A Theological Case for Ukraine’s European Integration: Deconstructing the Myth of “Holy Russia” vs. “Decadent Europe”

Joshua T. Searle

Introduction

Since 24th February 2022, Russia’s so-called “special military operation” has evolved into a campaign of mass extermination and demoralisation of the Ukrainian civilian population. Despite the barbarism of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, several prominent Christian leaders have sought to justify the barbaric invasion by appealing to notions such as “Christian values” and “Christian civilisation.” According to this narrative, Putin’s Russia represents “traditional Christianity”, which is in opposition to the decadent forces of secular modernity, represented by the nations of Europe and North America. This exclusive narrative depicts Europe as a hostile Other, representing liberalism, superficiality and depravity, that is set against the supposedly profound “Russian values” of family, tradition and respect for authority. This perspective also presupposes that “innocent sinless Russia” is engaged in an apocalyptic struggle against the “sinful immoral West” on behalf of Christianity. This dubious claim is repeated by Russian politicians and church leaders and amplified by Russian propaganda networks. Ominously, the baseless notion of “special Slavic spirituality” is prevalent not only among Orthodox Christians, but also among some post-Soviet protestants.

The aim of this article is to deconstruct this myth in both a positive and negative sense. Firstly, in negative terms, I aim to highlight the irreconcilable contradictions of this myth of Russian moral superiority and to demonstrate its discontinuity with traditional Christian teaching. Secondly, in positive terms, I intend to demonstrate the continuity between Christian orthodoxy (lowercase “o”) and the classical (Western) liberal tradition. In other words, what I am attempting here could be described as a “special theological operation” to uncover the duplicity of the belligerent kleptocrats who purvey these dishonest claims about Russia as a benevolent holy empire that upholds “Christian values.”

Perhaps somewhat controversially, I intend to advance the claim that the secular humanism of European modernity is more authentically Christian than the kind of Christian nationalism promoted by the Kremlin and the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) hierarchy. Such a claim is not new,[2] Christian nationalism, by contrast, constitutes a decisive break from orthodox Christian teaching and owes its provenance more to pagan myths of blood and soil than to biblical teaching concerning the dignity and freedom of human beings.This article is divided into three parts. Part One identifies the salient features of the “Holy Russia” myth with illustrations drawn from various representative figures. Part two is devoted to the defence of the European tradition in which I advance the counterintuitive argument that secular liberalism is more in continuity with orthodox Christianity than Christian nationalism. In part three, I apply these general points to the specific issue of Ukraine and its fate as a European nation.

The belief in the moral and spiritual superiority of “Holy Russia” did not originate with Vladimir Putin. The idea has roots that extend deep into Russian history. Ukraine, in particular the capital Kyiv, is seen by many Russian Orthodox believers as the cradle of Slavic Christendom. Ever since the Grand Prince Vladimir (c.958–1015) converted to Christianity and Christianised the ancient state of Kyivan Rus’ in the year 988, Kyiv has occupied a prominent place in the imagination of the Russian Orthodox Church.[5] Nikolai Berdyaev noted that many Russians are nurtured in the belief that God has given their motherland an exceptional destiny to Christianise the world. Those who imbibe such an idea tend to regard Russia “not only [as] the most Christian, but also the sole Christian land in the world.”Yet the question of whether Russia can be considered a “Christian nation” is disputable. One of the basic lessons that we learn from the history of Christianity is that not everything that flies under the banner of Christianity is truly Christian. Many corrupt tyrants and devious charlatans from Constantine to Donald Trump have invoked the name of Christ to consolidate their political power. The latest example of a corrupt tyrant who invokes Christianity for this purpose is the Russian dictator, Vladimir Putin. Since he came to power in 2000, the Russian dictator has frequently employed religious rhetoric in support of his megalomaniacal ambition to secure his legacy alongside Peter the Great in the annals of Russian history.[8]

The elevation of Russia and the disparagement of Western civilisation has become a constant feature of the Kremlin’s public utterances, especially since the first Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2014. Putin stated that, “Many Euro-Atlantic countries have moved away from their roots, including Christian values. Policies are being pursued that place on the same level a multi-child family and a same-sex partnership, a faith in God and a belief in Satan. This is the path to degradation.”[10] Such representative statements by senior Russian politicians demonstrate that the notion of “Holy Russia” finds expression “not only as Church doctrine but also as political ideology.”Unsurprisingly, Putin’s appeal to Christian values is fully endorsed by the Russian Orthodox Church hierarchy. The Orthodox Church’s influence on the Putin regime even extends to active involvement in drafting new legislation issued by the Russian government.[13] He shares the view of Putin that Russia has been given a special role by God to save the world from the liberals and gays. He seems to believe that the war in Ukraine was “a struggle that has not a physical, but a metaphysical significance”, in which Russia with its “traditional values” symbolised Good, whereas Ukraine and the West with its tolerance of homosexuality represented Evil. Gundyaev and the ROC leadership have likewise baptised Kremlin propaganda in religious language by claiming that the notion of universal human rights is a mere ideological expression of Western secularism and liberalism, whose intent is to isolate “Christian” authoritarian regimes like Putin’s Russia.[15]

The ideological affinity of the Putin dictatorship and the ROC hierarchy is easy to understand. Putin and Gundyaev have inherited the notion of symfonia, which dates back to Byzantium one thousand years ago. According to the idea of symfonia, the church and state are supposedly ordained by God work in concert: the Church provides the moral authority, the State provides the political authority for the just governance of the people.[17] In both the ROC and many of the Protestant churches, we see the same yearning for a “strong hand,” as well as anti-Western sentiments, a passive tolerance of legal nihilism, nostalgia for the Soviet communism and widespread nationalism and anti-democratic ferment.Part of the problem is that Christians in Russia and Ukraine have no tradition of thinking theologically or biblically about political events.[20] Therefore, many were persuaded to acclaim Putin’s rise to power as “a miracle of God,”[22] so too did many Russian Christians decide to support Putin in the belief that he would reimpose “traditional values” after the moral degradation of the Yeltsin era. Similar dynamics can be seen in the overwhelming support of evangelical Christians for the disgraced ex-President of the USA, Donald Trump.

The invocation of “Holy Russia” has even found a receptive audience among many conservative evangelicals in the West. Putin’s Russia is viewed by some prominent Western conservative commentators as a paragon of traditional family values.[24] In the past decade, many transnational conservative organisations have collaborated closely with likeminded far-right groups in Russia that promote the view that “Russia is a bulwark of Christian values throughout the world and has a special role in the struggle against a global anti-family lobby.”[26]

Russian propaganda has directed specific campaigns designed to appeal to the traditionalist religious instincts of many Ukrainians.[28] Yet while they disparage the West for its immorality, the Russian President and his Patriarch preside over a nation that is characterised by endemic corruption, shady schemes, base populism, endemic substance abuse, criminality at every level of society (including in public institutions), and the total absence of the rule of law. Russia is consistently identified as one of the most corrupt countries in the world, ranked alongside certain failed states in sub-Saharan Africa.All of this begs the question: is Russia really so superior morally and spiritually to the West? Is Russia truly a special case of a virtuous Christian nation? Is the situation really so bad in Europe? If traditional Russia with its high-minded Christian values is so spiritual and profound, then something seems to have gone wrong in the conversion of this spiritual vitality into anything that would resemble public virtues, such as justice, integrity, honesty and peace. One wonders, if Christian faith is so strong in Russia, if there is as much spiritual vitality as the Kremlin and ROC claim, then why are Russian Christians so incapable of translating this faith into social virtues that would serve the public good? Why has lying become such a universal feature in a country where up to 85 percent of the population claims to follow the one who declared that he was the Way, the Truth and the Life? Why has this special profound spiritual vitality not been applied to economic development, or at least led to the creation of an independent judiciary and the overcoming of rampant corruption that continues to afflict every sphere of Russian society? Why has “secular, godless Europe” been far more successful in creating just structures of law and civil rights than “sacred, holy” Russia? If Russian people with their “traditional Christian values” are so “spiritual,” then why do they seem so incapable of converting this spiritual prowess into at least a basic respect and common courtesy for one another? It seems strange that the face of the “Antichrist in Europe” is so poorly covered and easily discerned. It is also peculiar that “Holy Russia” remains completely untouched by the same kind of malevolent influences that allegedly afflict Europe, although according to the Scriptures, the Beast “was given power to wage war against God’s holy people and to conquer them. And it was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation” (Revelation 13:7).Upon closer examination, it is easy to discern the bogus character of the claim concerning the special spiritual depth of Russia as a holy nation that upholds “Christian values.” The invocation by Putin and his acolytes of conservative Christian values amounts to little more than a religious fig leaf for Russia’s aggressive expansionist policies towards its neighbouring territories and its repressive policies against non-conformist religious groups within its own borders and within the territories it forcibly occupies. This distorted form of Christianity, used as a tool in the Kremlin’s anti-Western propaganda war, is even further removed from orthodox (with a lowercase “o”) Christianity than secular humanism, as I will explain in the next section.

In the view of the Head of the Russian Orthodox Church, the reason why Russia invaded Ukraine was because “external and hostile dark forces” had disrupted this consciousness of unity.In contrast to the ROC with its tradition of symfonia, some expressions of Protestant Christianity tend to adopt a more suspicious approach to political power and the concept of a State Church. Churches that stand within the tradition of the Radical Reformation have understood that when the church and state were brought into the totality of a single authority, the church ceased to be the church.[33] The alliance of Church and State and any attempt to impose “traditional Christian values” through aggressive legislation or force of arms is morally bankrupt and devoid of any biblical basis. The history of Russian Orthodoxy and ancient Rus’ right up to the present time teaches clearly that the political dominance of the Christian religion over national life leads not to spiritual revival, but merely creates a thin veneer of nationalistic religion among a people whose adherence to Christianity signifies little more than a nominal attachment to a blasphemous abstraction of so-called Holy Russia.

The history of Russia and Orthodoxy since at least the time of Ivan the Terrible (1530–1584), teaches that the state has tolerated the existence of Christianity only when Christianity has been adapted to the pattern of the world and rendered its service towards advancing the social and political ends of the state. According to orthodox Christian teaching, the gospel of Christ is set in opposition to the world order. The gospel spells the end of the false harmony of Christian piety and political power. The notion of “traditional family values” has no place in the life and teachings of Christ and was never part of his gospel message.[35] This is why the idea of the “Russian World” and “spheres of influence” (so fetishized by many religious and political leaders in Putin’s Russia) is totally opposed to the spirit of the gospel.[37] Christ was crucified in Jerusalem by the Roman Empire at the urging of the religious authorities. Christ’s gospel was such a stumbling block, a scandal to these religious custodians of “traditional values”, that they responded by killing the Son of God. The prophets of the Old Testaments inveighed against the “traditional values” promoted by the religious authorities of ancient Israel and Judah. The righteous, the prophets, apostles and Christ himself, were killed by those religious authorities who claimed that they were defending traditional religious values.

From a biblical perspective, Christian faith is neither a badge of cultural identity nor an accident of birth or geography, but involves a free and committed response to the proclamation of the gospel of Christ. We might even regard the lure of political sovereignty as one of the temptations that Christ rejected in the wilderness (Matt. 4:1-11) and speculate that among the kingdoms that Satan presented to Christ were all those nations and empires of the world which would later call themselves “Christian” and that would wage war in the cause of defending “traditional Christian values.”Against this notion of forced imposition of religious values through the territorial expansion of “Holy Russia”, Europe stands for the principle of freedom of religion. This presents both opportunities and challenges for Ukrainian Christians. Firstly, in contrast to “Christian” Russia where Orthodox Christianity is endorsed by the state and occupies a privileged position in Russian society, “secular” Europe is pluralistic to the extent that it offers a cultural space in which there is no hegemonic religion or Leitkultur (leading culture) that is universally accepted as normative. In Europe clerical authority is not self-evident, and our claims to Christian exclusivity are looked upon with suspicion by a sceptical society. European culture also places a premium on the virtue of tolerance. This means that Christians in a secular society need to find ways of engaging compassionately with the majority of the wider population that does not share their Christian values or faith convictions. Within secular Europe, the challenge is to preserve one’s distinctive Christian witness by drawing on the riches of one’s tradition so as not to lose the distinctiveness of the gospel within a pluralistic culture. Moreover, within Europe, Ukrainian Christians will need to learn to live without either the Iron Curtain or the “fraternal assistance” of their imperialistic Eastern neighbour. Within the secular cultures of Europe, Ukrainian Christians will need to demonstrate the benefits of their faith and to defend their position in the language of debate, and not from a position of power and authority.On this point, I would argue that Ukrainian Christians should be less concerned with the symbolic and liturgical expression of the gospel within the church, but should aspire to work towards the concrete embodiment of the gospel within the world in concrete and tangible ways in the midst of so-called “secular culture.” The Vice Rector of the Ukrainian Catholic University, Miroslav Marinovich, expressed this idea with force and clarity: “We believe that in the West, faith is in decline, and it is with horror we say that churches are being closed, because for us the most important are the external attributes. However, unlike us, in Western Europe we see ‘inculturated Christianity’ embedded in human relations.”[41] The cross of Russian Orthodoxy, like in some expressions of Roman Catholicism and Anglicanism, has become a decorative symbol that confers status, power, and identity, whereas the cross of Christ was an instrument of torture that meant nothing but humiliation, vulnerability and estrangement.

Ukraine best represents Christian values not when it expresses the gospel in church symbols and liturgical rituals, but rather when its people actualise the Kingdom as a material reality within Ukrainian society as a whole. The Christian churches should side with the people in their legitimate aspirations for civil liberties, since freedom within the law is a much better indicator of “Christian values” than performance of religious rituals or the profession of “traditional family values.” The official Orthodox Churches in Russia and Ukraine have generally been content to symbolise and simulate the Kingdom in liturgical signs, whereas true faithfulness to the gospel requires a more material realization of the gospel values of justice, peace and compassion. A country can rightly be called “Christian” not according to the number of people who claim affiliation to a religious institution, but according the extent to which the gospel values of honesty, dignity, freedom, justice and compassion are inculturated and embedded in the mundane realities that govern social and personal relations in the nation as a whole. According to this criterion, even the most secular states in Europe, such as Sweden and Denmark with their democratic structures and independent judiciaries, are more “Christian” than “Holy Russia” with its authoritarian despotism and corrupt law courts. In connection with this argument, there is an obvious need for theological reflection: not so much on the political, but rather on the cultural, spiritual, and religious aspects of the current debate concerning the integration of Ukraine into the family of European nations. This question will occupy us in the next section.

3. Ukraine’s European Future

According to its own understanding, Europe stands for the values of human dignity and human rights, cultural diversity, democracy, justice, fairness, equality an the rule of law.The problem is that discussions about tolerance, minority rights, freedom and human dignity can easily progress into “culture wars.” Instead of thinking critically about the contribution that Christianity could make to the promotion of an open and free society, the discussions often get side-tracked into disputes about the fate of traditional values and the Christian heritage, which is only one step away from the demonisation of modern Europe. In order to facilitate Ukraine’s integration into European civilisation, Ukraine’s Christians will need to play their part in deconstructing the false narrative that portrays Russia as a defender of Christianity against a decadent, godless and anti-Christian Europe. Christianity can help Ukrainians to imagine the possibility of living in a country without constantly having to bribe public officials, such as is the case in Russia and many other nations of the former USSR. Searching questions need to be asked if it is even possible to live the Christian life if the entire structure of society requires people to compromise their Christian principles of honesty, openness, integrity and compassion. These questions call for the active engagement of a new generation of Ukrainian theologians who can address urgent issues in the public sphere.Ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukrainians have been faced with a choice to align either with a democratic Europe or with an autocratic Russia. Ukraine is not a whole or self-sufficient entity, but is part of the European cultural space, and especially of its core: the central tradition of Christianity. If it remains outside of Europe, Ukraine will remain in a cultural limbo, where powerful forces and vested interests will seek to harness Ukraine’s economic, political and cultural resources to serve their own agendas, and the Ukrainian people will remain as pawns in an ill-fated civilizational battle between East and West. Outside Europe, all that awaits Ukraine is a new era of Russian-led serfdom: no courts, no free elections, no education, no access to modern medicine and healthcare, no free enterprise and no freedom of movement. For only in an open dialogue, in a free world of permeating cultural ties can Ukraine overcome its cultural and scientific isolation, and emerge from the cul-de-sac of economic stagnation and endemic corruption.

Ukraine must therefore be thought of as a quintessentially European nation, not primarily in terms of history and geography, but in terms of the aspirations of its people for an open and democratic society that lives under the rule of law. The “principle of Europe” is the principle of coexistence, plurality and unity-in-diversity. A new generation of Ukrainians is emerging which cherishes these values. The great Ukrainian national poet, Taras Shevchenko (1814–1861), in one of his poems, advised his compatriots to “Learn from the foreigner, but do not be ashamed of the familiar.”Some might ask, what will happen to Ukrainian Christian traditions in a European future? The honest answer is that they will compete freely with other worldviews and ideologies that inhabit the Ukrainian public sphere. Churches within a pluralistic culture are required to express their convictions without invoking authority, but as they engage with other ideas and discover the riches of their Christian tradition, they grow in credibility among the general population. The church and faith will transition from being closed sacramental institutions that seek state patronage to becoming open movements on the side of justice, peace and compassion. Ukrainian Christianity will be associated with the future, rather than the past. Churches will be seen as pillars of freedom and defenders of the open society rather than closed institutions that promote the parochial interests of clerical hierarchies. There are certain risks inherent in Ukrainian Christians’ embrace of Europe, but there are even greater possibilities. There are crises and challenges, but every day that this terrible war continues, the Ukrainian people are also gaining the experience and courage that they need to overcome them. The future has its uncertainty, but it also has its hope, and the Soviet and Putinist past should no longer hold Ukraine back from its embrace of European values.