|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Church and State in Russia
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
Is Russia's Orthodox Church privileged or persecuted?
This article at the New York Times site reports that a protest performance uninvited by Pussy Riot, a female punk-rock group, occurred in the cathedral in Moscow. The members were arrested. Opposing demonstrations have occurred on behalf of the church and the group, the latter claiming that they broke no civil laws, only church regulations, so that there are no legitimate grounds for arrest. In other churches across Russia icons have been recently been damaged or destroyed by vandals. Thousands of the faithful are praying for the defense of the church and against descrecation and blasphemy.
The article also mentions revelations that Archbishop Kirill lives far more lavishly in Moscow than he would like the public to know. Russians perceive Putin and the Orthodox church as mutually supportive in general, to an extent that has caused Putin's detractors in Russia to take their ire out on the church.
These developments raise many issues, some specific to Russia and others more general.
The Philadelphia Inquirer report on this subject mentioned that soon after the Bolshevik Revolution, Lenin's thugs shot icons full of bullet holes. At least one such icon is still revered today, holes and all, as a reminder of the official persecution that the church endured for decades. In those dark days, church attendance and Christian practice represented a quiet protest against the government, at the very least inconvenient for the worshipper's reputation, and often costlier than that. Well, how quickly things change. Less than a generation later, the church is seen as all but in bed with the state, to the extent of sustaining not-so-collateral damage in the course of essentially political protests.
Once again? Reverting to type? What is historically normal for the Orthodox church? One well-known introduction to and apologia for Orthodoxy argued that the very structure of the church obviates the kind of coziness with rulers that has often prevailed in the West. What truth is there any truth to this claim, either in theory or in practice?
The late Christopher Hitchens replies to observations about the cruelty of Stalin's atheistic regime by saying that Stalin only learned very well from the church's example, which included turning despots into demigods. He would ask the audience to put themselves in Stalin's place as a would-be autocrat. Wouldn't it be only natural, he asked, to claim all the same trappings that the people had been well-trained by the church to confer: those of someone superhuman?
It seemed like such a good argument when coming out of his mouth that one might forget to wonder why, if the church had been so good at doing exactly that for centuries, Stalin wouldn't find it easier to use it likewise, as did his predecessor-tyrants, rather than trying to eradicate it. Putin doesn't seem to have had much trouble applying this strategy.
Let's putting ourselves in Archbishop Kirill's place. Our church had borne up under sustained persecution since before most people were born, escaping oblivion in a manner that one should probably call miraculous. Of course we will be grateful for a more hospitable regime. But is it possible to be too grateful? Where is the straight and narrow between inviting persecution from the ruler and inviting desecration from the ruler's enemies?
Are groups like Pussy Riot legitimate political protesters, or are they hooligans intent on blasphemy no matter what the church's relation to the state might be?
What should the laws be against violating the hospitality of a church left open for prayer, by deliberate behavior which horrifies those who worship in it, even if it is outside service times and they leave the place physically unharmed? The house rules are that women do not enter the sanctuary of a Russian Orthodox church, and these women did that. I think that there should be some effective misdemeanor penalty and remedy, perhaps for trespass and, if necessary, the costs of reconsecration; but I don't know how such cases are handled in any country.
[ 24. April 2012, 00:12: Message edited by: Alogon ]
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
What should the laws be against violating the hospitality of a church left open for prayer, by deliberate behavior which horrifies those who worship in it, even if it is outside service times and they leave the place physically unharmed? The house rules are that women do not enter the sanctuary of a Russian Orthodox church, and these women did that. I think that there should be some effective misdemeanor penalty and remedy, perhaps for trespass and, if necessary, the costs of reconsecration; but I don't know how such cases are handled in any country.
I would think that trespassing is the only legitimate charge to be applied here. With maybe the concept of tresspassing being extended to include a person entering a place(in this case, women entering a church) that the rules forbid them to enter.
I think it would be kind of daft to make Pussy Riot pay for the cost of reconsecration, since the defilement only exists in the minds of the church authorities. Otherwise, what would there be to stop some guy from declaring his back yard sacred ground, inadmissable to women, and then suing every girl who cuts through the yard on her way to school for the costs of reconsecration?
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
And to answer the question in the headline...
Yes, if the Orthodox Church has more power than my hypothetical homeowner to take legal action against trespassers, than they are indeed protected, not persecuted.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
Entering the sanctuary in Alogon's post almost certainly means entering what the Orthodox refer to as the altar, that is, the area behind (liturgically east of) the icon screen.
In Orthodox practice, only those who have specific business in the altar should go there. This certainly excludes women and non-Orthodox.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alt Wally
Cardinal Ximinez
# 3245
|
Posted
quote:
The late Christopher Hitchens replies to observations about the cruelty of Stalin's atheistic regime by saying that Stalin only learned very well from the church's example, which included turning despots into demigods. He would ask the audience to put themselves in Stalin's place as a would-be autocrat. Wouldn't it be only natural, he asked, to claim all the same trappings that the people had been well-trained by the church to confer: those of someone superhuman?
Sure, wouldn’t we all proceed with the systematic killing, torture and exile of hundreds of thousands of religious believers of all stripes if we were in that situation?
Sorry, not buying Mr. Hitchens. Whatever the past sins of the church, I see no moral equivalence.
The issue in question I think probably exposes deep and long standing conflicts within the Russian church about its relation with the state. It would be a mistake to assume there is only one position. This hasn’t been true historically and isn’t today (in particular in regards to the church holding property since that was brought up in the article). I believe many of the people standing up for the band members are themselves Orthodox Christians as well as other believers who disagree with their treatment and probably with other violations of individual rights that have occurred in the Russian Federation.
quote:
What is historically normal for the Orthodox church? One well-known introduction to and apologia for Orthodoxy argued that the very structure of the church obviates the kind of coziness with rulers that has often prevailed in the West. What truth is there any truth to this claim, either in theory or in practice?
To collapse a lot down in to a summary that reflects my own understanding. There is no single model of church state relations established as normative for Orthodoxy. There is certainly nothing dogmatic. The Byzantine model of symphonia viewed the two sides as buttressing each other, but without state domination of the church. The church itself pushed back or revolted when this symphonia was violated such as was the case with the iconoclastic controversy. The imposition of the Millet system was destructive to the church and the various non Greek speaking nations chafed at the domination of the phanariots which led to the formation of the many national churches that exist now. That was the Southern model.
The Russian model coalesced under the autocratic rule of the Tsar’s, but only after the power of the church was broken and Patriarch Nikon humbled and deposed. 20th century Russian priest and theologian Fr. Georges Florovsky has a very good history called “Ways of Russian Theology” if you’re interested which covers all of this in detail. He talks about the Third Rome theory origins and how what happened in the Russian Church was not a continuation of the Byzantine symphonia, but an overturning of it. James Billington’s “The Icon and the Axe” is also a worthy history written by an outsider which covers much of the same ground.
Currently there is no single “normal” in regards to church state relations. It varies by country, culture and circumstance. Churches located in Pennsylvania are on the same Orthodox theological plane as those in Beirut, Athens or Kiev.
Lastly, my own opinion the band should be given a small fine and let go.
Posts: 3684 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
quote:
What should the laws be against violating the hospitality of a church left open for prayer, by deliberate behavior which horrifies those who worship in it, even if it is outside service times and they leave the place physically unharmed? The house rules are that women do not enter the sanctuary of a Russian Orthodox church, and these women did that. I think that there should be some effective misdemeanor penalty and remedy, perhaps for trespass and, if necessary, the costs of reconsecration; but I don't know how such cases are handled in any country.
I would think that trespassing is the only legitimate charge to be applied here. With maybe the concept of tresspassing being extended to include a person entering a place(in this case, women entering a church) that the rules forbid them to enter.
I think it would be kind of daft to make Pussy Riot pay for the cost of reconsecration, since the defilement only exists in the minds of the church authorities. Otherwise, what would there be to stop some guy from declaring his back yard sacred ground, inadmissable to women, and then suing every girl who cuts through the yard on her way to school for the costs of reconsecration?
My immediate reaction upon hearing this story was likewise that the only appropriate legal charge would simply be one of trespassing. From a civil law standpoint, the only issue should be if they were asked/told to leave by due custodians of the property and then failed to leave the premises when so requested. Under such circumstances in a public venue that is normally what constitutes criminal trespassing.
The Church and Russian State are cynically using one another, although likely the Church is being more actively manipulated by the Sovi - er,Russian - authorities than vice versa. The Church will pay in the long run, as Russian citizens see the self-serving games that are being played.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
gorpo
Shipmate
# 17025
|
Posted
Is there any cost for reconsacration, anyway? Do they have to destroy the building and build another because a woman entered the altar?
Posts: 247 | From: Brazil | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
Why do it in the first place? This group knew very well how offended Orthodox christiams would be by them desecrating a Holy place (the sanctuary). It is not true that they can NEVER be forgiven - there is always room for confession and forgiveness in the Church, but this group knew very well that what they did was much more serious than "trespassing".
"Hooliganism" some have suggested - far more appropriate!
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
Only a thorough, non-coerced and unbiased mental examination of Pussy Riot and their ilk could possibly answer the question "Why?".
Do we really want to know? ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
From what I've heard from Romanian and other Eastern European friends is that - not only in Russia but across the whole former Soviet bloc - there was a massive surge towards the Orthodox Church both in terms of active engagement and more general sympathy.
Now, both with incipient 'Westernisation' and a certain disillusionment with the way the Church can act at times - Erastianism has always been an issue, even during the Soviet era when the Church effectively collaborated with its own persecution to some extent - there are signs of some cooling off.
I think the Church will 'pay' for this in the long run too in the form of increasing indifference and secularism - as indeed we've had in the West for many years.
Orthodoxy is at once fascinating and attractive and yet also profoundly repellant. I find that it attracts and repels in almost equal measure. There's something of this dynamic playing out here, I suspect.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
beatmenace
Shipmate
# 16955
|
Posted
Quite like this item on this though
http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles5/ROCChurchState.php
quote:
The Jubilee Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church of 2000 also spoke out on this matter in its "Basic Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church:"
"In everything that exclusively concerns the earthly order of things, the Orthodox Christian is obliged to obey the law, regardless of how ideal or imperfect it is. However, when compliance with legal requirements threatens his eternal salvation and requires an act of apostasy or the commitment of some other definite sin before God and neighbour, the Christian is called upon to perform the feat of witness of the faith for the sake of Divine truth and the salvation of his soul for eternal life. He must speak openly and lawfully against the indisputable violation committed by society or state against the statutes and commandments of God. If this lawful action is impossible or ineffective, he must assume the stance of civil disobedience" (IV, 9).
"The Church remains loyal to the state, but God's commandment to fulfill the task of salvation in any situation and under any circumstances supersedes this loyalty. If the authority forces Orthodox believers to apostatize from Christ and His Church and to commit sinful and spiritually harmful actions, the Church should refuse to obey the state" (III, 5).
I know under the Soviets many Orthodox lost their lives for these reasons and i wouldn't
at that lightly.
Not sure where that leaves the Patriarch though.
--------------------
"I'm the village idiot , aspiring to great things." (The Icicle Works)
Posts: 297 | From: Whitley Bay | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
I believe many who live in former Iron Curtain countries regard their current religious leaders with mixed feelings. Some were known collaborators with the Communists. Some suffered under it. It's a very mixed bag.
Whatever collusion there was, I'm not sure Pussy Riot made any deep, meaningful contribution to the continuing debate on this.
When is "protest" facile and possibly self-advertisement?
Is the Almighty offended by Pussy Riot and their antics?
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
...
Orthodoxy is at once fascinating and attractive and yet also profoundly repellant. I find that it attracts and repels in almost equal measure...
I think all forms of public Christianity suffer from this sort of baggage, Gamaliel.
OK, I take your point, Orthodoxy in its traditional geographic locales is something totally new and strange to us in the West.
However, I do think you could say the same about most of the familiar Western Churches as well.
I find myself feeling this way about the Anglican Church in Queensland of which I am a communicant member. It is, on the one hand, familiar and attractive and on the other weird and repulsive.
Under Communism in Russia there was the catacomb church which, although as canonically Orthodox as the Moscow Patriarchate, had nothing to do with the latter. Perhaps its flame kept Orthodoxy alive through those long black years?
What is genuine Orthodox Christianity in Russia today? A good question.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by gorpo:
Is there any cost for reconsacration, anyway? Do they have to destroy the building and build another because a woman entered the altar?
No, they don't need to rebuild. But if a consecration rite is considered necessary, it might involve a personage or two who must take a day off from other duties and travel a good distance. The details would be a question for Ecclesiastics.
You would be a very unusual churchgoer if you can't imagine anything untoward possibly happening in your house of worship that would make you as a congregant feel that it had been desecrated, so that you would no longer want to worship there until it were rededicated to God. When I was a university student in the 1960s, the chapel of our parish church, adjacent to campus, was open for prayer 24/7. One morning the rector entered to find a used condom draped over the altar cross. I think that did it for the parish. If that doesn't turn you off, how about murder in the church? So what, no physical harm done to the building... ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
One issue is whether the faithful still have the right to go into a church to pray without carrying a key and unlocking a door. This used to go without saying. But if a church has no recourse when others go in to make a foul mockery of the place, this is no longer feasible.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Orthodoxy is at once fascinating and attractive and yet also profoundly repellant. I find that it attracts and repels in almost equal measure.
Mysterium tremendum, mysterium fascinans
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
"Is Russia's Orthodox Church privileged or persecuted?"
Pretty obviously both at the same time, as in most periods of Russian history. In the Soviet times it mostly tended tp persecution (though not always and everywhere and entirely). Right now the balance is leaning more towards privilege.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
Stalin made nice with the Russian Orthodox Church during WWII because of the need for national unity and the Church's traditional position in supporting patriotism. Manipulation -- the flip side of persecution.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
decampagne
Shipmate
# 17012
|
Posted
It's also worth remembering, that while there was certainly nothing like the murderous, large-scale persecution of the Stalin era under the Tsars, the Church was stripped of automomy and purposely weakened to be clearly subordinate to the state for at least the final 2 centuries before the Soviet period: it wasn't for nothing that Peter the Great abolished the position of Patriarch of Moscow (and all Rus') - and that such a position was not again filled until the weeks following the overthrow of the Tsars in early 1917.
I don't think the situation today is quite like that of post-1943 (or rather: let us say 1943 to 1958 - when Khrushchev brought in a rather vulgar anti-religious campaign) Russia, where the church serves as a tool of nationalism and statehood (there is a more notable diversity of opinions and voices among the senior clerics, for one thing: plus the post-1988-or-so recovery of the Church is from a rather less low point than 1943).
Less still is it like that of the 1921-27 period, where the state sought purposely to meddle in church politics by sponsoring "progressive" (and in many ways really rather liberal) schismatic, "renovationist" or "living church" groups,which kept much of the ritual of Orthodoxy while combining it with decidedly secularist doctrine.
I'd agree that at the moment "privilege" rather than "persecution" is the fitting word. Although one wonders about the destiny of the bird in the gilded cage when it wishes to sing from a non-approved songbook. Since the murder of Fr Alexander Men in 1990 there hasn't been such a high prominent dissonent songbird (at least: in the Russian Orthodox Church, Moscow Patriarchate)
Interesting times in Russia, as ever, however.
Posts: 86 | From: Oxfordshire | Registered: Mar 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
The position of the Orthodox Church in Russian society has always been a complex one.
I think the key question is "Has real Christianity survived in Russia throughout the centuries despite all attempts to suppress genuine expressions of spirituality and collusion with the civil authorities of the worst possible kind?"
My answer would be a resounding "Yes!"
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
QLib
Bad Example
# 43
|
Posted
Thanks for raising this matter, Alogon. quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
Only a thorough, non-coerced and unbiased mental examination of Pussy Riot and their ilk could possibly answer the question "Why?".
Do we really want to know?
Actually, yes. And maybe all you need to answer the question is an open mind and the ability to read what's out there.
quote:
I'm not sure Pussy Riot made any deep, meaningful contribution to the continuing debate on this.
Maybe it wasn't meaningful for you - that does not necessarily mean it wasn't meaningful for anybody else.
quote:
When is "protest" facile and possibly self-advertisement?.
Well, it's probbaly not facile self-advertisement when performed in a country where outspoken critics of the government sometimes come to very sticky ends.
--------------------
Tradition is the handing down of the flame, not the worship of the ashes Gustav Mahler.
Posts: 8913 | From: Page 28 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Scrumpmeister
Ship’s Taverner
# 5638
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alt Wally:
Lastly, my own opinion the band should be given a small fine and let go.
Indeed, if even that.
I feel seriosuly constrained in what I can say publicly about the Purry Riot protest but let it suffice to say that the cosiness between His Holiness and Mr Putin is part of the reason that not everybody is exactly doing cartwheels over this forthcoming joyous occasion of the fifth anniversary of the reunion of the Russian church.
As a son of the Russian Church Abroad, I have found myself on more than one occasion asking myself, 'What have we done?', waiting to have my fears allayed.
--------------------
If Christ is not fully human, humankind is not fully saved. - St John of Saint-Denis
Posts: 14741 | From: Greater Manchester, UK | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Scrumpmeister
Ship’s Taverner
# 5638
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Michael Astley:
Purry Riot
In all honesty, that was a typo.
--------------------
If Christ is not fully human, humankind is not fully saved. - St John of Saint-Denis
Posts: 14741 | From: Greater Manchester, UK | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
I can't find anyone questioning or explaining the name "Pussy Riot." Wikipedia, for example, is not helpful. They speak Russian in Moscow, don't they? So presumably their official name is something in that language. Whose idea was the English phraseology, and is it a faithful translation? I hope that one has the right to find such a name disobliging, not only in its crudity but in exploiting a double standard. (What male band either wishes to style itself with quite such explicit slang, or would get away with it even if they tried?) But I'll give them the benefit of a doubt that they are fully aware of the implications of this name on Anglophone ears, if they are responsible for it at all.
It's good news that Putin's hegemony is not going unquestioned by his subjects... er, fellow citizens. I hope that the young women arrested will be let off easily. But I don't feel like demonstrating for dismissal of their case alongside people who are at best indifferent to their deliberate irreverence. The enemy of one's enemy is not necessarily one's friend.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Prester John
Shipmate
# 5502
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
(What male band either wishes to style itself with quite such explicit slang, or would get away with it even if they tried?)
Well, this band for one.
Posts: 884 | From: SF Bay Area | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
decampagne
Shipmate
# 17012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
I can't find anyone questioning or explaining the name "Pussy Riot." Wikipedia, for example, is not helpful. They speak Russian in Moscow, don't they? So presumably their official name is something in that language. Whose idea was the English phraseology, and is it a faithful translation? ... But I'll give them the benefit of a doubt that they are fully aware of the implications of this name on Anglophone ears, if they are responsible for it at all.
No, it's not a translation: the band are called "Pussy Riot". It's far from unusual for Russian rock bands, etc, to use English names ("Bravo" and "Agata Khristi" -ok, the latter one is transliterated, so spelled and pronounced slightly differently - spring immediately to mind.) And given their self-description as a "feminist punk band", I'm quite sure they are fully aware of the implications of the name.
They sing in Russian, and their sometimes coarse lyrics, brightly coloured style of dress, and very abrasive style of music is clearly intended to be attention-provoking and shocking. - They've staged impromptu "concerts" (generally ending in their arrest) on the former Tsarist era execution-spot on Red Square, and on top of a tram, elsewhere in Central Moscow too. So...attention-seeking is what they do - evidently with the desired effect resulting.
(As a native English-speaker, I think, huh, we saw all this in the 70s - the Slits or perhaps X-Ray Spex would be their nearest equivalent...)
Although granted the context of post-totalitarian Moscow is somewhat different. They are spectacle, not substance.
Posts: 86 | From: Oxfordshire | Registered: Mar 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
Let us fondly hope that the group don't know the full connotations of the name "Pussy Riot".
It is, I hope, something like the nonsensical slogans in "English" on T-shirts worn by East Asian tourists in Australia.
Let us pray. ![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif)
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by JSwift:
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
(What male band either wishes to style itself with quite such explicit slang, or would get away with it even if they tried?)
Well, this band for one.
Buzzcocks and Sex Pistols. OliviaG
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
Sanity for Pussy Riot?
Good T-shirt slogan, Eh?
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
QLib
Bad Example
# 43
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
Let us fondly hope that the group don't know the full connotations of the name "Pussy Riot".
It is, I hope, something like the nonsensical slogans in "English" on T-shirts worn by East Asian tourists in Australia. Let us pray.
Did you actually read the post previous to yours?
quote:
Originally posted by decampagne:
it's not a translation: the band are called "Pussy Riot". ...And given their self-description as a "feminist punk band", I'm quite sure they are fully aware of the implications of the name.
Sir P - I guess you see yourself as an old-fashioned gentleman - and, in a way you are. Your whole attitude "Do we really want to know?", "Let's hope they don't understand the implications of what they are saying" and, finally, let's all have a good laugh at these young women risking beatings-up, imprisonment, and possibly worse, is typical of dear old-fashioned white gentlemen and their sexist, racist and homophobic attitudes. I'm sure you don't see yourself as sexist, racist and homophobic but there's a huge irony in your prayerful hope that Pussy Riot don't really mean what they appear to be saying.
--------------------
Tradition is the handing down of the flame, not the worship of the ashes Gustav Mahler.
Posts: 8913 | From: Page 28 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by QLib:
there's a huge irony in your prayerful hope that Pussy Riot don't really mean what they appear to be saying.
I'll take old-fashioned gentlemanliness any day over the even huger irony of a resort to stereotyping, in order to bring in everything but the kitchen sink to accuse Sir P. of really meaning things he didn't say.
Maybe you will prefer a little less gentlemanly statement, then: as long as these masked marauders engage in protest against a legitimate target such as Putin, they will have my support and admiration. But the moment they take their antics inside a church without invitation, they've lost it. If they really want to accomplish a political objective, they should have the good sense to appeal to as many people as possible rather than throw friends away. Maybe that isn't what they're about after all?
Would you get more upset if this happened in America and the target were a mosque?
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by QLib:
it's probbaly not facile self-advertisement when performed in a country where outspoken critics of the government sometimes come to very sticky ends.
People who rob convenience stores in the middle of the night, with or without covering their faces with masks, also sometimes come to very sticky ends, but that doesn't prevent it from happening.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
QLib
Bad Example
# 43
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
as long as these masked marauders engage in protest against a legitimate target such as Putin, they will have my support and admiration. But the moment they take their antics inside a church without invitation, they've lost it.
Well, I trust they're suitably devastated. quote:
Would you get more upset if this happened in America and the target were a mosque?
You're comparing apples and elephants. Last time I looked, the US was a generally fairly free country where the rule of law generally applies and a significant shortage of journalists dying in mysterious circumstances and Islam did not have a specially privileged position quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
quote:
Originally posted by QLib:
it's probably not facile self-advertisement when performed in a country where outspoken critics of the government sometimes come to very sticky ends.
People who rob convenience stores in the middle of the night, with or without covering their faces with masks, also sometimes come to very sticky ends, but that doesn't prevent it from happening.
Indeed, but the people who do it usually aren't all that keen on self-advertisement.
--------------------
Tradition is the handing down of the flame, not the worship of the ashes Gustav Mahler.
Posts: 8913 | From: Page 28 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
... as long as these masked marauders engage in protest against a legitimate target such as Putin, they will have my support and admiration. But the moment they take their antics inside a church without invitation, they've lost it. ...
Putin is a legitimate target, then. Are supporters of Putin legitimate targets? Because the point that everyone seems to want to ignore is that they are protesting the church's support of Putin. From Pussy Riot's point of view, the church has already desecrated itself by allying itself with Putin. Where is the outrage over that?
Getting all frothed about the nature and location of the protest is like obsessing over the environmental impact of the Boston Tea Party. Or feeling sorry for the moneychangers getting their asses whipped in the temple. Tree, forest. Big picture.
And I'm not the only one who can smell chauvinistic condescension. OliviaG
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
... Would you get more upset if this happened in America and the target were a mosque?
As others have pointed out, fruit bowl. Let me try to come up with a similar comparable:
A band called Hijab Hussies goes into the front (men only) section of a mosque in Saudi Arabia and sings songs protesting the unequal status of women in their country. The monarchy and the religious establishment are tightly linked. Are they blasphemers or heroes? What should be done with/to them? OliviaG
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by QLib:
Indeed, but the people who do it usually aren't all that keen on self-advertisement.
The point is that taking a risk is no proof of honorable intentions. Some just like the thrill for the thrill, like bungee jumpers or motorcycling hobbyists.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by OliviaG:
A band called Hijab Hussies goes into the front (men only) section of a mosque in Saudi Arabia and sings songs protesting the unequal status of women in their country. The monarchy and the religious establishment are tightly linked. Are they blasphemers or heroes? What should be done with/to them? OliviaG
If they offend numerous fellow-citizens who use the Mosque without having given a thought to the monarchy all day, but because they love God, then the protesters are at best fools.
Churches (temples, mosques, whatever) which customarily remain open for prayer outside of service times, as they have done for centuries, are doing the public a service. If their hospitality is abused, they will eventually be locked up tight, as has recently become routine in the U.S. It would be sad if their having to become like almost every other place you can name in this respect were an inevitable part of modern "freedom" and "progress."
You might as well argue that when a cowboy enters an Indian's tent univited, it's the Indian's fault for not locking his door.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
If they offend numerous fellow-citizens who use the Mosque without having given a thought to the monarchy all day, but because they love God, then the protesters are at best fools. ...
Good company, then. ![[Biased]](wink.gif) And where is it written that protests must be inoffensive? Isn't that kind of the point?
It seems like you're arguing that religious institutions are either not legitimate targets for political protest, or they should only be protested against politely. Politicians' offices, public parks and streets, university buildings, corporate HQs, etc. all get occupied. Oil drilling operations get blockaded. Whaling ships get rammed. Either one deals with church "protesters" the same way as any other trespassers, or one is arguing for some sort of special privilege for religious property. OliviaG
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Pussy Riot is more than welcome to perform at my parish.
We support the arts. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Pussy Riot should be prosecuted for trespassing or whatever if any law they broke. Churches shouldn't get special treatment but protesters shouldn't get immunity just because they are protesting. Pussy Riot made the political statement they wanted to make. However, I would be surprised if many people in Russia didn't share Alogon's opinion. Pussy Riot desecrated worship space of average Russians not just the hierarchy of the Russian Orthodox Church. What better way to help the Russian Orthodox Church convince the average person to support Putin?
My opinion would be the same if a mosque in the United States was desecrated.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by OliviaG:
Either one deals with church "protesters" the same way as any other trespassers, or one is arguing for some sort of special privilege for religious property. OliviaG
I would be content with dealing with it as trespass. But what I'm hearing as that some people think they shouldn't be held accountable at all.
Failing that, yes, I would have to argue for a special privilege for church property, i.e. worship spaces. What Beeswax Altar said: they have gone out of their way to alienate citizens who would otherwise be on their side, and are actually making the best argument for a state religion that I've heard in a long time.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
QLib
Bad Example
# 43
|
Posted
You've used the analogy of the mosque -let me ask you this: suppose there was a racist state, such as the old apartheid regime in South Africa, and suppose a group of black protesters deliberately entered a white church, and that the church then claimed that it had been polluted and needed to be reconsecrated - would you support that?
It seems to me that you just want to close your eyes to the context and pick out the details that interest you. But context is everything
In the OP, you asked whether the protest was 'legitimate'. Clearly, your opinion is that it was both illegitimate and counter-productive. However, nothing you've posted on this thread convinces me that you understand enough of the context for your opinion to be of any interest, let alone have any validity.
--------------------
Tradition is the handing down of the flame, not the worship of the ashes Gustav Mahler.
Posts: 8913 | From: Page 28 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
And Alogon should care about your opinion, why?
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
Dear QLib,
Many thanks for banging me on the head with your assumed stereotype of me for my assumed stereotyping of "Pussy Riot".
I should now, if I were the silly old duffer you assume me to be, "Harrumph!" indignantly into my whisky and soda, whilst sitting in my leather armchair, in my "exclusive" club.
Perhaps you expect an indignant "Dear Ma'am" response, claiming you, as "a mere woman", should stick to "those things you understand" and "leave these matters" to "those who know" about "the real world" my having "served His Majesty" with gallantry at Shollapore, Mandalay etc. last century?
Alas, my late father, who was an Indian Army officer during WW II, was never like that. I can't do it! Good grief! Failed to live up to stereotype! He and my late mother would be proud!
I think both you and I are probably far, far more complex than our brief, seemingly failed attempt to communicate here.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by QLib:
You've used the analogy of the mosque -let me ask you this: suppose there was a racist state, such as the old apartheid regime in South Africa, and suppose a group of black protesters deliberately entered a white church, and that the church then claimed that it had been polluted and needed to be reconsecrated - would you support that?.
Is this a version of Godwin's Law?
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
QLib
Bad Example
# 43
|
Posted
No, it's not. Admittedly it's not a perfect parallel, but it's a damn sight closer than the mosque in the US parallel.
I chose the analogy because I want to draw attention to the appalling idea that any group of people can 'pollute' part of a Christian church simply by their presence. Not having women priests is one thing, but the idea of pollution is another. We might as well all be worshipping fucking Baal.
Let me tell you that if I anyone ever succeeds in convincing me that this is an intrinsic part of Christianity, then I personally will not rest until every church, chapel and monastery on the planet is reduced to a heap of blackened rubble.
SirP - all I can say is that, on here, we are what we post.
--------------------
Tradition is the handing down of the flame, not the worship of the ashes Gustav Mahler.
Posts: 8913 | From: Page 28 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by QLib:
...
SirP - all I can say is that, on here, we are what we post.
Methinks, Qlib, your words may speak a deeper truth than you can currently fathom.
A little self-knowledge can be a very dangerous thing.
Probably best sticking to your last.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
QLib
Bad Example
# 43
|
Posted
A deeply patronizing response, SirP.
Let's not bother taking this to Hell - my general impression of you leads me to believe that you're not being deliberately offensive.
--------------------
Tradition is the handing down of the flame, not the worship of the ashes Gustav Mahler.
Posts: 8913 | From: Page 28 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by QLib:
No, it's not. Admittedly it's not a perfect parallel, but it's a damn sight closer than the mosque in the US parallel.
I chose the analogy because I want to draw attention to the appalling idea that any group of people can 'pollute' part of a Christian church simply by their presence. Not having women priests is one thing, but the idea of pollution is another. We might as well all be worshipping fucking Baal.
Let me tell you that if I anyone ever succeeds in convincing me that this is an intrinsic part of Christianity, then I personally will not rest until every church, chapel and monastery on the planet is reduced to a heap of blackened rubble.
SirP - all I can say is that, on here, we are what we post.
I've only now read through this thread and can only contribute two considerations. The first of which is that nobody may enter beyond the iconostasis without specific purpose. On several occasions, when being shown around Orthodox services, I was cautioned clearly not to enter the gates. The second is that the Orthodox are likely able to remember how agitprop theatre troupes in the 1920s performed atheist theatrical pieces within the iconostasis to make their ideological point and, coincidentally, to demonstrate their power. In many places, this was the first step in removing sacred vessels and artwork for museums and for sale, and then to removing the clergy.
Without seeing the canonical documents around the reconsecration decision, my guess is that the church might have classified the incursion as a version of the agitprop activities of the 1920s, designed to destabilize and delegitimize the church. It's not impossible that the fact that they were women was only a minor consideration, or not at all.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
QLib
Bad Example
# 43
|
Posted
Yes, but part of the point is that the power boot is very much on the other foot.
Churches (etc) are entitled to have their own rules about who can (and cannot) go where (though I still find the pollution idea utterly repugnant and fundamentally unchristian). They are entitled to expect some protection under the law from trespass, particularly when accompanied by willful damage - although, like at least one other poster, I don't believe that this should extend to covering expenses for reconsecration..
However, this was a protest, so the point is not that rules were broken - clearly, that was the point - but whether the target of the protest was "legitimate". I think there is a good case to be made for arguing it was. I have no problem with the idea that some people might disagree with that - what I have a problem with is people stating that there is no case, or that they don't want to know what the case is.
--------------------
Tradition is the handing down of the flame, not the worship of the ashes Gustav Mahler.
Posts: 8913 | From: Page 28 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
The second is that the Orthodox are likely able to remember how agitprop theatre troupes in the 1920s performed atheist theatrical pieces within the iconostasis to make their ideological point and, coincidentally, to demonstrate their power. In many places, this was the first step in removing sacred vessels and artwork for museums and for sale, and then to removing the clergy.
Wow
Putin should send Pussy Riot a few bottles of really expensive Vodka. Any authoritarian despot worth his salt should be able to capitalize on this opportunity Pussy Riot was gracious enough to present to him. Putin and Medvedev aren't stupid.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
