in their midst.
The anti-Putin opposition flocked to support PR. A radical charismatic
opposition leader, the poet Eduard Limonov wrote that the opposition made a
mistake supporting PR, as they antagonise the masses; the chasm between the
masses and the opposition grows. But his voice was crying in the wilderness,
and the rest of the opposition happily embraced the PR cause, trying to turn
it into a weapon against Putin. The Western media and governments also used it
to attack Putin. A Guardian editorial called on Putin to resign. Putin called
for clemency for PR, and the government was embarrassed by the affair. But
they were left with no choice: the invisible organisers behind PR wanted to
have the viragos in jail, and so they did.
Commercially, they hit jackpot. With support of Madonna and the State
Department, they are likely to leave jail ready for a world tour and photo ops
at the White House. They registered their name as a trade mark and began to
issue franchises. And their competitors, the Femen group (whose art is showing
off their boobs in unusual places) tried to beat PR by chopping down a large
wooden cross installed in memory of Stalin�s victims. Now the sky is the
limit.
In August, vacation season, when there is not much hard news and newspaper
readers are at the seashore or countryside, the PR trial provided much needed
entertainment for man and beast. Hopefully it will drop from the agenda with
the end of the silly season, but do not bet on it.
Israel Shamir reports from Moscow, his email is ad...@israelshamir.net
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/23/the-secret-history-of-pussy-riot/
Hitting the Commercial Jackpot
The Secret History of Pussy Riot
by ISRAEL SHAMIR
Moscow.
Universally admired, Pussy Riot (or PR for short) have been promoted as
superstars. But what are they? A rock or punk group they are not. A British
journalist marvelled: they produce no music, no song, no painting, nada, rien,
nothing. How can they be described as �artists�? This was a severe test for
their supporters, but they passed it with flying honours: that famous
lover-of-art, the US State Department, paid for their first ever single being
produced by The Guardian out of some images and sounds.
We are able to stomach obscenity and blasphemy; I am a great admirer of Notre
Dame de Fleurs by Jean Genet, who combined both. However, the PR never wrote,
composed or painted anything of value at all. Chris Randolph defended them in
Counterpunch by comparing them with �the controversial Yegor Letov�. What a
misleading comparison! Letov wrote poetry, full of obscenity but it still was
poetry, while the PR have nothing but Public Relations.
Hell-bent on publicity, but artistically challenged, three young women from
Russia decided � well, it sounds like a limerick. They stole a frozen chicken
from a supermarket and used it as dildo; they filmed the act, called it �art�
and placed it on the web. (It is still there) Their other artistic
achievements were an orgy in a museum and a crude presentation of an erect
prick.
Even in these dubious pieces of art their role was that of technical staff:
the glory went to a Russian-Israeli artist Plucer-Sarno of Mevasseret Zion,
who claimed the idea, design and copyright for himself and collected a major
Russian prize. The future PR members got nothing and were described by Plucer
as �ambitious provincials on the make�, or worse.
Lately they have tried to ride on a bandwagon of political struggle. That was
another flop. They poured a flood of obscene words on Putin � in Red Square,
in subway (underground) stations � with zero effect. They weren�t arrested,
they weren�t fined, just chased away as a nuisance. And they did not attract
the attention of people. It is important to remember that Putin is an avowed
enemy of Russian oligarchs, owners of the major bulk of Russian media and
providers of the Moscow literati, so they print on a daily basis so much
anti-Putin invective, that it�s lost its shock value. You can�t invent a new
diatribe against Putin � it has been already said and published. And Putin
practically never interferes with the freedom of the press.
My foreign journalist friends are usually amazed by the unanimity and ferocity
of the anti-Putin campaign in Russian media. It can be compared with the
attacks on G W Bush in the liberal papers in the US, but in the US, there are
many conservative papers that supported Bush. Putin has practically no support
in the mainstream media, all of it owned by media barons. A valuable exception
is TV, but it is expressly apolitical and provides mainly low-brow
entertainment, also presented by anti-Putin activists like Mlle Xenia
Sobtchak. So PR failed profoundly to wake up the beast.
Eventually the young viragos were mobilised for an attack on the Church. By
that time they were willing to do anything for their bit of publicity. And the
anti-Church campaign started a few months ago, quite suddenly as if by
command. The Russian Church had 20 years of peace, recovering after the
Communist period, and it was surprised by ferocity of the attack.
Though this subject calls for longer exposition, let us be brief. After the
collapse of the USSR, the Church remained the only important spiritual
pro-solidarity force in Russian life. The Yeltsin and Putin administrations
were as materialist as the communists; they preached and practiced social
Darwinism of neo-Liberal kind. The Church offered something beside the elusive
riches on earth. Russians who lost the glue of solidarity previously provided
by Communists eagerly flocked to the alternative provided by the Church.
The government and the oligarchs treated the Church well, as the Church had a
strong anti-Communist tendency, and the haves were still afraid of the Reds
leading the have-nots. The Church flourished, many beautiful cathedrals were
rebuilt, many monasteries came back after decades of decay. The newly
empowered church became a cohesive force in Russia.
As it became strong, the Church began to speak for the poor and dispossessed;
the reformed Communists led by the Church-going Gennadi Zuganov, discovered a
way to speak to the believers. A well-known economist and thinker, Michael
Khazin, predicted that the future belongs to a new paradigm of Red
Christianity, something along the lines of Roger Garaudy�s early thought. The
Red Christian project is a threat to the elites and a hope for the world, he
wrote. Besides, the Russian church took a very Russian and anti-globalist
position.
This probably hastened the attack, but it was just a question of time when the
global anti-Christian forces would step forward and attack the Russian Church
like they attacked the Western Church. As Russia entered the WTO and adopted
Western mores, it had to adopt secularization. And indeed the Russian Church
was attacked by forces that do not want Russia to be cohesive: the oligarchs,
big business, the media lords, the pro-Western intelligentsia of Moscow, and
Western interests which naturally prefer Russia divided against itself.
This offensive against the Church began with some minor issues: the media was
all agog about Patriarch�s expensive watch, a present from the then President
Medvedev. Anti-religious fervour was high among liberal opposition that
demonstrated against Putin before the elections and needed a new horse to
flog. A leading anti-Putin activist Viktor Shenderovich said he would
understand if the Russian Orthodox priests were slain like they were in 1920s.
Yet another visible figure among the liberal protesters, Igor Eidman,
exclaimed,�exterminate the vermin�- the Russian Church � in the rudest
biological terms.
The alleged organiser of the PR, Marat Gelman, a Russian Jewish art collector,
has been connected with previous anti-Christian art actions which involved
icon-smashing, imitation churches of enemas. His � and PR�s problem was that
it was difficult to provoke reaction of the Church. PR made two attempts to
provoke public indignation in the second cathedral of Moscow, the older
Elochovsky Cathedral; both times they were expelled but not arrested. The
third time, they tried harder; they went to St Savior Cathedral that was
demolished by Lazar Kaganovich in 1930s and rebuilt in 1990s; they added more
blasphemy of the most obscene kind, and still they were allowed to leave in
peace. Police tried their best to avoid arresting the viragos, but they had no
choice after PR uploaded a video of their appearance in the cathedrals with an
obscene soundtrack.
During the trial, the defence and the accused did their worst to antagonize
the judge by threatening her with the wrath of the United States (sic!) and by
defiantly voicing anti-Christian hate speeches. The judge had no choice but to
find the accused guilty of hate crime (hooliganism with religious hate as the
motive). The prosecution did not charge the accused with a more serious hate
crime �with intent to cause religious strife�, though it could probably be
made to stick. (It would call for a stiffer sentence; swastika-drawers charged
with intent to cause strife receive five years of jail).
Two years� sentence is quite in line with prevailing European practice. For
much milder anti-Jewish hate talk, European countries customarily sentence
offenders to two-to-five years of prison for the first offence. The Russians
applied hate crime laws to offenders against Christian faith, and this is
probably a Russian novelty. The Russians proved that they care for Christ as
much as the French care for Auschwitz, and this shocked the Europeans who
apparently thought �hate laws� may be applied only to protect Jews and gays.
The Western governments call for more freedom for the anti-Christian Russians,
while denying it for holocaust revisionists in their midst.
The anti-Putin opposition flocked to support PR. A radical charismatic
opposition leader, the poet Eduard Limonov wrote that the opposition made a
mistake supporting PR, as they antagonise the masses; the chasm between the
masses and the opposition grows. But his voice was crying in the wilderness,
and the rest of the opposition happily embraced the PR cause, trying to turn
it into a weapon against Putin. The Western media and governments also used it
to attack Putin. A Guardian editorial called on Putin to resign. Putin called
for clemency for PR, and the government was embarrassed by the affair. But
they were left with no choice: the invisible organisers behind PR wanted to
have the viragos in jail, and so they did.
Commercially, they hit jackpot. With support of Madonna and the State
Department, they are likely to leave jail ready for a world tour and photo ops
at the White House. They registered their name as a trade mark and began to
issue franchises. And their competitors, the Femen group (whose art is showing
off their boobs in unusual places) tried to beat PR by chopping down a large
wooden cross installed in memory of Stalin�s victims. Now the sky is the
limit.
In August, vacation season, when there is not much hard news and newspaper
readers are at the seashore or countryside, the PR trial provided much needed
entertainment for man and beast. Hopefully it will drop from the agenda with
the end of the silly season, but do not bet on it.
Israel Shamir reports from Moscow, his email is ad...@israelshamir.net
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/23/the-secret-history-of-pussy-riot/
Percival P. Cassidy
Aug 24, 2012, 4:01:07 PM8/24/12
to
I sent this response before but don't see it on the ng. If others are
now seeing it for the second time, I apologize.
On 08/24/12 01:44 am, Steve Hayes wrote:
> August 23, 2012
> Hitting the Commercial Jackpot
> The Secret History of Pussy Riot
> by ISRAEL SHAMIR
>
> Moscow.
>
> Universally admired, Pussy Riot (or PR for short) have been promoted as
> superstars. But what are they? A rock or punk group they are not. A British
> journalist marvelled: they produce no music, no song, no painting, nada, rien,
> nothing. How can they be described as �artists�? This was a severe test for
> ... it was just a question of time when the
"the oligarchs, big business, the media lords" naturally prefer the USA
divided against itself?
<snip>
> Israel Shamir reports from Moscow, his email is ad...@israelshamir.net
>
> http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/23/the-secret-history-of-pussy-riot/
Perce
now seeing it for the second time, I apologize.
On 08/24/12 01:44 am, Steve Hayes wrote:
> August 23, 2012
> Hitting the Commercial Jackpot
> The Secret History of Pussy Riot
> by ISRAEL SHAMIR
>
> Moscow.
>
> Universally admired, Pussy Riot (or PR for short) have been promoted as
> superstars. But what are they? A rock or punk group they are not. A British
> journalist marvelled: they produce no music, no song, no painting, nada, rien,
> their supporters, but they passed it with flying honours: that famous
> lover-of-art, the US State Department, paid for their first ever single being
> produced by The Guardian out of some images and sounds.
<snip>
> lover-of-art, the US State Department, paid for their first ever single being
> produced by The Guardian out of some images and sounds.
> ... it was just a question of time when the
> global anti-Christian forces would step forward and attack the Russian Church
> like they attacked the Western Church. As Russia entered the WTO and adopted
> Western mores, it had to adopt secularization. And indeed the Russian Church
> was attacked by forces that do not want Russia to be cohesive: the oligarchs,
> big business, the media lords, the pro-Western intelligentsia of Moscow, and
> Western interests which naturally prefer Russia divided against itself.
That couldn't possibly be what is happening in the USA too, could it? --
> like they attacked the Western Church. As Russia entered the WTO and adopted
> Western mores, it had to adopt secularization. And indeed the Russian Church
> was attacked by forces that do not want Russia to be cohesive: the oligarchs,
> big business, the media lords, the pro-Western intelligentsia of Moscow, and
> Western interests which naturally prefer Russia divided against itself.
"the oligarchs, big business, the media lords" naturally prefer the USA
divided against itself?
<snip>
> Israel Shamir reports from Moscow, his email is ad...@israelshamir.net
>
> http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/23/the-secret-history-of-pussy-riot/
Steve Hayes
Aug 25, 2012, 2:43:28 AM8/25/12
to
On Fri, 24 Aug 2012 16:01:07 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"
<Nob...@NotMyISP.net> wrote:
>I sent this response before but don't see it on the ng. If others are
>now seeing it for the second time, I apologize.
I'm seeing it for the first time.
<Nob...@NotMyISP.net> wrote:
>I sent this response before but don't see it on the ng. If others are
>now seeing it for the second time, I apologize.
>On 08/24/12 01:44 am, Steve Hayes wrote:
>
>> August 23, 2012
>> Hitting the Commercial Jackpot
>> The Secret History of Pussy Riot
>> by ISRAEL SHAMIR
>>
>> Moscow.
>>
>> Universally admired, Pussy Riot (or PR for short) have been promoted as
>> superstars. But what are they? A rock or punk group they are not. A British
>> journalist marvelled: they produce no music, no song, no painting, nada, rien,
>> their supporters, but they passed it with flying honours: that famous
>> lover-of-art, the US State Department, paid for their first ever single being
>> produced by The Guardian out of some images and sounds.
>
><snip>
>
>> ... it was just a question of time when the
>> global anti-Christian forces would step forward and attack the Russian Church
>> like they attacked the Western Church. As Russia entered the WTO and adopted
>> Western mores, it had to adopt secularization. And indeed the Russian Church
>> was attacked by forces that do not want Russia to be cohesive: the oligarchs,
>> big business, the media lords, the pro-Western intelligentsia of Moscow, and
>> Western interests which naturally prefer Russia divided against itself.
>
>That couldn't possibly be what is happening in the USA too, could it? --
>"the oligarchs, big business, the media lords" naturally prefer the USA
>divided against itself?
I'm not sufficiently up on current events in the USA to say yay or nay to
>> lover-of-art, the US State Department, paid for their first ever single being
>> produced by The Guardian out of some images and sounds.
>
><snip>
>
>> ... it was just a question of time when the
>> global anti-Christian forces would step forward and attack the Russian Church
>> like they attacked the Western Church. As Russia entered the WTO and adopted
>> Western mores, it had to adopt secularization. And indeed the Russian Church
>> was attacked by forces that do not want Russia to be cohesive: the oligarchs,
>> big business, the media lords, the pro-Western intelligentsia of Moscow, and
>> Western interests which naturally prefer Russia divided against itself.
>
>That couldn't possibly be what is happening in the USA too, could it? --
>"the oligarchs, big business, the media lords" naturally prefer the USA
>divided against itself?
that, but the media everywhere love a fight, and if they can stir one up they
are very happy.
And to judge from the invective one sees on the Internet, the USA must be one
of the most divided societies on earth. I mean you see really over-the-top
denunciations of the two main political parties by their opponents, yet when
they get into power they seem to behave in the same way, with very little
difference between them.
Or perhaps I missed the fact that when the Republicans were in power the
abortion rate dropped to zero, or that when the Democratic Party was in power
they closed Guantanamo Bay. As I said, I'm out of touch with US current
affairs.
No, please don't try to show me why these parties wanted to do the things they
promised but didn't -- I can read about that any time I want on the political
NGs. The point in this post is about the disproportionate level of invective
showing societal division, and whether, as Perce suggests, that is the state
preferred by the oligarchs, big business, and the media lords.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Alexander Arnakis
Aug 26, 2012, 4:53:57 PM8/26/12
to
>Pussy Riot in the Cathedral: cultural revolution, blasphemy, or hate speech?
>
>http://su.pr/2wtBqo
The latest news is that 2 of the 5 members of the band (the ones who
>
>http://su.pr/2wtBqo
were *not* caught, tried, and sent to prison) have escaped Russia.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/26/pussy-riot-members-escape-russia_n_1831087.html
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
Aug 26, 2012, 6:43:03 PM8/26/12
to
http://solzemli.wordpress.com/2012/08/25/pussy-riot-the-russian-orthodox-church/
Salt of the Earth
← Whence This Anger? by Fr. George Chistyakov
August 25, 2012 · 11:02 pm Pussy Riot & the Russian Orthodox Church
Pussy Riot Members: Yekaterina Samutsevich, Maria Alyokhina, &
Nadezhda Tolokonnikova
[The following letter was originally sent to Frederica Mathewes-Green,
and was reprinted with the author’s permission, provided that his name
was edited out, since he felt that it may be too politically risky to
reveal it.]
My name is [deleted] I am a listener of AFR and a fan of your
podcasts. I’m 26 years old, an Orthodox Christian, living in Moscow.
As you can possibly guess, I am writing to you about the recent
podcast “Russian Blasphemy”.
I completely agree with you on the matter of the importance of sincere
prayer, and of how painful, insulting and disrespectful the
blasphemous “prayer” of the “PR” [Pussy Riot] band had been. But,
unfortunately, while listening to your podcast, I could not help
feeling, that you were either ill-informed or misinformed on some very
crucial matters, pertaining to the scandal, the court case, and
especially – the position of the Moscow Patriarchate.
First of all, there is no such charge as “blasphemy” in the secular
legislature of the Russian Federation, nor were the “PR” band members
calling for religious hatred, for which they were charged and
convicted. They performed a blasphemous act; but they did not call the
people to kill or persecute Christians, Jews, Muslims, or any other
religious groups, and only such an act falls directly under the “call
for religious hatred” charge. If such a charge as “blasphemy” existed
before the incident and if the government simply enforced existing
laws to a certain “crime” – no one would have said a word. But
instead, the state court gave these women 2 years in prison.
Moreover, from what you said, it seems like the “PR” band was supposed
to get 7 years, but the Church asked the sentence to be eased to 2.
Again, this was not the case.
“Officially” the Church did not keep silent until the verdict was
carried out by the court (as it was stated by the Patriarchate’s
representatives this spring). Nor did it call for pity or mercy to the
“sinner”. On the contrary. Representatives of the Moscow Patriarchate,
such as the Head of the Department of the Public Relations –
archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin and the Churches’ attorney – the nun
Serafima (Chernega) called for “righteous” punishment for this act of
hatred. This was directly said by our Patriarch in the beginning of
April, when he called the Orthodox Faithful not to tolerate the new
rise of blasphemy and not to allow the punk band’s act to be seen as a
mere political protest. The Patriarch is a strong speaker, and won a
powerful emotional response from his flock, talking about how the band
sinned against Our Lord, against the Orthodox shrines, against Our
martyrs, our nation and the fallen soldiers of the Napoleonic Wars,
(in whose memory the Cathedral was erected). Was this a Christian
response? Was this an attempt of a responsible pastor to calm his
faithful down and appeal to Christian mercy and prayer?
After the court’s verdict, the recently formed High Church Council (a
parallel to the Lesser Synod), said that “While Christ forgave those,
who insulted Him as a Man, He called against blasphemy on the Holy
Spirit”. Forgive me, but is this not strikingly similar to some, ill-
drafted Nestorian statement? When Our Lord was raised up on the Cross,
and asked God to forgive those, Who nailed Him to the Tree, was this
done as a Man, or as a God? Neither the Eastern Orthodox, nor the
Oriental or Catholic Churches know of such a separation between the
Divinity and Humanity in Jesus. The statement goes on to say, that no
forgiveness is possible without the repentance of the sinners (not
Holy Communion – simple forgiveness). Meanwhile, I do not remember a
passage in the Gospel, where the Saviour asks us to demand an official
repentance from the one who offended us, before “granting” him
forgiveness.
Unlike his predecessor – Patriarch Alexei II (of Blessed Memory), who
managed to sustain excellent relations with the state, yet skillfully
refrain from direct involvement in politics, our current Primate got
the Church directly involved in the most scandalous and passionate
election campaign in modern Russian history. His support of Putin –
whose right to run for a third, 6-year presidency is more than
questionable – put the Church under direct attack not only from some
kind of atheistic “liberals”, but from the wide range of common
people, who have no real protection from corrupt government officials
and have nothing but contempt, fear and hatred for the state “powers”.
How would you feel, if you personally knew dozens of people, who were
required to vote for Putin and his “United Russia” party under the
direct threat of losing their jobs – and then hear the Patriarch, our
Patriarch and the Primate of our local Church, call the protests of
hundreds of thousands of desperate people, who came out ot ask for
their right to vote – “ear piercing shrieks”?
This was said at a meeting with the candidate V. Putin on February 8
2012. The two “Punk prayers” took place roughly two weeks after the
Patriarch’s meeting with Putin (the one and only candidate for
presidency, with whom the Patriarch and other religious leader decided
to meet, which can rightfully be seen as open political backing).
Moreover, thanking Putin for his personal part in the “unparalleled”
spiritual recovery of Russia and of its Church, the Patriarch forgot
to mention his own predecessor – Patriarch Alexei II, our beloved
Father who actually led the Church during the 17 years of recovery
from the Soviet desolation. The current Patriarch did not even mention
Alexei, not even once!
Should we, as Orthodox, as Christians, not ask ourselves – had the
Patriarch asked his flock to forgive the blasphemy, had he given the
judgment to God, and not to the state court, had he called for these
women to be released and “go in peace”, would the current rise of anti-
clericalism and this strange cult of making the “PR” band into
prisoners of conscience and “political martyrs” actually taken place?
There is also another problem, pertaining to “blasphemy” in the
Cathedral of Christ the Saviour. The resurrected Christ the Saviour
Cathedral does not belong to the Church. It belongs to the government
and is under the “care” of a certain “Fund of the Cathedral of Christ
the Saviour”. This organization runs several souvenir shops around the
cathedral, a restaurant – recently built right by the cathedral, as
well as a car-wash and a banquet hall, located in an underground
complex directly beneath the Church. This gives rise to popular belief
that “the Church” rents the halls of its cathedral for expensive
corporate parties and banquettes. But instead of fighting for the
Cathedral “to be a house of prayer”, the Patriarchate not only
conforms with the current state of affairs, but parallel with the “PR”
case, the Church won a lawsuit, defending its right for the commercial
use of the cathedral premises – along with the infamous “Fund”. What
kind of “message” is this supposed to give the nation, which does not
differentiate between the patriarchate’s officials and the Church as a
whole?
What other Cathedral, in what other Orthodox patriarchate or diocese
belongs to a state-owned commercial organization, which builds a
banquet hall in the place of a crypt? Yet, the Patriarchate does
nothing, disregarding the waning reputation of this magnificent, truly
resurrected cathedral.
In light of recent events, should we, as Orthodox Christians, not
honestly ask ourselves – “what really happened?”, “what could have
caused people to start this unjust, senseless act of blasphemy and
protest in Moscow’s cathedral?”, “Why so many Christians, including
the Primate of our local Church, who shed so many tears listening to
the Passions narratives, fail to show Christian mercy when beset by a
single act of blasphemy?”. Instead, we go on the defensive, carrying
out relics, calling on for the State’s protection and retribution.
But, as Orthodox Christians in Russia, we are beset by both – attacks
from the “outside” insulting our Church, as well as from irrational
and irresponsible actions of our own clergy and even – the
patriarchate’s officials. Unlike our brothers and sisters in Albania,
Finland, Georgia, the OCA, and, of course, in the Antiochian Orthodox
Church – we, in Russia, have no ability to ask or receive
accountability from our hierarchs and primates. And this, truly has a
devastating effect on the state of the Church and its reputation in
Russia. Should not such problems be openly addressed outside the
internet? Should not we speak of our own sins in the wake of new
attacks on our Church?
The sin of someone who blasphemes, yet does not belong to the Church,
is grave, there can be no doubt. But if we, as Christians, by our
actions cause the rise of blasphemy against the Church, is not our sin
far greater? Somehow, we seem to skillfully evade such questions.
Please, forgive me for such a long message. I have the deepest respect
for you, and this was why I wanted to make a clear and full statement
regarding the situation in my country and my local Church.
God Bless You and may He Grant You Many Years!
Yours faithfully in Christ,
[Name]
Moscow, Russia
* The American Conservative
Salt of the Earth
← Whence This Anger? by Fr. George Chistyakov
August 25, 2012 · 11:02 pm Pussy Riot & the Russian Orthodox Church
Pussy Riot Members: Yekaterina Samutsevich, Maria Alyokhina, &
Nadezhda Tolokonnikova
[The following letter was originally sent to Frederica Mathewes-Green,
and was reprinted with the author’s permission, provided that his name
was edited out, since he felt that it may be too politically risky to
reveal it.]
My name is [deleted] I am a listener of AFR and a fan of your
podcasts. I’m 26 years old, an Orthodox Christian, living in Moscow.
As you can possibly guess, I am writing to you about the recent
podcast “Russian Blasphemy”.
I completely agree with you on the matter of the importance of sincere
prayer, and of how painful, insulting and disrespectful the
blasphemous “prayer” of the “PR” [Pussy Riot] band had been. But,
unfortunately, while listening to your podcast, I could not help
feeling, that you were either ill-informed or misinformed on some very
crucial matters, pertaining to the scandal, the court case, and
especially – the position of the Moscow Patriarchate.
First of all, there is no such charge as “blasphemy” in the secular
legislature of the Russian Federation, nor were the “PR” band members
calling for religious hatred, for which they were charged and
convicted. They performed a blasphemous act; but they did not call the
people to kill or persecute Christians, Jews, Muslims, or any other
religious groups, and only such an act falls directly under the “call
for religious hatred” charge. If such a charge as “blasphemy” existed
before the incident and if the government simply enforced existing
laws to a certain “crime” – no one would have said a word. But
instead, the state court gave these women 2 years in prison.
Moreover, from what you said, it seems like the “PR” band was supposed
to get 7 years, but the Church asked the sentence to be eased to 2.
Again, this was not the case.
“Officially” the Church did not keep silent until the verdict was
carried out by the court (as it was stated by the Patriarchate’s
representatives this spring). Nor did it call for pity or mercy to the
“sinner”. On the contrary. Representatives of the Moscow Patriarchate,
such as the Head of the Department of the Public Relations –
archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin and the Churches’ attorney – the nun
Serafima (Chernega) called for “righteous” punishment for this act of
hatred. This was directly said by our Patriarch in the beginning of
April, when he called the Orthodox Faithful not to tolerate the new
rise of blasphemy and not to allow the punk band’s act to be seen as a
mere political protest. The Patriarch is a strong speaker, and won a
powerful emotional response from his flock, talking about how the band
sinned against Our Lord, against the Orthodox shrines, against Our
martyrs, our nation and the fallen soldiers of the Napoleonic Wars,
(in whose memory the Cathedral was erected). Was this a Christian
response? Was this an attempt of a responsible pastor to calm his
faithful down and appeal to Christian mercy and prayer?
After the court’s verdict, the recently formed High Church Council (a
parallel to the Lesser Synod), said that “While Christ forgave those,
who insulted Him as a Man, He called against blasphemy on the Holy
Spirit”. Forgive me, but is this not strikingly similar to some, ill-
drafted Nestorian statement? When Our Lord was raised up on the Cross,
and asked God to forgive those, Who nailed Him to the Tree, was this
done as a Man, or as a God? Neither the Eastern Orthodox, nor the
Oriental or Catholic Churches know of such a separation between the
Divinity and Humanity in Jesus. The statement goes on to say, that no
forgiveness is possible without the repentance of the sinners (not
Holy Communion – simple forgiveness). Meanwhile, I do not remember a
passage in the Gospel, where the Saviour asks us to demand an official
repentance from the one who offended us, before “granting” him
forgiveness.
Unlike his predecessor – Patriarch Alexei II (of Blessed Memory), who
managed to sustain excellent relations with the state, yet skillfully
refrain from direct involvement in politics, our current Primate got
the Church directly involved in the most scandalous and passionate
election campaign in modern Russian history. His support of Putin –
whose right to run for a third, 6-year presidency is more than
questionable – put the Church under direct attack not only from some
kind of atheistic “liberals”, but from the wide range of common
people, who have no real protection from corrupt government officials
and have nothing but contempt, fear and hatred for the state “powers”.
How would you feel, if you personally knew dozens of people, who were
required to vote for Putin and his “United Russia” party under the
direct threat of losing their jobs – and then hear the Patriarch, our
Patriarch and the Primate of our local Church, call the protests of
hundreds of thousands of desperate people, who came out ot ask for
their right to vote – “ear piercing shrieks”?
This was said at a meeting with the candidate V. Putin on February 8
2012. The two “Punk prayers” took place roughly two weeks after the
Patriarch’s meeting with Putin (the one and only candidate for
presidency, with whom the Patriarch and other religious leader decided
to meet, which can rightfully be seen as open political backing).
Moreover, thanking Putin for his personal part in the “unparalleled”
spiritual recovery of Russia and of its Church, the Patriarch forgot
to mention his own predecessor – Patriarch Alexei II, our beloved
Father who actually led the Church during the 17 years of recovery
from the Soviet desolation. The current Patriarch did not even mention
Alexei, not even once!
Should we, as Orthodox, as Christians, not ask ourselves – had the
Patriarch asked his flock to forgive the blasphemy, had he given the
judgment to God, and not to the state court, had he called for these
women to be released and “go in peace”, would the current rise of anti-
clericalism and this strange cult of making the “PR” band into
prisoners of conscience and “political martyrs” actually taken place?
There is also another problem, pertaining to “blasphemy” in the
Cathedral of Christ the Saviour. The resurrected Christ the Saviour
Cathedral does not belong to the Church. It belongs to the government
and is under the “care” of a certain “Fund of the Cathedral of Christ
the Saviour”. This organization runs several souvenir shops around the
cathedral, a restaurant – recently built right by the cathedral, as
well as a car-wash and a banquet hall, located in an underground
complex directly beneath the Church. This gives rise to popular belief
that “the Church” rents the halls of its cathedral for expensive
corporate parties and banquettes. But instead of fighting for the
Cathedral “to be a house of prayer”, the Patriarchate not only
conforms with the current state of affairs, but parallel with the “PR”
case, the Church won a lawsuit, defending its right for the commercial
use of the cathedral premises – along with the infamous “Fund”. What
kind of “message” is this supposed to give the nation, which does not
differentiate between the patriarchate’s officials and the Church as a
whole?
What other Cathedral, in what other Orthodox patriarchate or diocese
belongs to a state-owned commercial organization, which builds a
banquet hall in the place of a crypt? Yet, the Patriarchate does
nothing, disregarding the waning reputation of this magnificent, truly
resurrected cathedral.
In light of recent events, should we, as Orthodox Christians, not
honestly ask ourselves – “what really happened?”, “what could have
caused people to start this unjust, senseless act of blasphemy and
protest in Moscow’s cathedral?”, “Why so many Christians, including
the Primate of our local Church, who shed so many tears listening to
the Passions narratives, fail to show Christian mercy when beset by a
single act of blasphemy?”. Instead, we go on the defensive, carrying
out relics, calling on for the State’s protection and retribution.
But, as Orthodox Christians in Russia, we are beset by both – attacks
from the “outside” insulting our Church, as well as from irrational
and irresponsible actions of our own clergy and even – the
patriarchate’s officials. Unlike our brothers and sisters in Albania,
Finland, Georgia, the OCA, and, of course, in the Antiochian Orthodox
Church – we, in Russia, have no ability to ask or receive
accountability from our hierarchs and primates. And this, truly has a
devastating effect on the state of the Church and its reputation in
Russia. Should not such problems be openly addressed outside the
internet? Should not we speak of our own sins in the wake of new
attacks on our Church?
The sin of someone who blasphemes, yet does not belong to the Church,
is grave, there can be no doubt. But if we, as Christians, by our
actions cause the rise of blasphemy against the Church, is not our sin
far greater? Somehow, we seem to skillfully evade such questions.
Please, forgive me for such a long message. I have the deepest respect
for you, and this was why I wanted to make a clear and full statement
regarding the situation in my country and my local Church.
God Bless You and may He Grant You Many Years!
Yours faithfully in Christ,
[Name]
Moscow, Russia
* The American Conservative
Oleg Smirnov
Aug 27, 2012, 12:35:29 AM8/27/12
to
Alexander Arnakis, news:o33l38tm4bnkov2n1...@4ax.com
> The latest news is that 2 of the 5 members of the band
> (the ones who were *not* caught, tried, and sent to
> prison) have escaped Russia.
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/26/pussy-riot-members-escape-russia_n_1831087.html
There was some information five days ago.
http://tinyurl.com/blgs4fa (in Hebrew)
"The remaining group participants actually are hiding in Israel"
> The latest news is that 2 of the 5 members of the band
> (the ones who were *not* caught, tried, and sent to
> prison) have escaped Russia.
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/26/pussy-riot-members-escape-russia_n_1831087.html
http://tinyurl.com/blgs4fa (in Hebrew)
"The remaining group participants actually are hiding in Israel"
Percival P. Cassidy
Aug 29, 2012, 9:59:36 AM8/29/12
to
paper between them in the Authoritarian-Right quadrant -- and Romney
somewhat more authoritarian than Obama.
> No, please don't try to show me why these parties wanted to do the things they
> promised but didn't -- I can read about that any time I want on the political
> NGs. The point in this post is about the disproportionate level of invective
> showing societal division, and whether, as Perce suggests, that is the state
> preferred by the oligarchs, big business, and the media lords.
thought we recognized as belonging to one of our fellow church members
but then saw the bumper stickers, which we thought were way over the top
even for her: one had a picture of Obama with the words "I am the 'enemy
within' the Founding Fathers warned about" (or words to that effect);
the other said "Better Mormon than moron". The person whose vehicle we
had at first thought it was came and sat beside us, and I said, "We
thought for a moment that we were behind your car, but the bumper
stickers were too extreme even for you." When I told her what the
stickers said, she replied, "Yes that's my car; that's how I feel."
Yesterday evening I went to a meeting of our local "Patriots" (alias
"Tea Party") to hear some presentations on Islam. One was to be given by
a friend, a professor who has written a college textbook on world
religions (now in its 4th or 5th edition, I think), and I was interested
to see how people would react to a calm and reasoned presentation. When
he spoke of the necessity of encouraging moderate Muslims to assimilate
into American society, somebody protested that there is no such thing as
a moderate Muslim. When my friend later warned against alienating
Muslims by treating them all as suspected terrorists, referring to a
now-discontinued (I think) practice by the NY (City) Police Dept of
planting spies in mosques all around (not just in NY State), many
cheered -- cheered the NYPD, I mean.
One of those in attendance was wearing a shirt with the words:
"President's Enemies List
Since <graphic> 2008
Official Member"
plus other wording I could not make out at that distance. When I looked
it up on line, I found that the same Web site offers bumper stickers
with the words:
"To-Do List
Pray. Vote. Buy more ammo."
and
"SECEDE! from the United Socialist States of America"
and shirts with the words:
"There's a Communist living in the White House."
Truly scary! And people ask me why I haven't become a US citizen!
Perce
Steve Hayes
Aug 29, 2012, 10:39:53 PM8/29/12
to
Both parties, when in power, seem to have been equally addicted to
warmongering, and both have adopted policies that seem calculated to eradicate
Christianity from the part of the world where it first spread, the Middle East
-- where a high proportion of Christians are Orthodox.
And the response of the Western media to the Pussy Riot affair shows that
Samuel Huntington was right in his "Clash of civilizations" thesis.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Steve Hayes
Aug 31, 2012, 12:28:19 AM8/31/12
to
A group of Orthodox protesters attempted to give Pussy Riot supporters a taste
of their own medicine, but is this the Orthodox way?
http://t.co/cNmQebXd
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
of their own medicine, but is this the Orthodox way?
http://t.co/cNmQebXd
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Oleg Smirnov
Aug 31, 2012, 8:55:40 AM8/31/12
to
Steve Hayes, news:e7f0481pagkcuruh7...@4ax.com...
>A group of Orthodox protesters attempted to give Pussy Riot supporters a
>taste of their own medicine, but is this the Orthodox way?
>
> http://t.co/cNmQebXd
I think this is an illustration of how some radical
freaks create social polarisation encouraging radical
freaks from oppose side.
>A group of Orthodox protesters attempted to give Pussy Riot supporters a
>taste of their own medicine, but is this the Orthodox way?
>
> http://t.co/cNmQebXd
freaks create social polarisation encouraging radical
freaks from oppose side.
Steve Hayes
Sep 3, 2012, 11:27:57 PM9/3/12
to
A Russian Orthodox Church deacon who left the church because of its stance on
the jailing of members of the punk band Pussy Riot says he has been subjected
to a campaign of smears and harassment.
Sergey Baranov was a deacon in the Orthodox Church, ordained to help lead
services and assist congregations, for more than 15 years.
But after three members of Pussy Riot were handed two-year jail sentences for
mounting a protest against president Vladimir Putin inside Moscow's main
Orthodox cathedral, he very publicly left the church, asking to be defrocked
in an open letter on his Facebook page.
The 37-year-old told the ABC the Pussy Riot sentence left him no choice.
"It was the very last straw when I realised that concepts such as mercy and
forgiveness had been shredded to pieces," he said.
His anger extends to numerous other church scandals.
They include fatal accidents involving priests in luxury cars, and a $30,000
watch which officials tried and failed to edit out of a picture of Russian
Orthodox Patriarch Kirill.
There has long been debate about the deepening ties between the church and Mr
Putin, and blogger and journalist Anton Nosik says the issue has burst into
the open after the Pussy Riot verdict.
"The discussion of the virtues and the sins of the church has for once become
very relevant, and very hot," he said.
"This is something new and this has much to do with the Pussy Riot sentence."
Sergey Baranov pulls no punches. The church, he says, is filled with
hypocrites and liars, and the Pussy Riot verdict proves the church leadership
and the Kremlin are now one and the same.
"The church-state merger is such that it causes not only mistrust amongst the
people but the people think very negatively about that,� he said.
He is bracing for more consequences from his decision.
The church has threatened a clerical trial and regional officials have warned
him to be quiet.
A rumour was spread online that he does not exist. He does.
He says he is still a Christian, but he can no longer serve a church that he
says supports punishing political expression with prison.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-03/orthodox-priest-speaks-out-over-pussy-riot/4239330
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
the jailing of members of the punk band Pussy Riot says he has been subjected
to a campaign of smears and harassment.
Sergey Baranov was a deacon in the Orthodox Church, ordained to help lead
services and assist congregations, for more than 15 years.
But after three members of Pussy Riot were handed two-year jail sentences for
mounting a protest against president Vladimir Putin inside Moscow's main
Orthodox cathedral, he very publicly left the church, asking to be defrocked
in an open letter on his Facebook page.
The 37-year-old told the ABC the Pussy Riot sentence left him no choice.
"It was the very last straw when I realised that concepts such as mercy and
forgiveness had been shredded to pieces," he said.
His anger extends to numerous other church scandals.
They include fatal accidents involving priests in luxury cars, and a $30,000
watch which officials tried and failed to edit out of a picture of Russian
Orthodox Patriarch Kirill.
There has long been debate about the deepening ties between the church and Mr
Putin, and blogger and journalist Anton Nosik says the issue has burst into
the open after the Pussy Riot verdict.
"The discussion of the virtues and the sins of the church has for once become
very relevant, and very hot," he said.
"This is something new and this has much to do with the Pussy Riot sentence."
Sergey Baranov pulls no punches. The church, he says, is filled with
hypocrites and liars, and the Pussy Riot verdict proves the church leadership
and the Kremlin are now one and the same.
"The church-state merger is such that it causes not only mistrust amongst the
people but the people think very negatively about that,� he said.
He is bracing for more consequences from his decision.
The church has threatened a clerical trial and regional officials have warned
him to be quiet.
A rumour was spread online that he does not exist. He does.
He says he is still a Christian, but he can no longer serve a church that he
says supports punishing political expression with prison.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-03/orthodox-priest-speaks-out-over-pussy-riot/4239330
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Oleg Smirnov
Sep 4, 2012, 8:50:40 AM9/4/12
to
@, news:k1qceo$lfi$2...@os.motzarella.org
> Steve Hayes, news:e7f0481pagkcuruh7...@4ax.com
months of forced labor for violent attack on pussies'
supporter during pussies' trial.
http://www.vz.ru/news/2012/9/4/596564.html
> Steve Hayes, news:e7f0481pagkcuruh7...@4ax.com
>
>> A group of Orthodox protesters attempted to give Pussy
>> Riot supporters a taste of their own medicine, but is
>> this the Orthodox way?
>>
>> http://t.co/cNmQebXd
>
> I think this is an illustration of how some radical
> freaks create social polarisation encouraging radical
> freaks from oppose side.
Orhodox activist has been tried to a fine and three
>> A group of Orthodox protesters attempted to give Pussy
>> Riot supporters a taste of their own medicine, but is
>> this the Orthodox way?
>>
>> http://t.co/cNmQebXd
>
> I think this is an illustration of how some radical
> freaks create social polarisation encouraging radical
> freaks from oppose side.
months of forced labor for violent attack on pussies'
supporter during pussies' trial.
http://www.vz.ru/news/2012/9/4/596564.html
Oleg Smirnov
May 12, 2013, 7:28:20 PM5/12/13
to
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/russian/uk/2013/05/130512_voina_tower_bridge.shtml>
"On Sunday 12 May the Russian art group "Voina" ("The War") tried to
hang a banner with the Tower Bridge with the image of their leader
Oleg Vorotnikov behind bars and the words 'Voina wanted'.
They did it, but the banner hung only a few seconds, as the London
police responded to an attempt to politicize the historic site of the
capital fast, harsh, but correct. ..
According to Mike Castle, one of the technicians serving the Tower
Bridge, .. all such attempts are usually stopped very quickly."
Evil British tyranny rigidly suppresses the freedom of expression.
@, news:k0aihk$46i$1...@os.motzarella.org
"On Sunday 12 May the Russian art group "Voina" ("The War") tried to
hang a banner with the Tower Bridge with the image of their leader
Oleg Vorotnikov behind bars and the words 'Voina wanted'.
They did it, but the banner hung only a few seconds, as the London
police responded to an attempt to politicize the historic site of the
capital fast, harsh, but correct. ..
According to Mike Castle, one of the technicians serving the Tower
Bridge, .. all such attempts are usually stopped very quickly."
Evil British tyranny rigidly suppresses the freedom of expression.
@, news:k0aihk$46i$1...@os.motzarella.org
Oleg Smirnov
May 13, 2017, 1:05:36 PM5/13/17
to
2013-05-13 <http://archive.li/VbFlF>
> <http://www.bbc.co.uk/russian/uk/2013/05/130512_voina_tower_bridge.shtml>
>
> "On Sunday 12 May the Russian art group "Voina" ("The War") tried to hang a
> banner with the Tower Bridge with the image of their leader Oleg Vorotnikov
> behind bars and the words 'Voina wanted'.
Mr. Vorotnikov had spent a few years in Europe. He is still wanted in Russia
for criminal prosecution. Russian liberal opposition outlet interviewed him
via Skype, and he told what he managed to learn from his European experience.
<http://kommersant.ru/doc/3292661>
Vorotnikov says he feels like a POW in Europe. While his life in Russia was
full of highlights, here in Europe he cannot do anything. Initially, his 'art
group' <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voina> was invited to participate in
some 'contemporary art' events in West Europe, but it turned out that in fact
Europe allows much less freedom of expression and space for arts than Russia.
He says he has experienced a revolution in his mind while living here: he
discovered the fact that in the modern 'western' society there is very strict
distribution of roles, where artists are in quite a miserable position.
He considers Europe a genuine fascist place, - although the classic fascism is
impossible today, but the prevailing neoliberal 'western' ideology is rather a
modification of the fascism developed after the WW2.
He said their 'art group' were greatly impressed by the way the Czech police
were beating them in a police station. They were beating woman in the face in
front of her child, which would hardly be possible in Russia. As Vorotnikov
explained, the Czech authorities would welcome them as 'classic' Soviet-style
'dissidents', but soon the Czechs realized 'Voina' is something different, and
the police applied violence to them in order to force them to leave Czechia
and don't create problems for the domestic authorities.
He says it's a common thing for Europe: the Europeans have a standard pattern
of what 'Russian dissidents' must look like, and if a person behaves not quite
in line with the pattern, then there would be some big problems: if they see
that you go beyond the prescribed frame, then they would stop you in a pretty
painful way.
In Switzerland, 'Voina' had a similar conflict with the local human rights
defenders and police. The latter were coercing them to go to camp for refugees
and ask for political asylum. 'Voina' refused to follow this way, the result
was they had been subjected to intimidation. In the end, 20 men in masks and
with truncheons, with tear gas, broke into their dwelling and began to beat
them. Their children were pulled out of the tub and put straight to the street
(and it happened in March, almost in winter).
Vorotnikov says, they repeatedly experienced such things in Europe that would
be unthinkable in Russia, and he would never believe that it's possible, if he
not experienced it himself.
"Imagine that you will be tied up with an adhesive tape, filled with tear gas
and will be beaten. Then comes the police, and under the grin of those human
rights defenders who beat you, they confiscate your videos. And that's all."
Mr. Vorotnikov says, in addition to physical violence, the Europeans destroyed
their information channels: the promoted Facebook account, few web sites, many
documents and videos were destroyed.
...
> <http://www.bbc.co.uk/russian/uk/2013/05/130512_voina_tower_bridge.shtml>
>
> "On Sunday 12 May the Russian art group "Voina" ("The War") tried to hang a
> banner with the Tower Bridge with the image of their leader Oleg Vorotnikov
> behind bars and the words 'Voina wanted'.
for criminal prosecution. Russian liberal opposition outlet interviewed him
via Skype, and he told what he managed to learn from his European experience.
<http://kommersant.ru/doc/3292661>
Vorotnikov says he feels like a POW in Europe. While his life in Russia was
full of highlights, here in Europe he cannot do anything. Initially, his 'art
group' <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voina> was invited to participate in
some 'contemporary art' events in West Europe, but it turned out that in fact
Europe allows much less freedom of expression and space for arts than Russia.
He says he has experienced a revolution in his mind while living here: he
discovered the fact that in the modern 'western' society there is very strict
distribution of roles, where artists are in quite a miserable position.
He considers Europe a genuine fascist place, - although the classic fascism is
impossible today, but the prevailing neoliberal 'western' ideology is rather a
modification of the fascism developed after the WW2.
He said their 'art group' were greatly impressed by the way the Czech police
were beating them in a police station. They were beating woman in the face in
front of her child, which would hardly be possible in Russia. As Vorotnikov
explained, the Czech authorities would welcome them as 'classic' Soviet-style
'dissidents', but soon the Czechs realized 'Voina' is something different, and
the police applied violence to them in order to force them to leave Czechia
and don't create problems for the domestic authorities.
He says it's a common thing for Europe: the Europeans have a standard pattern
of what 'Russian dissidents' must look like, and if a person behaves not quite
in line with the pattern, then there would be some big problems: if they see
that you go beyond the prescribed frame, then they would stop you in a pretty
painful way.
In Switzerland, 'Voina' had a similar conflict with the local human rights
defenders and police. The latter were coercing them to go to camp for refugees
and ask for political asylum. 'Voina' refused to follow this way, the result
was they had been subjected to intimidation. In the end, 20 men in masks and
with truncheons, with tear gas, broke into their dwelling and began to beat
them. Their children were pulled out of the tub and put straight to the street
(and it happened in March, almost in winter).
Vorotnikov says, they repeatedly experienced such things in Europe that would
be unthinkable in Russia, and he would never believe that it's possible, if he
not experienced it himself.
"Imagine that you will be tied up with an adhesive tape, filled with tear gas
and will be beaten. Then comes the police, and under the grin of those human
rights defenders who beat you, they confiscate your videos. And that's all."
Mr. Vorotnikov says, in addition to physical violence, the Europeans destroyed
their information channels: the promoted Facebook account, few web sites, many
documents and videos were destroyed.
...
0 new messages