CEC Member Churches have been greatly shaken by the impact of the Russian aggression on Ukraine. Ecumenical solidarity has emerged in force among European churches, with our members and ecumenical partners responding with an outpouring of prayers for peace. A flood of appeals and statements are urging for a diplomatic solution through dialogue, strongly advocating for reconciliation, and encouraging political decision-makers and church leaders to play their crucial roles. European churches have also supported and continue to implement humanitarian projects, offering aid and an open door to those fleeing the conflict.
Czechia holds the Presidency of the Council until the end of 2022. A first series of hearings took place from 11 to 13 July. A second set of hearings to presents outlines priorities to EP committees will happen during the first week of September.
The impact of Russian aggression against Ukraine on food security is a key priority, according to Agriculture Minister Zdeněk Nekula on 11 July. The Presidency will seek an early start for the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to provide member states with flexibility and temporary exceptions to handle the crisis. The Presidency will also prioritise negotiations on the sustainable use of plant protection products.
A number of MEPs called for the way in which solidarity corridors for agricultural exports from Ukraine work to be improved and for a balance between EU food production and the proposed reduction in the use of pesticides. Some MEPs agreed that some derogations from CAP rules will be needed, while others warned against weakening the CAP and called for organic farming to be supported instead.
Development
On 12 July, Jiří Kozák, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, highlighted a three-fold challenge caused by Russia’s war against Ukraine: the distribution of grain from Ukraine; securing sufficient humanitarian relief; and breaking the Russian narrative that the food security crisis is the EU’s fault. Mr Kozák also said that, for the Post-Cotonou Agreement, the Presidency is determined to conclude the remaining steps as fast as possible.
MEPs agreed on the importance of dealing with the immediate and longer-term impacts of the war on global food security. They also raised the question of refugees in Ukraine and its neighbours. Others questioned the Presidency on their priorities in the Sahel, on the migration issue on the EU’s southern border, and the integration of humanitarian relief and long-term development policy.
Transport and Tourism
On 12 July, Transport MinisterMartin Kupka, and Deputy Prime Minister for Digitisation and Minister of Regional DevelopmentIvan Bartoš, stressed that the Presidency will focus on measures to decarbonise transport, promote railways, make sure solidarity lanes for Ukraine are working and increase the resilience of the tourism sector. Minister Kupka promised MEPs that the work on new rules on the Single European Sky, alternative fuel infrastructure, sustainable fuels for aviation and maritime sectors, intelligent transport systems and TEN-T revision would advance.
Transport Committee MEPs urged the Presidency to put more efforts into addressing mobility poverty and road safety, make sure EU countries would unite in response to any possible new COVID-19 pandemic and asked for the option of providing EU financial support for solidarity lanes in Ukraine to be explored.
Fisheries
On 12 July, Zdeněk Nekula, Minister of Agriculture, said that the Presidency’s top priority will be to ensure food security in the EU and improve the competitiveness of the sector compared to third countries. Despite being a landlocked country, the Czech Presidency will also focus on fishing quotas, reaching agreements on EU fishing possibilities with third countries, as well as fisheries-relevant initiatives related to the Green Deal.
MEPs stressed the need to help fishers due to the impact of the war in Ukraine. They welcomed the intention to make fisheries more competitive but stressed the need to strike a balance between the socio-economic and environmental aspects of the initiative. Finally, some reaffirmed the idea of reforming the Common Fisheries Policy, even if the Commission is reluctant to do so.
Internal Market and Consumer Protection
Industry and Trade Minister Jozef Síkela told MEPs that the Presidency will pay special attention to better enforcement of Single Market tools and services, deeper market integration and high consumer protection, including raising consumer awareness on sustainable consumption and online risks. The Presidency will work to move forward on negotiations with MEPs on machinery products and consumer credits and to reach a common position in the Council on the General Product Safety Regulation, the Artificial Intelligence Act, and Transparency and Targeting of Political Advertising.
MEPs quizzed the Presidency on empowering consumers in light of the twin transition, the implementation of rules on dual quality of products, the update of travel package rules in light of the pandemic and the ongoing digital priorities (including the new Chips Act and European Digital Identity).
Women’s Rights and Gender Equality
Marian Jurečka, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Labour and Social Affairs, said the Czech Presidency will strive to achieve progress on the pay transparency directive. On an EU strategy for care, they will focus on long-term care and providing refugees from Ukraine with high-quality care. Member states’ diverse positions on preventing violence against women need to be respected, he said, although the definition of online sexual violence will be discussed in November. There will be Council conclusions on gender equality, and the Presidency will look into economic parity for men and women with a focus on youth.
Several MEPs asked if Czechia is planning to ratify the Istanbul Convention. Many welcomed the objective to reach a deal on pay transparency, stressed that LGBTI rights and sexual and reproductive health and rights must be protected, and highlighted Parliament’s call to add the right to abortion to the EU Charter of fundamental rights.
Employment and Social Affairs
On 11 July, Marian Jurečka, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Labour and Social Affairs, identified as key issues: managing the influx and integration of refugees, food and energy affordability for the most vulnerable and the fight against child poverty. Further priorities include reaching a common position in the Council on improving conditions in platform work, and progressing on the pay transparency directive.
MEPs asked for the Social Climate Fund to be made operational to protect the most vulnerable during the green transition. Some MEPs urged for the SURE instrument for the preservation of employment to become permanent and for a more ambitious use of the Child Guarantee. Finally, MEPs asked for an extraordinary Social Summit to address the impact the energy and inflation crisis and the recession are having on employment.
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
On 11 July, Environment Minister Anna Hubáčková told MEPs the priorities are: reaching agreements on the Fit for 55 files; nature restoration law; protecting vulnerable households during the green transition; and global cooperation on climate and environment. MEPs questioned the minister on preparations for the UN conferences on climate change (COP27) and biodiversity (COP15), as well as the Russian war’s impact on the environment.
On 12 July, Health Minister Vlastimil Válek said the Presidency will focus on the fight against cancer; disinformation on vaccination and vaccines for new variants; progress on Council’s position regarding the European Health Data Space (EHDS), and healthcare services for Ukrainian refugees. MEPs quizzed the minister on fair prices and access to vaccines, the impact of the war, rare diseases and the impact of climate change on population health.
Later that day Agriculture Minister Zdeněk Nekula highlighted food security, sustainable agriculture, animal health, and achieving progress on “Farm to Fork” and agreeing on the “Deforestation” regulation. MEPs questioned the minister on the sustainable use of pesticides, the Russian war’s impact on food security, genomic technologies, the financing of the green transition of the agricultural sector, and meat production.
Regional Development
On 12 July, Deputy Prime Minister for Digitisation and Minister of Regional DevelopmentIvan Bartoš said the Presidency will focus on the future cohesion policy, analysing which instruments are helping to converge EU regions best and ensuring green and digital transitions, while at the same time providing for the necessary flexibility to face new developments.
MEPs stressed cohesion funds should be used to develop a capacity that ensures safe transit of food and supplies, in current time of war. They also warned that cohesion policy principles should not harm the environment. MEPs also urged the Presidency to support the idea of setting-up a new generation Just Transition fund and reviving the EU Cross Border Mechanism.
Economic and Monetary Affairs
Russia’s war in Ukraine and rising inflation will be the backdrop for most of the Presidency’s priorities, Finance Minister Zbyněk Stanjura told MEPs on 13 July. The Presidency would be prioritising reaching agreements on EU rules for a global minimum tax on large multinationals, green bonds, anti-money laundering rules and energy taxation. It would broker discussions on integrating Repower EU into the Recovery and Resilience Facility to remove Russian influence from the EU economy, and on the update of the EU’s fiscal rules.
MEPs focussed their questions on what the Presidency was concretely planning to do to save the rules on a global minimum tax, and how it would orient talks on a revision of the fiscal rules, and to what extent it is possible to address inflation without impinging on the independence of central banks. The looming economic difficulties and the debate around unanimity voting in the area of taxation were also raised by a number of MEPs.
Culture, Education and Youth
On 13 July, Culture Minister Martin Baxa said the Presidency will focus on finalising the EU’s 2023–2026 Work Plan for Culture. He also promised to work to open negotiations on boosting funds for the Creative Europe programme, as the current funding does not meet the sector’s needs. Minister of Education, Youth and Sports Vladimír Balaš focussed in his presentation on digital education, intergenerational dialogue and active support for the European Year of Youth, with a conference on the latter planned for 6 December 2022.
MEPs asked about plans for the Media Freedom Act, due to be announced in September, ways to include Ukrainian students in the EU student mobility programme, and integrating Ukrainian refugee children and young people into the EU education system. They also raised issues around sporting activities, the implementation of the Copyright directive, and completing the European Education area.
International Trade
“Free trade agreements are the core tasks of the Czech Presidency,” said Trade Minister Jozef Síkala on 13 July, a statement that Trade Committee members welcomed. They urged the conclusion and ratification of free trade agreements with, among others, New Zealand, Mexico, Chile, Australia, India and the Mercosur countries, insisting that all trade deals must respect the EU’s values and sustainability goals.
Trade Committee members asked the presidency to work towards reaching a Council position on the review of the Generalised Scheme of Preferences and the anti-coercion instrument and to finally conclude the Post-Cotonou agreement. Several MEPs urged the Council to intensify cooperation with Africa and to consider gender equality when working on trade.
Foreign Affairs
Foreign Affairs Minister Jan Lipavský on 13 July outlined five priorities: Ukraine, energy, defence, economy and democracy. Stressing the need to continue standing by Ukraine, he warned against the dangers of “Ukraine fatigue”, and called for weapons to be supplied to Kyiv more quickly and for greater efforts to facilitate the country’s post-war reconstruction. He also stressed the need for a strong transatlantic partnership and for discussing how the EU should reassess its relations with Russia in the long term.
MEPs quizzed Mr Lipavský on a range of subjects, including on the EU’s long-term vision for relations with Russia, how to move ahead with the EU enlargement process, in particular on Bulgaria’s blockade of North Macedonia, the necessity to grant EU visa liberalisation to Kosovo and the need to counter Russian false narratives in countries south of the EU, including Africa.
Industry, Research and Energy
Ivan Bartoš, Deputy Prime Minister for Digitisation and Minister of Regional Development, said that the Presidency will work on the digital agenda, communication resilience, sustainable digital ecosystems, cybersecurity in the EU, security of ICT supply chains, and digitalisation of public services. The Presidency will aim to secure a Council position on the AI Act, a general approach on the eID regulation, and to continue work on the Data Act. It will also work to reach an agreement in Council on the proposal to reinforce cybersecurity in the EU before the end of November, he said.
On industry and energy, Jozef Síkela, Minister of Industry and Trade, said that the Presidency will work to reduce the EU’s dependence on Russian fossil fuels as set out in the RepowerEU plan, continue work towards climate neutrality, while securing affordable energy for citizens. The Presidency will work on fast-tracking permitting procedures in renewables, improving energy efficiency and energy savings, as well as on the transition to low-carbon and renewable energy sources. It will also focus on diversifying supplies and assist the Commission with the EU’s energy platform for joint purchasing, to ensure that all member states have enough energy supplies for the winter.
On research and innovation, Vladimír Balaš, Minister of Education, Youth and Sports, said that the Presidency will work to advance the development of the European Research area and the EU research ecosystem. It will focus on synergies in research and innovation funding, on the enhancement of the European research infrastructure ecosystem, and the development of a new European innovation agenda. It will also aim to finalise the legislation on the Horizon Europe joint undertakings with regards to semiconductors, and the conclusion of association agreements with third countries on Horizon Europe.
On space policy, Martin Kupka, Minister of Transport , said that the Presidency will remain committed to ensuring that the EUSPA agency for the Space Programme, based in Prague, has the best conditions and provides the best standards. The main priority will be the programme for secure connectivity, and the Presidency is looking to start talks with MEPs as soon as possible. The Presidency will also focus on innovation and the use of data and services from EU space systems, and to extend existing capacities to protect the EU’s satellite systems.
Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs
The Presidency strongly supports EU responses to Russian aggression, including the fight against impunity and collecting evidence on war crimes, Justice Minister Pavel Blažek told MEPs on 5 September. He said that Eurojust and its new mandate can play a key role, while stressing that ongoing work on cracking down on sanctions violations will continue.
European Affairs Minister Mikuláš Bek said that the work on the rule of law will play a major role and announced that the next discussion on the issue will focus on Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia and Sweden. The Presidency will also work on the ongoing procedures on Poland and Hungary, in dialogue with the national governments.
MEPs encouraged the Presidency to produce country-specific recommendations on the state of rule of law. MEPs also called for more engagement on e-Privacy and e-Evidence, asked for a stronger stance on revelations about spyware being used and raised the issue of media monopolisation in certain countries.
On the same day, First Deputy Prime Minister and Interior Minister Vit Rakušan said the Presidency is ready to start negotiations on the Screening and Eurodac regulations and work on structural solutions for solidarity and legal migration. Online child sexual abuse, the mandate of the EU drug addiction monitoring centre, the political governance of the Schengen area and Croatia, Romania and Bulgaria’s inclusion in it, are also priorities.
MEPs asked for more details on the Council’s timetable on migration files, on data protection concerns in relation to fighting online child abuse as well as on pushbacks and human rights violations at the EU’s external borders.
Legal Affairs
On 5 September, Justice Minister Pavel Blažek identified progress on the directive on the protection of the environment through criminal law and the digitalisation of justice systems as key issues. Further priorities include corporate sustainability due diligence, the directive to tackle abusive lawsuits targeting critical voices, so-called SLAPPs, and legislation on Artificial Intelligence (AI).
MEPs stressed the importance of a liability regime for AI. Some MEPs urged for progress on the revision of EU geographical indications. Finally, MEPs asked for an ambitious approach on the SLAPPs directive, underlining that it is of vital importance for freedom of expression, fearing Council might weaken the initiative.
Constitutional Affairs
Following the presentation by European Affairs Minister Mikuláš Bek on 5 September, MEPs inquired on the follow-up to the Conference on the Future of Europe, including the revision of EU Treaties and the reform of electoral rules, already initiated by Parliament. They also called on the Presidency to focus on the fight against foreign interference and disinformation, and the protection of the EU’s legal order from breaches of the rule of law.
Minister Bek replied he intends to have a political discussion on a Convention to revise the Treaties in October, aiming to have a vote in November and pass on the matter to the European Council. Electoral law reform will be debated in October, but he warned MEPs the process will be politically complicated. The Presidency will seek a common approach on European political parties and foundations by the end of the year. On the rule of law, he promised that the topic will feature prominently in all General Affairs Council agendas.
The proposed article was originally printed in the Church Gazette (issues 15, 17 and 19) – an edition of our diocese, as a review of the book of Fr. M. Polsky[1] The canonical position of the supreme church authority in the USSR and abroad (from “Typography of Rev. Iov Pochaevsky in St. Troitskom monastry”, 1948, 196 p.), and it is reprinted here without any significant changes. In it I touch, as far as it is possible for me, only one of all concerned in the book of Fr. M. Polish questions, namely about the church organization abroad.
Based on a detailed analysis of facts and documents, in his book prot. Polsky comes to the following definite conclusion: “Today, the only canonical authority in the Russian Orthodox Church as a whole, both for its overseas part and – after 1927 – for Russia itself, is the Abroad Synod of Bishops” (p. 193). It is hardly possible to say more clearly. Therefore, if only out of respect for the author’s personality and work, we must treat his evidence carefully and try to put and understand the question on its merits. There is no room for controversy here. Or Fr. M. Polski is right – and then, convinced by him, all those who until that moment have thought otherwise are obliged to accept his conclusions and harmonize their church life according to them – or he is not right, but in such a case it is not enough to simply say this, but to reveal where the justice lies. There can be no relativism in the church. And the fact that so many people these days “don’t pay attention” to the question of church organization and consider it unimportant, some “business of the bishops”, is only a sign of a deep illness and loss of church consciousness. There cannot be multiple equally valid ways of understanding the Church, its nature, task and organization.
The book of Fr. M. Polski demands from us a clear and definite answer to the question: what is our specific disagreement with the Overseas Synod and where do we see the norm of the canonical structure of our church life? I am convinced that the time has come when these questions must be posed and considered in substance, that is, in the light of the Tradition of the Church, instead of in the fruitless form of “jurisdictional polemics”. Of course, just one article is not enough for this purpose. The concerted effort of the entire church consciousness is necessary. The task of this article is only to ask the question and try to evaluate the book of Fr. M. Polski in some comprehensive relationship. It goes without saying that the article has no official character and is only a private attempt – according to one’s own strength – to ecclesiastically approach some of the painful difficulties of our church life.
All disputes over ecclesiastical organization usually boil down to the question of canonicity and non-canonicality, in which the ways of defining both are infinitely varied. Thus, at the basis of his judgments, Fr. M. Polski takes Apostolic Rule 34: “The bishops of each nation must know which of them is first and recognize him as the head.” And let them not do without his opinion anything that exceeds their power: let each do only that which pertains to his diocese and to the lands belonging to it. But the first should not do anything without the opinion of all. Because in this way there will be consensus and God will be glorified through the Lord in the Holy Spirit – Father and Son and Holy Spirit”.[2] However, we can ask: why, as the main criterion, Fr. M. Polsky proclaims just this and not some other rule? Take, for example, Rule 15 of the First Ecumenical Council. It prohibits bishops and clerics from moving from one diocese to another. At the same time, both in Russia and abroad, the relocated bishops were and continue to be not an exception to the rule, but a common practice, and the Abroad Synod itself was composed in its majority of bishops who abandoned their chairs. Therefore, if we take this rule as the main criterion, then under the concept of “non-canonicality” we can include the entire episcopate of the synodal period of the history of the Russian Church, not to mention emigration. We cite this example not to simplify the controversy, but only to show the arbitrary nature of the one used by Fr. M. Polish method, the application of which would make all modern disputes about canonicity meaningless. Because on the basis of individual canonical texts, arbitrarily selected and interpreted ad hoc, absolutely everything that pleases us can be proved, and in the émigré church-polemical literature, curious examples can be found of how with the help of the same canons one can prove and justify two diametrically opposed points of view. Thus, it becomes clear that before we use the canons, we must establish the norm of their use itself, i.e. try to clarify what a canon is and what its action is in the life of the Church.
It is known that the Church compiled the canons at different times and on different occasions, in the general case with the aim of correcting the distortions of church life or in connection with a change that occurred in the conditions of church life. Thus, in their origin, the canons were determined by the historical setting in view of which they were composed. From this, some “liberal” Orthodox people make the hasty and erroneous conclusion that, as a rule, the canons are “inapplicable” because the conditions of life for which they were created have changed, and therefore all disputes about canonicity are a fruitless and harmful casuistry. Opposing the “liberals” are those who can be called zealots of canonical formalism. Usually ill-informed in theology and in the history of the Church, they see in the canons only the letter and consider as heresy any attempt to see meaning behind that letter. Indeed, at first glance, the implementation of the canons faces great difficulties. So what relation to our lives could have some of the canons, for example, of the Council of Carthage, determining how to divide the dioceses with bishops who switched to the heresy of the Donatists (Council of Carthage, Rule 132)? And at the same time, the Church has repeatedly and solemnly confirmed the “indestructibility” and “unwaveringness” of the canons (Seventh Ecumenical Council, Rule 1; Council of Trulli), and the promise of fidelity to the canons is part of our bishop’s oath. In reality, however, this contradiction is apparent and based on a theological misunderstanding. The deepest error of both “liberals” and “zealots” is that they see in the canon a statute of a juridical nature – a kind of administrative rule that is automatically applicable if only a suitable text can be found. In this approach, some who find such a text try to use it to justify their position (which, in fact, is usually determined for completely different reasons), and others simply reject any reference to the canons as obviously “outdated” legislation.
The thing is, however, that the canon is not a legal document, that it is not a simple administrative rule that can be applied purely formally. The canon contains an indication of how, under the given conditions, the eternal and unchanging essence of the Church can be embodied and manifested, and precisely this eternal truth expressed in the canon – although on a completely different occasion, radically different from our historical situation – represents the eternal and unshakable content of the canon and it is she who makes the canons an invariable part of the Tradition of the Church. “The forms of historical existence of the Church – writes an Orthodox canonist – are extremely diverse. To anyone with even a little knowledge of Church history, this is so self-evident that it requires no proof. One historical form is replaced in this process by another. And yet, for all the diversity of the historical forms of church life, we find in them a constant core. This core is the dogmatic teaching of the Church, or in other words, the Church itself. Church life cannot take arbitrary forms, but only those that correspond to the essence of the Church and are able to express this essence under the specific historical conditions”.[3] Therefore, it is the canon that is the norm for how the Church embodies its immutable essence in changing historical conditions. And therefore to use the canons means, first of all, to be able to find in the text of the canon that eternal core, that side of the dogmatic teaching of the Church, which are precisely contained in it, then to update this eternally – again and again – in life. However, for such use of the canons, as for everything else in the Church, the dead knowledge of the Book of Rules is not enough,[4] but a spiritual effort is required, since the canons cannot be separated from the entire Tradition of the Church, as this people using them as absolute legal rules often do. Fidelity to the canons is fidelity to the entire Tradition of the Church, and this fidelity, in the words of Prof. Prot. Georgi Florovski, “does not mean fidelity to the external authority of the past, but is a living connection with the fullness of the Church’s experience. The reference to the Tradition is not only a historical argument, and the Tradition is not reduced to ecclesiastical archaeology”.[5]
And so, the yardstick for the ecclesiastical structure turns out to be not the bare canonical text, but the testimony contained in it about the Tradition of the Church. This is the only understanding of the canons that gives us an objective and ecclesiastical criterion for determining the applicability or non-applicability of one or another canon to a given situation, and thus also tells us the way of its use. Therefore, in our effort to determine the canonical norm of our ecclesiastical organization in these new conditions in which God has condemned us to live, we are obliged first of all to recall what the Church has always and everywhere embodied but with its external arrangement and what is that main thing to which the canons point.
2. The essence of the Church
The essence of the Church can be expressed with a single word – unity. The Greek term itself ἐκκλησία (church) means, according to the definition of St. Cyril of Jerusalem, “a gathering of all together in unity.” “And the fact that, from the very beginning, this term closely related to Old Testament terminology was taken to denote the Christian Church, speaks clearly of the consciousness of unity that was present in the primal church” – so he writes in his Essays on the History of Dogma for the Church V. Troitsky (subsequently Solovetsky confessor archbishop Hilarion).[6] However, what is the essence of this unity, what is expressed or should it be expressed?
With sadness we have to admit that if we continue to profess the unity of the Church, as well as other dogmas with our mouths, then in our consciousness this unity has become an almost hijacked concept, or almost subconsciously we have replaced its original meaning with our own concepts. While at the same time the unity of the Church is not just a “negative” sign, which means that the Church is united when there are no obvious disagreements in it, but represents the very content of church life. Unity in Christ of people with God and unity – in Christ – of the people themselves among themselves, according to the words of the Lord: “I am in them, and You in Me, so that they may be in complete unity” (John 17:23). “The church – writes Fr. G. Florovsky – is a unity not only in the sense that it is one and only, but above all because its very essence consists in the rejoining into one of the divided and fragmented human race”.[7] In the fallen and sinful world, everything divides people, and therefore the unity of the Church is supernatural. It requires a re-gathering and renewal of human nature itself – things that were accomplished by Christ in His Incarnation, in His death on the cross and Resurrection – and which are graciously given to us in the Church through the sacrament of Baptism. In the fallen world, Christ has begun a new being. “This very new being of humanity St. Ap. Paul calls the Church and characterizes it as the Body of Christ”,[8] that is, such an “organic unity of all believers that even the life of the regenerated person becomes unthinkable outside of this organic unity”.[9]
However, just as in the sacrament of Baptism we receive all the fullness of grace, but we ourselves must grow in it by being filled with it, so in the Church – all the fullness of unity is given in Christ, but each of us is required to fulfill or realize this unity, manifestation of this unity in life. In this way, the life of the Church represents a “creation of the body of Christ, until we all reach the unity of faith and the knowledge of the Son of God, to the state of a perfect man, to the full age of Christ’s perfection” (Eph. 4:12-13). “Only then will the head, that is, Christ, be fulfilled, when we are all united and fastened in the most permanent way”.[10] The way to realize this unity in Christ with a view to the creation of His Body is love. “Paul demands from us such a love – says St. John Chrysostom – that would bind us together, making us inseparable from one another, and such a perfect union as if we were members of the same body”.[11] And finally, in the Liturgy – the highest and final embodiment of the Church’s unity in Christ – only after we have “loved one another” can we pray: “All of us – partakers of the one Bread and the one Cup – unite one to another in the one Spirit of Holy Communion…” (From the Liturgy of St. Basil the Great).
Thus unity turns out to be a real content of church life. Given to the Church from the very beginning, it is also the goal of each of us and of all together – that fullness to which we are obliged to strive at every moment of our ecclesial existence.
3. The Catholicity of the Church: local and universal
Here is this unity, which is the dogmatic essence of the Church, represents in reality the norm of its organization, i.e. it is precisely what is embodied in both the external and internal organization of the Church throughout its earthly history – it is also pointed to it is invariably protected by church canons. “This unity, i.e. the church itself, does not seem like something desired and only expected. The church is not only a conceivable magnitude, it is a real historically tangible phenomenon… In the natural world, Christ has laid the beginning of a special, supernatural society, which will continue to exist alongside natural phenomena”.[12] And because of this, the historical forms of the church organization, although they change depending on the external historical conditions, change only because in these new conditions the same eternal essence of the Church and, above all, its unity is invariably embodied. That is why, under the diversity and difference of all these forms, we always find a basic core, some permanent principle, the betrayal of which or the violation of which would mean to change the very nature of the church. We have in mind the principle of the locality of the ecclesiastical structure.
The locality of the Church means that in one place, that is, in one territory, only one Church can exist, or in other words, one church organization, expressed in the unity of the priesthood. The bishop is the head of the Church – in the words of St. Cyprian of Carthage, who said: “The Church is in the bishop and the bishop is in the Church.” That is why in a Church there can be only one head – a bishop – and this bishop, in turn, heads the whole Church in the given place. “The Church of God in Corinth” (1 Cor. 1:2) – here the history of the Church begins with such church units scattered all over the world. And if subsequently this unit and its territory undergo development – from a small municipality in a given city to a diocese, from a diocese to a district and from a district to a huge patriarchate, the principle itself remains unchanged, and at its foundation always remains the same indestructible cell: the one bishop heading the one Church in the particular place. If we delve into the essence of the canons that refer to the authority of the bishop and to the distinction of this authority between the individual bishops, it will not be subject to any doubt that they protect precisely this primordial norm, demanding its embodiment regardless of the specific conditions.
Why is this so? This is so precisely because of this unity of the Church in each specific place, which is also the first concrete embodiment of that unity in which the very essence of the Church and its life consists – the unity of the people whom Christ has regenerated for new life and for who “is one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph. 4:5). And therefore there can be no other principle of organization of the Church than the local and the territorial, because any other principle would mean that some other natural feature – national, racial or ideological – has replaced the supernatural, supernatural, grace unity in Christ. The Church opposes the natural divisions in the world to the supernatural unity in God and embodies this unity in its structure.
The same meaning is also contained in the other name of the Church – in naming it New Israel. Old Testament Israel was the people of God and its religion was essentially national, so accepting it meant becoming a Jew “in the flesh”, joining the Jewish people. As for the Church, its designation as the “new Israel” meant that the Christians constituted a new and united people of God, of which the Old Testament Israel was a type, and in this new unity “circumcision or uncircumcision” no longer means anything – there is no Jew there, we are Greek, but all are already one in Christ.
This very principle of locality lies at the basis of the catholicity (i.e. collegiality) of the Church.[13] The Greek word catholicity means first of all wholeness and applied to the Church, it indicates not only its universality, i.e. that the Universal Church is simply a sum of all its parts, but also that in the Church everything is Catholic, i.e. that in each of its parts the whole fullness of the experience of the Church, its whole essence, is fully embodied. “The Catholic Church residing in Smyrna” – this is how the Smyrna Christians defined themselves in the middle of the second century (Martyrdom of Polycarp 16, 2). Every Christian is also called to this catholicity, i.e. to conformity with the whole. “The order for Catholicism – says Fr. G. Florovsky – is given to everyone… The Church is Catholic in each of its members, since the Catholic whole cannot be built in any other way than through the Catholicity of all members”.[14] And so every church, every ecclesiastical community, in any place, is always a living embodiment of the whole essence of the Church: not just a part, but a member living the life of the whole organism, or rather, the Catholic Church itself , residing at this location.
(to be continued)
* “Church and church structure. About books prot. Polish Canonical position of the highest church authorities in the USSR and abroad” – In: Shmeman, A. Collection of articles (1947-1983), M.: “Русский пут” 2009, pp. 314-336; the text was originally published in: Church Gazette of the Western-European Orthodox Russian Exarchate, Paris, 1949.
Notes:
[1] Protopresbyter Mikhail Polsky (1891-1960) was a graduate of the Stavropol Theological Seminary, a priest from 1920, and in 1921 he entered the Moscow Theological Academy, which was closed soon after. In 1923 he was arrested and exiled to the Solovetsky Islands, but in 1930 he managed to escape and cross the Russian-Persian border. At first he ended up in Palestine, then (from 1938 to 1948) he was the chairman of the London parish of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (OROC), and in 1948 he moved to the USA, where he served in the church of the ROCOR “Joy of All Who Sorrow” in the city of San Francisco. He is the author of a number of works on the situation of the church in Soviet Russia.
[2] Cited by: The rules of the Holy Orthodox Church with their interpretations, 1, S. 1912, p. 98.
[3] Afanasyev, N. “Unchanging and temporary in church canons” – In: Living tradition. Collection, Paris 1937.
[4] Literally the Book of Rules – Slavic bilingual canonical collection (with Church Slavonic and Greek text), published for the first time in the first half of the 19th century and including the creeds of the ecumenical councils, the so-called Apostolic Rules, the rules of the ecumenical and of the local councils and the rules of the holy fathers (note trans.).
[5] Florovsky, G. “Sobornost” – In: The Church of God, London 1934, p. 63.
[6] Troitskii, V. Essays on the history of dogma about the Church, Sergiev Posad 1912, p. 15. See also: Aquilonov, E. Church (scientific definitions of the Church and apostolic teaching from it as about the Body of Christ), St. Petersburg. 1894; Mansvetov, N. New Testament teaching from Tserkva, M. 1879.
[7] Florovsky, G. Cit. op. p. 55. See also: Antonius, Mitr. Collection Sochinenii, 2, pp. 17-18: “The being of the Church cannot be compared with anything else on earth, since there is no unity there, only division… The Church is a completely new, extraordinary and unique being on earth , a “unique” that cannot be defined by any concepts taken from the life of the world… The Church is a similitude of the life of the Holy Trinity – a similitude in which the many become one.”
[8] Troitsky, V. Cit. ibid., p. 24.
[9] Ibid., p. 7.
[10] St. John Chrysostom, “Interpretation of the Epistle to the Ephesians”, Sermon 2 – In: The Creation of St. Joanna Chrysostom in Russian translation, 2, pp. 26-27.
[11] Ibid., p. 96.
[12] Troitskyi, V. Cit. ibid., p. 24.
[13] The exact name of the Orthodox Church is the Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church (for this see in: Prostrannyi khristianskii catechesis by Mitr. Philaret).
The Germans’ love for their dogs is proverbial. Now an exact price can be put on this love, reports DPA.
In 2021, the total amount of tax paid by dog owners in Germany rose by 5.4 percent to a record 401 million euros, according to data from the federal statistics office Destatis.
This is likely due to the pandemic-related increased purchases of pets, the agency said.
The tendency to increase the “love” for dogs was clearly manifested already in 2020. Then some wanted to have company while working from home, and others – to have a reason to go outside, at a time when this was not recommended.
The tax authorities, however, report a steady increase in dog tax revenue over the past decade. Compared to 2011, the increase in 2021 is nearly 46 percent.
Russia found itself in a Chinese trap. Before the war in Ukraine, it invested 17% of its gold reserves in yuan to protect itself from possible sanctions. Now, however, it turned out to be impossible to get them, because for their sale you need a special permission from China, which is difficult to obtain, writes Bloomberg(link is external). According to the Central Bank’s report, 105 billion dollars were invested in Chinese yuan.
This is clear from a presentation of the Central Bank of Russia, prepared for a meeting with members of the government on the further fate of reserves and plans to replenish them with the currency of “friendly countries”, held on August 30.
According to the document, Russian authorities are discussing the possibility of buying yuan and other “soft” currencies for $70 billion. “In the new situation, the accumulation of liquid reserves in foreign currency for future crises is extremely difficult and slow. The frozen 300 billion dollars not only does not help Russia, but is also a weakness, a symbol of missed opportunities,” says the presentation in a rare acknowledgment of the true impact of sanctions.
The Central Bank recognizes that because of the sanctions and the ban on operations with dollars and euros, this is not an easy task. The choice must fall on the few “friendly countries”. But the Turkish lira is collapsing – in 10 years it has lost 90% of its value. The UAE dirham is a “political risk” as it has increased visits by US officials to Dubai, who are insisting that the city does not become a hub for circumventing sanctions. There remains the yuan, but there is also a problem – it is easy to put money in, but it is almost impossible to withdraw it. “It is extremely difficult to obtain permission for the sale of Chinese yuan from the Chinese authorities in times of crisis,” the Central Bank wrote.
Officials first broached the idea of buying “friendly” currencies to slow the ruble’s rise in June. At the time, Economy Minister Maxim Reshetnikov criticized the idea, saying it wouldn’t be enough to move the ruble rate much but would force the government to reduce spending sharply.
Citigroup economist Ivan Tchakarov called the plan for buying $70 billion by year-end “quite ambitious,” writing in a note that past purchases have been more modest. “In any case,” he added, “the government seems determined to finally engineer a weaker ruble into year-end.”
Russia’s last unfrozen reserves turned out to be in a Chinese “trap”. About half of the 640 billion dollars available to the Central Bank before the start of the war in Ukraine fell under the first wave of Western sanctions – these are investments in dollars, euros, Japanese yen, British pounds, Australian and Canadian dollars.
The Central Bank began buying yuan in 2018, when the US imposed sanctions on Rusal and began discussing measures against Russian sovereign debt. The largest investment of 44 billion was made in the spring of 2018, when the exchange rate of the Chinese currency was 6.2-6.4 yuan to the dollar. In 2021, the Russian Ministry of Finance transferred the dollar portion of the $17 billion National Welfare Fund into yuan at a rate of 6.4 yuan to the dollar. The Chinese currency is now trading at around 6.9 yuan to the dollar.
The Central Bank’s gold – 2.3 thousand tons, which is the fifth largest reserve in the world, came under separate US sanctions in April. And although gold bars are located in Russia and cannot be arrested, they cannot be sold secretly abroad – Russian gold has characteristic impurities that will immediately show the origin of the metal.
We are all familiar with cloves and that it is a well-known spice that we cannot miss because of its strong aroma and taste.
But despite how small it is, it is very rich in minerals, such as calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, selenium, zinc, etc.
Its spectrum of action is very wide – the spice has a strong effect on the body and can solve many problems and prevent those that have not yet appeared. You can also use clove essential oil, which is rich in eugenol, which turns it into an antiseptic. Just by sucking a bud of it, you can even help get rid of bad breath by letting it dissolve.
Make it part of your morning routine, such as sucking on a spice 15 minutes before breakfast, and its components will have a good effect on your digestive tract. It is also very rich in antioxidants, can raise blood pressure and is quite useful instead of coffee.
According to some people, it is even a “female healer” because it can be used to prepare a potion suitable for irregular periods. Of course, never take before consulting a specialist to be as sure as possible that you are protecting your health.
Alevis are accepted by modern Shia scholarship, although there has long been controversy over this issue. From the beginning of their existence until today, the Alevis have been called by various names. In colloquial Turkish and in official documents from different periods, there are many designations for them. At the same time, they identify themselves with different names. The names “Kazalbashi”, “Alevi” and “Bektashi” have gained the greatest popularity. It is correct to point out that the term “Alevi” does not correspond either historically or chronologically to the name “Kazalbashi”. The word “Alevi” means “descendant of Ali ibn Abu Talib”, who was the son-in-law, cousin and first companion of the Prophet Muhammad. In the Ottoman Empire, this term is found since the 19th century and is preserved in modern Turkey. It refers to the opponents of Sunni Islam, i.e. the followers of Ali, who defend his right to rule in the ummah (Muslim community) after the death of Muhammad. Today, “Alevi” are the groups professing moderate or extreme Shia beliefs and mysticism. The name “Kazalbashi” appeared at the end of the 15th century and referred to the supporters of the Safavids, and later included all Turkic groups in Anatolia who professed heterodox Islam and in which the cult of Ali played a major role. The name “Kazalbash” comes from the Turkic words kazal – red and bash – head, i.e. red-headed, from the twelve red ribbons hung on their hats in honor of the twelve Shia imams. In documents from the time of the Ottoman Empire, “Kazalbash” is found as a synonym for the terms “Rafazi”, “Mulhid” and “Zandak”, which mean “heretic, apostate, godless” and have a pejorative meaning. Because of this negative meaning, “Kazalbash” is still replaced by “Alevi” to this day. It should be specified that within the community itself, the name “Kazalbash” is not offensive. The founder of the Safavid state, Shah Ismail himself, called himself, as well as his followers, “Qazlbash” without attaching a pejorative meaning to this term. According to I. Melikoff, the Qazlbashes in Anatolia, like their similar sectarian groups in Iran, should be referred to by the general name “Ali illahi”, since their common feature is the belief in the divinity of Ali. And they themselves are called so in their religious verses and prayers. At the same time, the Alevis (Kazalbashi) in Turkey are also called Bektashi, which refers them to the Bektashi Order and to Bektashiism in general. A significant number of them also identified as Babai and thus identified with the Babai movement that arose in 1239–1240 against the central Seljuk power. They are also defined as Ja’farites, i.e. as followers of the school of the sixth Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq, whose teachings they follow secretly. The community in question also uses for itself names that are kept secret from the uninitiated. Such are, for example, “ahl-i Haq” (“people of God, people of the Truth”), “Hak erenler” and “gerchek erenler” (“those who have reached the Divine truth”) or “gyuruh-i naji” (“community of the redeemed” ). Taking these meanings into consideration, it can be concluded that they perceive themselves to have known God and attained the Divine truth.
With their establishment in Anatolia, the Seljuks imposed the system of leased use of the land – ikta, tied to military and official duties. Turkic beys were also given the right to rule for life and thus became a kind of civil servants, subordinating large tribes and many settled peasants. Thus the foundation of the provincial Turkic dynasties was created. Among the tribes that arrived in Anatolia after the Mongol invasions, the imposition of the ikta system no longer proceeded smoothly. The discontent that grew among the Turks led to serious clashes between them and the Seljuk power. The most shocking was the Babai rebellion of 1239–1240 during the reign of Sultan Gyaseddin II Keyhusrev (1237–1246). The Turkic tribes resisted the advance of Islam. However, it penetrates into their lives in various ways – through coercive methods, through peaceful propaganda, through trade connections and due to economic interests. But caught in their cultural milieu, Islam was forced either to war against Turkic beliefs or to adapt and become part of them. He chooses the path to adaptation and the creation of syncretic forms. Thus, for four centuries, Islam managed to establish itself among the Turks. Entering the community of the Orthodox, the Turks preserved various national and regional traditions, integrated into their new religion. Despite becoming an integral part of the Muslim tradition, many of the Turks find it difficult to part with their old religious ideas, borrowed from shamanism and the other religious systems with which they came into contact (Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Manichaeism, Mazdakism). A large part of the Turks do become a supporter of Islamic orthodoxy, but there are also a considerable number of adherents of Shiism who practice it in moderate or extreme forms. The penetration of Shi’ism among these groups is due to the fact that in the eastern provinces, inhabited also by Turkic groups, the propaganda of the Alids (supporters of Ali and his family) quickly spread. Already within the borders of the Ottoman Empire, the unrest of the Anatolian population did not stop. In the period after 1500, strong Turkic groups from the central Anatolian steppes, the Taurus Mountains, and the heights of Tokat and Sivas declared themselves against the centralized Ottoman administration. In an attempt to protect the settled population and preserve its agricultural income, the administration is making efforts to impose control over these tribes. For this purpose, it enters them in its cadastral registers and subjects them to systematic taxation. In the mentioned period, the Ottoman regime was no longer compatible with the nomadic economy and tribal customary law. He espoused the cause of Sunni orthodoxy, while the tribes fanatically adhered to dervish orders, preaching a form of Islam that was radically altered by tribal customs and shamanic beliefs. The mentioned tribes, known as Qazalbashi because of the red hood they wore, became the expressions of strong anti-Ottoman social and political sentiments. The Kızlbaş were the foundation of the Akkoyunlu state in Eastern Anatolia, which was one of the rivals of the Ottoman Empire to the east. In 1473, Mehmed the Conqueror crushed them mercilessly. Around 1500, however, Ismail Safavi, who was of the Safaviye dynasty, was supported by the Akkoyunlus in eastern Anatolia, in present-day Azerbaijan and Iran. As the leader of a heretical religious order, he spread his influence over all the Anatolian Turkic groups. His people preached his ideas all over Anatolia. Thousands of Ottoman subjects followed Ismail and he became their religious and political leader. For the central Ottoman power, the Qazalbashi movement was a serious internal problem because Ismail announced that he would make Anatolia part of the Iranian Empire. In 1511, when Bayezid II was old and ill, and the Ottoman princes were in conflict for the throne, the Qizlbaş of the western Anatolian highlands rose in revolt, led by one of Ismail’s men. They attack Bursa, burning and destroying everything in their path. Prince Selim was among the first to push for strong action against Ismail. Selim won the support of the Janissaries and on April 24, 1512, forced his father to abdicate. He imprisoned about 40,000 of Shah Ismail’s associates and executed them, and then attacked Ismail as well, declaring him a heretic Shiite. The Sultan caught up with the Shah’s army in eastern Anatolia and won a decisive victory at Chalderan on 23 August 1514. This victory temporarily removed the threat from the Qazalbaş and allowed Selim to annex the mountainous region from Erzurum to Diyarbakır to the Ottoman Empire. In 1516–1517, the local dynasties and chieftains of the area recognized Ottoman suzerainty. Turkic tribes from Anatolia, and in particular from Eastern Anatolia, migrated en masse to Iran and Azerbaijan, where they served as the main force in the Safavid armies. In the 16th century, there were also many forced deportations of heterodox groups from Eastern and Central Anatolia and from the conquered Azerbaijani regions. The policy of forced resettlement was most intense under Selim I and Suleiman I. In the Balkans, including the Bulgarian lands, large groups of displaced Qazalbashi arrived. Another part of the kizalbashi were killed. They remain outside the millet system. In parallel with the institutionalization of official religions and the creation of the millet system, Istanbul began to treat the Kızlbaş as a “fifth column” both religiously and politically. After defeating Safavid Persia, the Ottoman Empire severed ties between the Qazalbashi living in Ottoman territory and Iran. During this period of isolation, many og Qazalbash communities joined Bektashism, which included the Janissary Corps. This religious brotherhood, which is associated with the name of Haji Bektash (13th century), to some extent succeeded in channeling the heterodoxy of the Qazalbashi. However, one should not equate the religious practices of the Qizalbash and the Bektash, even though many of their elements of cult and belief are close. Membership in Bektashism is associated with a conscious act of initiation into a teacher. Belonging to the Qazalbashi, however, is predetermined at birth. The leaders of the two groups are not the same. The Bektashite brotherhood is led by the dedebaba, who is elected. The spiritual authority over most of the Qazalbashi is exercised by the chelebiya, perceived as a descendant of the saint Haji Bektash. In addition, not all Alevi groups belong to Bektashism. Some remain autonomous, such as the Tahtaji living along the Mediterranean coast of Turkey. The ties between Bektashi and Alevi weakened during the period of modernization that entered the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century. The Bektashi are a predominantly urban type of people, many of whom are part of the elite of Istanbul, Izmir and Thessaloniki. They take part in the modernization processes and a large number of them are among the reformers close to the authorities. Alevis, however, remain a predominantly rural population, foreign to reform processes and the idea of modernization. The Safavid episode was decisive for the formation of Qazalbash beliefs and practices, and Bektashism brought them somewhat closer to Muslim mysticism. Alevis interpret the Koran in a flexible way. They believe that the Sunnis are incapable of understanding the spirit of the Holy Book. They also do not observe some of the sacred pillars of Islam, for example daily prayers, fasting during the month of Ramadan, pilgrimage to Mecca. Their moral system of rules is concentrated in the formula “eline, diline, beline sahip olmak”, which translates to “be master of your hand, your tongue and your loins”, i.e. don’t steal, don’t lie and you shall not commit adultery.
The meaning of the presence of prayers – requests in the prayer practice of such a fatalistic religion as Islam, seems completely incomprehensible. According to Islamic doctrine, the afterlife of a person is predetermined by Allah. Even before his birth, a person is given a list of his future affairs, under which he can only silently sign and humbly accept. “They tied a bird to each of you” (K.17:14), i.e. what she portends is fate. Arabs – pagans believed in fate, fate and determined it by the flight of a bird (auspices). Mohammed could not rid himself of these pagan prejudices and decided to put into the mouth of God the words of a superstitious Arab. A “faithful” Muslim humbly expects what Allah will deign to prepare for his obedient slave, whether it be good or bad: “Neither good nor bad will befall us in the earthly world, except for what Allah has ordained for us. We are humble before His predestination” (K.9:51). At the same time, Islam still recognizes relative freedom of will for a person: “If your Lord, O prophet, wished, then people would have one religion, and they would obey Allah by their nature, like angels, but the Almighty did not wish this, but gave them freedom of choice” (K.11:118), “Allah willed… that you have the ability to choose” (K.16:93). At first glance, there is a certain similarity between the Qur’anic quotations and the Christian doctrine of free will. But it’s not. In Islam, it is believed that a person makes his choice from a list of options, each of which is already predetermined by Allah. That is, a person himself chooses his life path, whether it is: life – death, faith – disbelief, light – darkness, good – evil, but all these options are already predetermined by Allah, or, which is the same, are his will. “We are running from the predetermined to the predetermined,” said Omar ibn Khattab.
This is best illustrated by the case of Ali. “Once Khazret Ali (May Allah Almighty be pleased with him!) Was resting in the shadow of a wall that was about to collapse. Suddenly he stood up and moved into the shadow of another, much more secure wall. The companions immediately asked him: “O Ali! Are you avoiding what Allah has prepared for you?” He answered them: “I seek refuge in the power of Allah from the fate that he has prepared for me, that is, I run away from one fate in order to achieve another. If the wall came down on me and I was injured, then such would be the immutable sentence of Allah and His predestination, and since I left the dangerous place and avoided mutilation, then it was allowed for me and, therefore, such was again the immutable sentence. Allah and His predestination.
That is, wherever a person goes, he everywhere falls into the network of Allah’s predestination: “Not a single misfortune will befall the servant of Allah without His permission and predestination” (K.64:11). The freedom of a person manifests itself precisely at the moment of choosing between already predetermined paths. True, for some reason, Muslims do not associate such manifestations of evil as: drug addiction, alcoholism and prostitution with the predestination of Allah. Although, according to their own theory, everything goes to this. Even the Quran says about this: “No trouble will strike the earth: drought, lack of fruits, etc., and will not strike your souls: sickness, poverty, death, etc., unless it was predetermined by Allah … before We bring it to life on earth and in your souls. The predestination of trouble, the knowledge of it for Allah is very easy and does not present any difficulty ”(K.57:22). Of course, if we take the current situation, then, indeed, it turns out that a person himself makes a choice, for example, whether to sin with a harlot or not. But if we return to the origins of this sin, i.e. when there was no prostitution yet (we are considering classical prostitution, and not priestly or any other), we will see that the first woman who decides to do this still makes some choice from several options (to choose this way of earning money or no, even if the decision is not made by her), of course, already predetermined by Allah. Thus, we get the conclusion that the very appearance of such a variety of sin as prostitution is the predestination of Allah, i.e. his will. And although Muslims themselves recognize this as absurd, the Qur’an explicitly says that it was Allah who commanded some people to do wickedness so that they strayed from the straight path, and for this he himself destroyed them. And this destruction of people, firstly, was predetermined by Allah, and secondly, it was an expression of his will: “And when We, according to Our predestination (underlined – author), recorded in the Preserved Tablet (al – Laukh al – Mahfuz) , wished to destroy the inhabitants of the village in justice and according to Our will. We gave a command to those endowed with blessings in it, and they did wickedness and strayed from the straight path, and others thoughtlessly followed them, erring. Thus, they all deserved punishment, and We destroyed this village completely ”(K.17:16).
There is, however, another attempt to resolve this providential problem created by Muhammad. Some of the representatives of Muslim publicists (Yasin Rasulov), trying to somehow hush up this inconvenient incident with predestination, explain it in the sense of the establishment (predestination) by Allah of the laws of the universe. That is, predestination (predestination) is considered the inevitability of some law of nature. For example, a person decides to throw himself into an abyss. He jumps in and dies. His death in this case is considered predetermined by Allah by virtue of the laws of attraction established (predetermined) by him. That is, a person makes his own choice (manifestation of free will) and is broken due to the inevitability of the laws of nature established by Allah (predestination). Also, if he jumps there with a parachute, his flight is also predetermined by Allah by virtue of the relevant laws. If he walks on the ground, his movement is predetermined due to the inevitability of the laws of locomotion, etc. But to go, run or jump – the decision is made by a person.
It must be assumed that a person flying on a rocket overcomes the predetermined laws of attraction by virtue of other laws of mechanics predetermined by Allah. The bomb in Hiroshima burned everything alive due to the predetermined inevitability of the laws of nuclear physics. Alcoholic beverages knock a person down due to the predetermined inevitability of the laws of the effects of alcohol on the human body. LSD is maddening due to the corresponding processes predetermined by Allah, etc. It turns out that a person makes a decision, and Allah implements it. In this case, the blame falls on both, and no one has the right to take on the role of judge in relation to the other.
In short, such schemes can be developed indefinitely, but where is the truth? And the truth has long since been revealed to the world in the words: “And God created man … in the image of God … and in the likeness of God he created him” (Gen. 1:27; 5:1). That is, man was created holy and striving for goodness and absolutely free, as his Creator is free. And history develops not in the way God predetermines it, but in the way that man himself “predetermines” it, in accordance with the use of free will by him.
By the way, Islam teaches that in case of unauthorized use by a person of free will, which is entirely a gift of Allah and belongs only to him, he deprives a person of this gift and acts with a sinful weak-willed being at his own discretion.
Which one? One can only guess. Since “if a person uses it (the gift of free will – ed.) incorrectly, does not fulfill his high destiny (presumably, he is not a Muslim – ed.), then the existence of such an individual loses all meaning”93. That is, the sinner is deprived of free will and is quietly thrown into the garbage heap of mankind as hopeless and “unfaithful.” Thus, the relative free will of a person is impermanent and periodic! And this despite the fact that Islam endlessly repeats about some kind of repentance, which in fact concerns exclusively Muslims, because “The one who accepts repentance is At – Tawwab (80th name)” – Allah: “Then, when you repented of your sin and asked Allah has forgiveness for him (calf), We have spared and forgive you ”(K.2:52). For everyone else, repentance lies solely in the adoption of Islam. But according to the same Koran, repentance is impossible for sinners, “For whom Allah has deprived of His mercy and led away from the straight path, you will never be able to guide him to the straight path” (K.4: 88). He can only guess why the merciful and merciful Allah, who, “if he wished, could direct every soul to the straight path” (K.32:13), nevertheless predestined them to be led astray from this straight path and “be kindling for hellfire”? (K.3:10) As a result, “we were convinced that Allah is powerful over us, wherever we are on earth, and we will not be saved from His predestination (sub. – ed.) by fleeing to heaven” (K.72 :12).
This is not enough. According to Islamic ideas, Allah is the creator of all events on earth (both positive and negative), as well as all the deeds and deeds of every person and any creature (both good and evil) up to this moment. That is, being in fact the creator of good and evil, he is in the literal sense the incessant creator of the history of mankind. “World history is an unceasing epiphany, even the victories of the infidels happen according to the will of God”94. “God not only maintains the world, but precisely creates it every moment, creates it again and again, so that in each subsequent moment any thing, any being, each person is different, different, different. The created world does not even have a relative ontological status. Not only through providence, but through the permanent creation itself, he is dependent on God. Between the action and its consequences, God establishes only a connection of habit, routine, but He is free at any moment to break this connection, to change everything. Likewise, human actions do not have any internal ontological reality: “God created both you and the work of your hands” (K.37:96), says the Koran, and Sunni Islam literally understands these words. God directly creates every action of man, both in its essence and in its moral content. That is, any sin and any evil, in principle, can be written off to the will of Allah, who contributed to this. The fact that both good and evil are predestined (predetermined) by Allah is stated in the Qur’an in plain text: “Thus they lose their peace of mind in earthly life, which comes from faith in Allah predetermined (good and evil)” (K.22:11). This is also confirmed by Islamic publicists: “Allah created both the good that He approves and the evil that He disapproves of. Those who believe that Allah created only good, and evil was created by Shaitan (Satan), are mistaken, since there cannot be “two Creators”. Both good and evil are created by Allah.
Notes:
92.Ali Apsheroni. The Essence of the Islamic Worldview.httr://scbooks.shat.ru
93.Ali Apsheroni. The Essence of the Islamic Worldview.httr://scbooks.shat.ru
94.Eliade M. History of faith and religious ideas. Volume 3: From Mohammed to the Reformation. Chapter 33: Mohammed and the Rise of Islam. http//www/gumer.info/
95.A.D. Redkozubov. Moral requirements for the individual in Islam and Christianity: a comparative analysis. https://rusk.ru/
96.Prophets. True faith is the faith of our ancestors. . ru/Server/Iman/Maktaba/Tarikh/proroki.dos
Source: Chapter 8. Rites in Islam – Unexpected Sharia [Text] / Mikhail Rozhdestvensky. – [Moscow: b. i.], 2011. – 494, [2] p.
[From the letters of St. Athanasius (Sakharov), Bishop of Kovrovsky (1887-1962) to Nun Varvara (Adamson)]
Regarding mentioning your deceased parents. Above all, I think that children are always obliged to pray for their parents, whatever they may have been during their lifetime – monsters, blasphemers and persecutors of the faith. I am convinced that St. Martyr Barbara prayed for her father who killed her. Your parents were Christians. If, according to the Word of God, “in every nation the one who fears Him and walks in righteousness is acceptable to Him” (Acts 10:35), how much more does this apply to those who believe in the One God, glorified in the Trinity, and who profess Christ , came in the flesh.
Orthodoxy is dearest to me. I cannot compare it with any other confession, with any other faith. But I dare not assert that all the non-Orthodox have perished hopelessly. The mercy of the Lord is great, and his deliverance is great (Ps. 129:7). Who can resist Him if He has decided to save someone? And the Lord wants everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Tim. 2:4). He cannot save only those who themselves do not desire salvation and stubbornly resist His outstretched right hand. And your parents, as Christians, wanted and sought salvation, but they did not know the way of Orthodoxy.
If the prayer of St. Macarius the Great for the pagans brought them some comfort, how much more will the prayer of Orthodox children bring comfort to non-Orthodox parents?!
At the request of the pious Queen Theodora, the Fathers of the Church prayed hard for her husband, the fierce iconoclast and persecutor of Orthodoxy Theophilus, and received a revelation that through their prayers and because of Theodora’s faith, he was granted absolution.
So we can and must pray for the non-Orthodox. But, of course, the prayer for the non-Orthodox should be a little different. So, for example, at the very beginning of the funeral canon, a prayer is offered for the Lord to grant His eternal benefits to the deceased faithful. Something we can only say about Orthodox. Therefore, the Holy Synod approved a special rite of requiem for the non-Orthodox. Its printing began in 1917, but was not completed. Therefore, in 1934 or 1935, Mitr. Sergius (of Stragorod, successively metropolitan of Vladimir, Gorky, Moscow, vicar of the patriarchal throne and finally patriarch, b. b.) sent to the dioceses an order compiled by him for the memorial service of non-Orthodox deceased.
I think that the clergy in the Lavra have this hierarchy. If for some reason this act should not be performed, then give to the ordinary memorial service your memorial with all the names of your deceased relatives and friends, including the non-Orthodox ones, and at the very beginning of the list let the names of your parents and other non-Orthodox relatives stand .
Regarding their mention of proscomidia, it should be reasoned like this. The mention of proscomidia is accompanied by the subtraction of particles of prosphora. These particles symbolically depict those mentioned. They offer themselves to the divine Throne and immerse themselves in the divine Blood, as if they partake of it. According to the rules of the Church, not only the non-Orthodox, but even the declared, who are preparing for baptism, should not remain in the temple after the exclamation “Announced, come out” and when the Holy Eucharist is being performed. True, in recent times the ancient Christian strict discipline has weakened, and the non-Orthodox are allowed to remain in the temple until the end of the Liturgy.
However, if your parents, for example, were alive and had agreed to come with you to pray in an Orthodox church, then you yourself, approaching the Holy Communion, you would not even mentally allow the possibility of taking your parents to the Chalice.
That’s why I advise you to have a special monument with names of only Orthodox deceased for the proscomidia. It is not a sin that you mentioned your parents to the proscomidia before. You did it out of ignorance. Earlier, I also mentioned non-Orthodox to the proscomidia, and then I became convinced that it is better not to do this.
During the other moments of the liturgy, however, without specifically removing particles from the prosphora, in a secret prayer or in a funeral litany, we can also mention non-Orthodox, especially our parents.
Incidentally, the late Fr. Alexii Zosimovski advised Fr. Michael Shiku to mention his parents, devout Jews, during the litanies for the announced.
Source: Collection of Letters of St. Athanasius (Sakharov), M.: “Rule of Faith”, 2001, c. 272-274 (in Russian).
From left to right: Denys SHMYHAL (Prime Minister of Ukraine), Josep BORRELL FONTELLES (High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy), Olivér VÁRHELYI (European Commissioner for Neighbourhood and Enlargement)
On 5 September 2022, the European Union and Ukraine held the 8th meeting of the EU and Ukraine Association Council in Brussels.
The Association Council condemned in the strongest possible terms the unprovoked and unjustified Russian war of aggression against Ukraine. The EU commended the courage and determination of the Ukrainian people and its leadership in their fight to defend the sovereignty, territorial integrity and freedom of Ukraine and underlined its unwavering commitment to help Ukraine exercise its inherent right of self-defence against the Russian aggression and to build a peaceful, democratic and prosperous future. It commended Ukraine’s civil society for their continued key role in building Ukraine’s resilience against the Russian aggression.
Ukraine expressed its appreciation for the previous packages of EU restrictive measures and underlined the necessity to foster the process of strengthening EU restrictive measures against Russia. Ukraine also called for measure in the sphere of visa policy.
The Association Council emphasized that those responsible for human rights violations, atrocities and war crimes committed in the context of the Russian war against Ukraine, the perpetrators and their accomplices must be held accountable.
The EU emphasized its strong commitment to supporting the intensive work of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal court and Ukraine’s Prosecutor General in this respect and underlined its continued financial and capacity-building support to these efforts. Ukraine considered that its suggestion on the establishment of the special ad hoc international criminal tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine shall be further explored. The EU recalled Ukraine’s commitment in the Association Agreement to ratify the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and encouraged Ukraine to implement this commitment urgently.
The Association Council highlighted the historical importance of the decision of the European Council of 23 June 2022 to recognise the European perspective and grant the status of candidate country to Ukraine. It stressed that the future of Ukraine and its citizens lies within the European Union. The EU recalled that the Council will decide on further steps once all the conditions specified in the Commission’s opinion on Ukraine’s EU membership application are fully met, underlining that the progress of Ukraine towards the EU will depend on its own merit, taking into consideration the EU’s capacity to absorb new members. The EU noted the action plan prepared by the Ukrainian Side on the implementation of the recommended steps included in the European Commission’s opinion, welcomed the progress already made, and underlined the importance of their full and effective implementation.
The EU reiterated its commitment to further strengthening relations with Ukraine, including through well-targeted support to Ukraine’s European integration efforts and exploiting fully the potential of the Association Agreement, including the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA), and stressed the mutual commitments to that end. The EU recognised the substantial progress that Ukraine has made thus far in its reform process and underlined the need to preserve and build on the achieved results.
The Association Council welcomed the steps that Ukraine had taken thus far with regard to reforms in the sphere of anti-corruption, fighting against fraud, anti-money laundering and rule of law and urged Ukraine to pursue further efforts in these areas. It stressed the paramount importance of ensuring the independence, effectiveness and sustainability of the anti-corruption institutional framework and avoid politicisation of the work of all law enforcement agencies. The Association Council welcomed the major steps taken by Ukraine towards a comprehensive reform of the judiciary in 2021 and the appointment of the new Head of the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, while emphasising the urgent need to complete the selection of the new Director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine and the reform of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine (CCU), including a clear and transparent competitive selection process for judges.
The Association Council welcomed the prompt mobilisation of EU humanitarian assistance since the beginning of the Russian invasion against Ukraine. The Association Council also welcomed the EU’s and its Member States strong emergency response via the EU Civil Protection Mechanism at an estimated value above EUR 430 million. The EU highlighted the key priority in ensuring winterized shelter facilities and housing ahead of the upcoming winter and the need to enhance cooperation within the international community.
The Association Council recalled EU’s activation of the temporary protection status for citizens of Ukraine giving them temporary residence rights, access to labour markets and housing, medical assistance and education.
The Association Council welcomed the EU’s financial support and immediate relief efforts with over EUR 9,5 billion, including support amounting to EUR 2.6 billion under the European Peace Facility, that will have been provided since the beginning of the Russian war of aggression. The EU reiterated its strong commitment to Ukraine’s reconstruction, geared towards fast-forwarding the green, climate resilient and digital transitions, underlining its readiness to take a leading role in the effort and stressing the importance of Ukraine’s ownership. Both sides underlined the need for practical development of the partnership initiative between European and Ukrainian regions and municipalities aiming at recovery of the destroyed and damaged Ukrainian cities. The EU recalled that its support for reconstruction will be linked to the implementation of reforms to ensure the rule of law, resilient democratic institutions, to reduce the influence of oligarchs, to strengthen anti-corruption measures consistent with Ukraine’s European path and to further the process of aligning legislation with the EU acquis.
Ukraine expressed gratitude for the military assistance provided by EU Member States to the Armed Forces of Ukraine, including under the European Peace Facility and called for continuation of these efforts as long as required.
The Association Council welcomed the decision on allocation of loan funds of the European Investment Bank (EIB) in the amount of EUR 1,059 million to cover priority needs.
The Association Council noted the priority given to the objective of integration of Ukraine’s payment market participants into the Single Euro Payments Area (SEPA) and the necessary steps to achieve that objective.
The Association Council recalled the common values of democracy, rule of law, gender equality, respect for international law and human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities and LGBTI persons.
The Association Council emphasised the need to ensure – in line with the recommendations of the Venice Commission – respect for rights of persons belonging to national minorities. In particular, Ukraine needs to finalise its reform of the legal framework for national minorities as recommended by the Venice Commission and to adopt effective implementation mechanisms as indicated in the steps specified in the Commission’s opinion on Ukraine’s EU membership application.
The Ukrainian side presented its vision on the accession framework.
The Association Council commended Ukraine’s decision to ratify the Istanbul Convention as a major step forward in protecting all women and girls.
The EU reconfirmed its commitment in supporting Ukraine’s efforts to preserve its macroeconomic stability during the war. Both sides acknowledged the disbursement to Ukraine of EUR 2.2 billion in emergency and exceptional EU macro-financial assistance programmes in the first half of 2022 and expressed their commitment to deliver on the remaining part of the exceptional macro-financial assistance package of up to EUR 9 billion, as announced by the Commission in its Communication Ukraine: Relief and Reconstruction of 18 May 2022.
The Association Council welcomed the success of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA), which has supported the doubling of bilateral trade flows since its entry into force in 2016. Both sides welcomed the temporary full trade liberalisation and temporary suspension of trade defence measures introduced by the EU on Ukrainian imports since June 2022. The EU stressed the importance of a solid implementation of the DCFTA and welcomed progress on the “Priority Action Plan for enhanced implementation of the DCFTA”. The EU welcomed Ukraine’s progress in implementing its commitments in the public procurement sector, notably as regards the first and second phases of the roadmap, which is a step towards the further gradual mutual opening of public procurement markets. The EU and Ukraine emphasized their willingness to continue negotiations on the review of customs duties under the Article 29 (4) of the Association Agreement. The EU noted in particular the decisive progress on Ukraine’s path towards joining the Common Transit Convention and the Convention on Simplification of formalities in trade in goods. The EU also confirmed its commitment to continue supporting Ukraine on its path towards an Agreement on Conformity Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial products. The Association Council welcomed Ukraine’s association to the EU Customs and Fiscalis programmes. The Association Council welcomed the start of the negotiations between Ukrainian Side and the European Commission on Ukraine’s participation in the EU Single Market Program (SMP).
The Association Council welcomed accession of Ukraine to the common transit system (NCTC) as from 1 October 2022. Ukraine underlined the importance of setting up automatic exchange of advance customs information between Ukraine and the EU Member States as an efficient instrument for combatting customs fraud.
The EU welcomed Ukraine’s ongoing engagement in implementing its commitments in the telecommunication services sector, which, if fully met, can lead to internal market treatment for this sector. The Association Council welcomed the signature of a joint statement by telecom operators based in the EU and in Ukraine on their coordinated efforts to secure and stabilise affordable or free roaming and international calls between the EU and Ukraine. The EU underlined its commitment to explore the possibilities for a longer-term arrangement eliminating roaming charges between the EU and Ukraine. The Association Council also welcomed the signing of the agreement on Ukraine’s association with the EU’s Digital Europe Programme, an important step in further integration with EU’s Digital Single Market.
The Association Council welcomed the Ukrainian Regulator’s joining the work of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) and its supporting agency the BEREC Office.
The EU reconfirmed its solidarity with Ukraine in countering hybrid and cyber threats as well as its continued engagement in strategic communication and countering foreign information manipulation and interference, including disinformation, notably in light of increased cyber-attacks linked to Russia’s war of aggression. Both sides underlined the importance of conducting the second round of the Cyber Dialogue in September 2022 and welcomed their readiness to further extend the scope of cooperation in cyber field. The EU and Ukraine agreed to work closely on further strengthening overall resilience of Ukraine, including within actual Eastern Partnerships instruments.
The Association Council welcomed the successful synchronisation of Ukraine’s electricity grid with the Continental European Network. The Sides commended the start of commercial exchange of electricity between Ukraine and the EU. They welcomed the start of a gradual increase in electricity trade on a level playing field in terms of equivalent basic rules with respect to market access as well as compatible environmental and safety standards. The Association Council acknowledged a considerable progress of Ukraine in implementing key EU energy legislation, including the unbundling of its transmission system operators in gas and electricity. The EU reiterated its readiness to support Ukraine’s energy sector as well as reform efforts, including via the EU-Ukraine High Level Working Group on energy markets. The EU took note of the availability of vast gas storage capacities in Ukraine’s underground gas storage facilities. The Sides stressed the need to decrease dependency on Russian fossils and nuclear fuels and technologies. The EU and Ukraine agreed to continue close collaboration to coordinate the security of gas supply and increase resilience in view of possible disruptions in gas supplies.
The Association Council welcomed efforts of Ukrainian nuclear regulator and operator to maintain safe operation and energy generation on Ukrainian nuclear power plants as well as to continue corresponding legislation approximation. The Association Council condemned the Russian military control of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant and called for an immediate withdrawal and de-militarization of the facility, and restauration of full control over the plant to the legitimate operator and Ukrainian authorities to ensure nuclear safety and security. The Association Council emphasised its support to the efforts of the IAEA and underlined the need for the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant to remain an integral part of the Ukrainian energy system.
The Association Council stressed the need to achieve Ukraine’s green transition as part of the reconstruction efforts. Both sides welcomed the finalisation of the development process of the EU – Ukraine strategic partnership on renewable gases.
The Association Council welcomed the signature of the agreement to associate Ukraine to the LIFE Programme, with the objective of addressing climate change and environmental challenges, including air, soil and water contamination, biodiversity conservation through the demonstration of innovative solutions and techniques and the capacity building of actors involved.
Both sides welcomed the intention of the parties to complete in 2022 the negotiations on an Agreement on Ukraine’s accession to the regional satellite navigation system European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service (EGNOS).
The Association Council welcomed successful transit of the first ships from Ukrainian ports following successful UN and Turkey mediation. It welcomed also the ongoing implementation of the EU solidarity lanes action plan and its achievements so far. Ukraine highlighted the Solidarity Lanes as a key assistance by the EU to address the challenges in relation to agricultural exports and its necessary imports due to the persisting constraints put by Russia on Ukraine’s Black and Azov Sea ports. The Council welcomed the Ukrainian initiative to associate with the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) Programme. The Council welcomed the provisional application of the road transport agreement between the EU and Ukraine and the amendment of the indicative TEN-T maps for Ukraine. Ukraine underlined the need to further update the TEN-T maps for Ukraine, in particular regarding inclusion of the Danube river.
The Association Council welcomed the potential of the cross-border cooperation programmes with EU Member States to foster the capacities of regional and local authorities and to further strengthen the EU-UA links. The Association Council also welcomed additional financial support of 26.2 million for Ukraine in the new Interreg programmes 2021-2027 as well as more flexible legal provisions towards the on-going cooperation programmes with the EU. The EU marked the renewed Ukraine Presidency of the European Strategy for the Danube Region.
The EU encouraged Ukraine to participate in and take fully advantage of the international dimension of the Erasmus+ programme. The Association Council welcomed the entry into force of Ukraine’s association agreement to the Creative Europe Programme and to Horizon Europe and EURATOM Research & Training programmes. The Association Council welcomed the signature of the agreement to associate Ukraine to the EU4Health Programme.
The Association Council commended the EU support to Ukraine’s cultural and creative sectors.
The meeting was co-chaired by Denys Shmyhal, Prime Minister of Ukraine and Josep Borrell, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.
