Latvia is changing the ROC to the LOC – Picture of the Day – Kommersant

The Parliament of Latvia on Thursday, September 8, adopted a presidential bill on the separation of the Latvian Orthodox Church (LPC) from the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate. The ROC itself categorically disagrees with the decision of the Latvian authorities. The Moscow Patriarchate claims that the Latvian authorities rudely interfere in the affairs of believers.

The initiator of the legislative act was the President of Latvia, Egils Levits. He stated that the law “will restore the historical status of the LOC and exclude any power of the Moscow Patriarchate over the Latvian Church.” According to the Latvian authorities, they decided to return the church to the status “which historically was de facto established for the Latvian Orthodox Church by the tomos of July 6 (19), 1921, issued by Patriarch Tikhon of Moscow and All Russia to Archbishop Janis Pommer, and by a decree of the Cabinet of Ministers of July 8 October 1926 on the status of the Orthodox Church.

The Sejm’s official website states that “the law does not affect or interfere with the teachings of the Church’s faith and questions of canon law.” After the President of Latvia signs the law, the LPC will have until October 31 to amend its charter to take into account the new law.

However, the Moscow Patriarchate categorically disagrees with this. “The status of a self-governing church is exactly the status that the Latvian Orthodox Church had under Archbishop John Pommer (he headed the LOC in 1921-1934.— “b”) and has now. This status was confirmed by the tomos of Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Russia in 1992. “RIA News” Adviser to the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, Archpriest Nikolai Balashov.— No legislative changes are required to achieve it. The law on the position of the Orthodox Church, adopted by the Latvian Seimas in 1926, drafted by Archbishop John himself and mentioned in a statement by the President of Latvia, dealt with “the rights of self-government and self-determination.” But this was not the status of autocephaly, as Mr. Levits erroneously believes.”

The Russian Orthodox Church is convinced that the adopted law “completely destroys the notions of religious freedom in Europe that have evolved over the past few centuries” and “calls the very concept of religious freedom into question.” “The principle of the ‘rule of law’, which European politicians have been talking about for a long time, seems to take on a new sinister meaning,” says Archpriest Nikolai Balashov, adviser to the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia. 99 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia, which states: “The Church is separated from the State”? No matter. The Latvian deputies are convinced that after proper consultations “with state security agencies” it is possible to proclaim autocephaly.”

Roman Lunkin, head of the Center for the Study of Religion and Society at the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences, believes that “the Latvian law on the special status of the Orthodox Church in the country, of course, became possible only as a result of the political crisis in Europe and the continuing decline in living standards in the Baltic countries.” “All the problems of politics, especially in the poorest European countries, are explained by the confrontation with Russia and the “hand of Moscow,” he is convinced. “The Ukrainian crisis is hitting churches, mainly the Moscow Patriarchate. The Law on the Church of Latvia is distinguished by a high degree of hypocrisy both in relation to international and European norms of freedom of religion and belief, and in relation to the Orthodox citizens of the republic.”

According to Mr. Lunkin, if the question of “historical justice” is raised, then Latvia “should be the Diocese of Riga within the Russian Church, as in the 19th century.”

“The authorities claim that the law does not interfere with canonical issues, but they want to control precisely them – the status of the church and the appointment of the clergy. The authorities seem to care about the independence of the church, but they do not ask it themselves, moreover, they carry out, in fact, church privatization in order to control church affairs and leadership. They give a month to change the charter and provide information about the episcopate,” the expert says. “The Latvian authorities are pushing the church itself to violate canonical norms, since changing the canonical status from autonomy to autocephaly is possible only with the approval of the Moscow Patriarchate (first, the LPTs council must turn to the patriarch, then the patriarch and the Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church make a decision and it is approved by the Council of Bishops. “b”). The decision of the Seimas has no meaning for the church, it only means disrespect for the faithful and interference in the internal affairs of the LOC. The law directly contradicts European values ​​and world standards of religious freedom, and exercises violence against church canons. A similar law on changing the name of the UOC to the ROC in Ukraine was adopted under Poroshenko, but even in Ukraine Zelensky was afraid to apply it, while in Latvia the adoption of a new law is a desire to drive underground everyone who does not agree to sever ties with Russia.”

Pavel Korobov