In English:
Patriarch Alexy of Moscow and All Russia: Response to the open letter of 138 Muslim theologians

En français:
Rencontre entre le patriarche Bartholomée de Constantinople et José Manuel Barroso

Auf Deutsch:
Bischof Hilarion Alfeyev: Der Ursprung des Bösen (I)

Patriarch Alexy of Moscow and All Russia: Response to the open letter of 138 Muslim theologians

I would like to thank all the Muslim religious leaders and scholars who sent an open letter to representatives of Christian Churches and organizations including the primate of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Christians and Muslims have many similar aims, and we can unite our efforts to achieve them. However, this unity will not occur if we fail to clarify our understanding of each other’s religious values. In this connection, I welcome the desire of the Muslim community to begin a sincere and open dialogue with representatives of Christians Churches on a serious scholarly and intellectual level.

Christianity and Islam are engaged today in a very important task in the world. They seek to remind humanity of the existence of God and of the spiritual dimension present both in man and the world. We bear witness to the interdependence of peace and justice, morality and law, truth and love.

As you rightly put in your letter, Christians and Muslims are drawn together first of all by the commandment of the love of God and the love of one’s neighbor. At the same time, I do not think it is worthwhile for us to identify a certain minimum that seems to fix our convergences in faith and to be theologically sufficient for the individual’s religious life. Any doctrinal affirmation in Christianity or Islam cannot be viewed in isolation from its unique place in the integral theological system. Otherwise, one’s religious identity will be obliterated to give rise to a danger of moving along the path of blending the faiths. It seems to be more fruitful, therefore, to study the integral faith of each side and to compare them.

In Christianity, a discourse about love of God and love of one’s neighbor is impossible without a discourse about God. According to the New Testament revelation, God is revealed to human beings as Love. “Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love” (1 John. 4, 8). “And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him” (1 John. 4, 16). One cannot help seeing in this an indication that the Divine nature itself also has love as its most essential, characteristic and important property.

A lonely isolated essence can love only itself: self-love is not love. Love always presupposes the existence of the other. Just as an individual cannot be aware of himself as personality but only through his communication with other personalities, there cannot be personal being in God but through love of another personal being. That is why the New Testament speaks of God as one Being in three Persons – the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. God is the unity of three Persons who have the same divine nature, which belongs to each of them in its fullness so that they are not three but one God. God the Trinity is the fullness of love with each hypostatic Person bespeaking love towards the other two hypostatic Persons. The Persons of the Trinity are aware of themselves as “I and you”: “just as you are in me and I am in you” (John. 17, 21), Christ says to the Father. “He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you”, Christ says about the Holy Spirit (John. 16, 14). Therefore, every Hypostasis in the Trinity refers to the other Hypostasis, and, according to St. Maxim the Confessor, it is “eternal movement [of the Trinity] in love”.

It is only through the knowledge of God as love that the individual can come to the true knowledge of His being and His other properties. The love of God, not any other property of the Divine nature, is the main principle and the main driving force of Divine Providence for humanity in the cause of its salvation: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John. 3, 16).

The Christian teaching on the incarnation of God the Word in Jesus Christ is also a natural manifestation of God’s love of human beings. “This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins” (1 John. 4, 9-10).

Man, created in the image and after the likeness of God (Gen. 1, 26), is able to experience Him in himself and, thus, come to know the love that God has for him. God’s love is communicated to human beings to become their inner property, their living force that determines, penetrates and forms their whole lives. Love in man arises in response to God’s love. “How great is the love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God!” (1 John. 3, 1). God expects from man not so much a slave’s devotion as filial feeling of love. Therefore, in the main prayer that the Lord Jesus Christ has taught Christians to say (Luke. 11, 2), man appeals to God as his Heavenly Father.

The manifestation of man’s true love of God is possible only if man is free. This freedom makes it possible to do good by fulfilling the will of God by choice, not only out of fear or for the sake of reward. The love of God inspires in man the selfless desire to fulfill His commandments. For, according to St. Isaac the Syrian, “Because of His great love, God was not pleased to restrict our freedom but was pleased to draw us near Him through the love of our own heart”. Therefore, human freedom increases, extends and grows stronger as human beings grow in love of God, which is the core of human religious and moral perfection. Those who love God seek to emulate their Creator in their actions: “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matt. 5, 48).

My letter does not have the aim of setting forth the entire Christian theology. I only offer an example of reflection on God’s love of man and man’s love of God, which underlie the whole theological system of Christianity and which cannot be reduced to a few laconic formulations. It is my conviction that Christian and Muslim thinkers would benefit from regular studies of each other’s doctrines in their fullness. In this connection, it seems desirable to develop a doctrinal Christian-Islamic dialogue to broaden academic and research cooperation, to study doctrinal affirmations, to create an in-depth basis for developing multifaceted cooperation between our two religious communities.

The doctrinal dialogue between the Orthodox Church and Islam has considerably intensified recently. This happened not only because we have to communicate more intensively and to build societal life together, but also because Christians and Muslims have come to face the same challenges which are impossible to meet on one’s own. We have together encountered a pressure from the anti-religious worldview that claims universality and seeks to subject all the spheres of life in society. We are also witnesses to attempts to assert a ‘new morality’ that contradicts the moral norms supported by traditional religions. We should be together to face these challenges.

Some people among both Christians and Muslims have expressed fears that the development of interreligious dialogue may lead to religious syncretism, a review of the doctrines and obliterated borders between religious traditions. Time has shown however that a reasonable system of cooperation between religions helps to preserve and emphasize the unique nature and identity of each of them. Moreover, the development of appropriate forms of interreligious dialogue in itself has proved to be a serious obstacle for manipulations aimed to establish a kind of universal super-religion.

Unfortunately, I have to state that our religions do have enemies who would like to see Christians and Muslims clash, on the one hand, or to bring them to a false ‘unity’ based on religious and moral indifference, thus giving priority to purely secular concerns, on the other. Therefore we as religious leaders need each other, so that our faithful may preserve their identity in the changing world.

Noteworthy in this connection is the experience of co-existence between Christianity and Islam in Russia. The traditional religions in our country have never come into conflict while preserving their identity for a thousand years. Russia is one of those rare multi-religious and multinational states whose history has not known the religious wars that have plagued various regions of the world.

The basic religious and ethical principles held by the traditional faiths in Russia invariably guided their followers toward cooperation with people of other religions and beliefs in the spirit of peace and harmony. Various religious communities lived side-by-side, working together and defending together their common Motherland. Nevertheless, they stood firm in the faith of their own forefathers, safeguarding it against encroachments from outside and often doing so together in face of invaders from other countries. To this day, our compatriots have not come into any real conflict between them based on religious grounds. In this way, an affective system of interreligious relations based on mutual respect and good-neighborliness was established in Russia.

In today’s Russia, there is an important mechanism for interreligious dialogue, namely, the Interreligious Council in Russia, which has been working fruitfully and successfully for over ten years now. Its example and experience have proved to be attractive for the independent states, which have been formed in the post-Soviet space. Religious leaders in these countries have formed a CIS Inter-religious Council. Through these two bodies, together we seek to meet the various challenges of today and to show to the whole world a positive experience of peaceful coexistence and cooperation between Orthodox Christians and Muslims who have lived in the same society for centuries. As is known, in other Christian countries, too, Muslims have had opportunities for developing their religious life freely.

In many Muslim countries, Christians have enjoyed invariable support and have the freedom to live according to their own religious rules. But in some Islamic countries, the legislation prohibits the construction of churches, worship services and free Christian preaching. I hope that the letter of Islamic religious leaders and scholars proposing to intensify dialogue between our two religions will contribute to establishing better conditions for Christian minorities in such countries.

Doctrinally our dialogue could deal with such important themes as the teaching on God, man and the world. At the same time, on the practical plane the Christian-Muslim cooperation could be aimed at safeguarding the role of religion in public life, struggling with the defamation of religion, overcoming intolerance and xenophobia, protecting holy places, preserving places of worship and promoting joint peace initiatives.

It is my conviction that it is precisely the Christians and the Muslims that should initiate inter-religious dialogue on regional and global levels. Therefore, in the framework of international organizations, it seems useful to create mechanisms that make it possible to be more sensitive to the spiritual and cultural traditions of various peoples.

Once again I would like to thank all the Muslim scholars and religious leaders for their open letter. I hope for further fruitful cooperation both in theological dialogue and social sphere.

English translation: DECR Moscow Patriarchate

Rencontre entre le patriarche Bartholomée de Constantinople et José Manuel Barroso

Le patriarche Bartholomée de Constantinople s'est entretenu le 11 avril dernier au Phanar avec Mr. José Manuel Barroso, président de la Commission européenne, et avec M. Olli Rehn, commissaire européen en charge du dossier de l'élargissement. Assistaient également à la rencontre Mgr Emmanuel, métropolite de France, M. Marc Pierini, chef de la délégation de la Commission européenne à Ankara, l'archimandrite Elpidophoros Lampryniades, secrétaire du Synode et Mgr Meliton, métropolite de Philadelphie qui s'occupe des questions relatives aux biens et propriétés du patriarcat à Constantinople.

M. Barroso a demandé au patriarche de l'informer relativement à la situation du patriarcat et de ses fidèles. Il a souligné l'importance qu'il accordait au caractère oecuménique du patriarcat.

Les problèmes auxquels le Patriarcat oecuménique est confronté sont inclus dans les rapports annuels que rédige la Commission européenne sur le progrès des réformes en Turquie et sur la convergence avec l'acquis européen.

Source: www.orthodoxie.com

Bischof Hilarion Alfeyev: Der Ursprung des Bösen (I)

Im Morgenrot der Existenz des geschaffenen Seins, noch vor der Erschaf­fung der sichtbaren Welt durch Gott, jedoch bereits nach der Erschaffung der Engel in der geistlichen Welt, ereignete sich eine ungeheure Katastro­phe, um die wir nur aus ihren Folgen wissen. Ein Teil der Engel stellte sich gegen Gott, fiel von Ihm ab und wurde zum Feind alles Guten und Heili­gen. An der Spitze dieses abgefallenen Heeres stand Luzifer, griechisch Eosfor, dessen Name (wörtl. „Lichtbringer“) selbst zeigt, dass er ursprüng­lich gut war, sich dann aber durch seinen eigenen Willen „und durch die eigenmächtige Willkür vom Natürlichen zum Widernatürlichen veränderte, hochmütig gegenüber Gott wurde, Der ihn erschaffen hatte, sich Ihm wi­dersetzen wollte und als erster vom Heil abfiel und in das Böse geriet“ (Johannes von Damaskus). Luzifer, den man auch Diabolus und Satan nennt, gehörte zu einem der höchsten Ränge der Engelhierarchie. Mit ihm zusammen fielen auch andere Engel, wovon die Apokalypse sinn­bildlich erzählt: „Und es fiel ein grosser Stern auf die Erde, der wie eine Fackel brannte ... und getroffen wurde ein Drittel der Sterne, so dass ein Drittel von ihnen verdunkelt wurde“ (Offb 8,10.12).

Der Diabolus und die Dämonen gerieten in die Finsternis durch den eigenen freien Willen. Jedes vernünftige Lebewesen, sei es ein Engel oder Mensch, hat von Gott einen freien Willen erhalten, das heisst das Recht, zwischen Gut und Böse zu wählen. Der freie Wille ist einem Lebewesen gegeben, damit es sich im Guten übt und so ontologisch an diesem Guten Anteil erhält, das heisst dass das Gute nicht nur etwas von aussen Gegebe­nes bleibt, sondern zu seinem eigenen Besitz wird. Wenn das Heil von Gott nur notwendig und unvermeidlich aufgezwungen worden wäre, dann könnte kein einziges Lebewesen eine vollständig freie Persönlichkeit wer­den. „Niemand wurde jemals durch Zwang gut“, sagen die heiligen Vä­ter (Syméon le Nouveau Théologien, Hymnus 43, 137, in: Hymnes, hg. v. J. Koder, SC 196, Paris 1973, Bd. 3, 66). Durch beständiges Wachsen im Guten sollten die Engel zur Fülle der Vollkommenheit aufsteigen bis hin zur völligen Verähnlichung mit dem übergütigen Gott. Ein Teil von ihnen traf jedoch die Wahl nicht zugunsten Gottes und bestimmte damit im voraus das eigene Schicksal wie auch das Schicksal des Universums, das von diesem Moment an zum Kampfplatz zweier polarer (wenn auch nicht gleichwertiger) Prinzipien wurde: des Guten, Göttlichen und des Bösen, Dämonischen.

Die Lehre vom freiwilligen Abfall des Teufels von Gott ist die Antwort auf die uralte Frage jeder Philosophie nach der Herkunft des Bösen. Die Frage nach dem Entstehen des Bösen stellte sich dem christlichen theologi­schen Denken in aller Schärfe, weil es ständig auf offene oder verborgene Erscheinungen des Dualismus stiess. Nach dieser philosophischen Doktrin wirken in der Welt ursprünglich zwei gleiche Kräfte – eine gute und eine böse –, die die Welt regieren und sie sozusagen auseinanderreissen. Ende des 3. Jahrhunderts breitete sich im Osten der Manichäismus sehr weit aus (so genannt nach Mani, dem Gründer) und existierte unter verschiedenen Namen (Paulizianer, Bogomilen, Albigenser) bis zum späten Mittelalter: In dieser Häresie sind einige Elemente des Christentums mit Elementen östli­cher dualistischer Religionen verflochten. Nach der Lehre der Manichäer besteht die Gesamtheit des Seins aus zwei Reichen, die immer gemeinsam existiert haben: das Reich des Lichtes, erfüllt von einer Vielzahl von guten Äonen (Engeln), und das Reich der Finsternis, erfüllt von bösen Äonen (Dämonen). Dem Gott des Lichtes ist die gesamte geistige Wirklichkeit unterstellt, der Gott der Finsternis (Satan) aber herrscht uneingeschränkt über die materielle Welt. Die Materie selbst hat einen sündhaften und bö­sen Ursprung: Der Mensch muss auf verschiedenartige Weise seinen Leib abtöten, um sich von der Materie zu befreien und in das nicht-materielle Reich des Guten zurückzukehren.

Die christliche Theologie spricht anders von der Natur und der Entste­hung des Bösen. Das Böse ist nicht ein uranfängliches Wesen, das ewig wie Gott und ihm gleich wäre, es ist Abfall vom Guten, Widerstand gegenüber dem Guten. In diesem Sinn kann es nicht allgemeinhin als „Wesenheit“ bezeichnet werden, weil es nicht aus sich selbst existiert. Wie die Finsternis oder der Schatten nicht ein eigenständiges Sein darstellen, sondern nur den Mangel an Licht, so ist das Böse nur ein Mangel an Gutem. „Das Böse“, schreibt der heilige Basilius der Grosse, „ist kein lebendiges und beseeltes Wesen, sondern ein Zustand der Seele, der der Tugend entgegengesetzt ist und durch Abfall vom Guten entsteht. Suche darum das Böse nicht aussen, stell dir nicht vor, dass es eine ursprüngliche Natur des Bösen gibt, viel­mehr muss jeder sich selbst als Urheber der eigenen Schlechtigkeit beken­nen“ (Basilius der Grosse, 2. Homilie zum Sechstagewerk). Gott hat nichts Böses geschaffen: Engel wie Menschen wie auch die materielle Welt – alles ist der Natur nach gut und herrlich. Doch den ver­nünftigen personalen Wesen (Engeln und Menschen) ist ein freier Wille gegeben, und sie können ihre Freiheit gegen Gott richten und dadurch das Böse erzeugen. Und so geschah es: Der Lichtträger-Morgenstern, ur­sprünglich gut geschaffen, missbrauchte seine Freiheit, verkehrte die eigene gute Natur und fiel von der Quelle des Guten ab.

Aus dem Buch Geheimnis des Glaubens. Einführung in die orthodoxe dogmatische Theologie. Fortsetzung folgt.