Russian Orthodox Church Asks Authorities to Show Mercy on Pussy Riot
August 18, 2012 4 Comments
Officials from Russia’s Orthodox Church have appealed to the country’s authorities to “show mercy” on the three members of Pussy Riot sentenced to two years in jail for a “punk prayer” in Moscow’s main cathedral.
“Casting no doubt on the legitimacy of the court’s decision, we appeal to the public authorities to show mercy, within the law, on the convicted in the hope they will never repeat such blasphemous actions,” the Russian Orthodox Church’s High Council said in a statement.
Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, Maria Alyokhina and Ekaterina Samutsevich have each been sentenced to two years in a medium-security prison for hooliganism motivated by religious hatred.
“We think the words of pity for the convicted which have been coming from the Church’s children and other people are natural. It is necessary to divide the sin from sinner and reprimand the first while hoping the latter will improve,” said the Orthodox Church.
The Church condemned “the intentional act of blasphemy” as well as the “rude hostility to millions of peopleand their feelings” they say the Pussy Riot manifested back in February. They also pointed out that blasphemy which qualifies as “a sin against God” can only be forgiven after “sincere repentance.”
Still, calls were made on people hurt by the punk performance to abstain from revenge or violence.
This is the first official statement Russia’s Orthodox Church has made since the trial began. Like President Vladimir Putin, the top clerics refrained from remarks that could affect the judge’s decision. Nevertheless, Putin ventured a small comment on August 3 saying the three girls should not be judged too harshly.
In February, Pussy Riot performed a “punk prayer” in Moscow’s Christ the Savior Cathedral. Dressed in bright, short dresses and balaclavas, they sang a song with controversial lyrics, slamming a perceived merger of state with the Church, and called on the Virgin Mary to banish Vladimir Putin, who was Prime Minister at that time.
So the above seems to run a little against the common thread that has the leader of the Russian church, Patriarch Krill, watching a YouTube clip of Pussy Riot doing what they did and calling President Putin demanding action against them…
See also: Pussy Riot verdict draws criticism around globe, here.
About Fr Stephen Smuts
From “Religion Law Blog” (http://religionlaw.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/pussy-riot-in-british-church.html)
‘ …the incident involved Pussy Riot shouting obscenities in a Church whilst worshipers were there, disrupting a service, shouting insults about the Orthodox Church and parodying worship.
In Britain that would constitute a criminal offence contrary to
s2 Ecclesiastical Courts Jurisdiction Act 1860
Penalty for making a disturbance in churches, chapels, churchyards etc
Any person who shall be guilty of riotous, violent, or indecent behaviour in England in any cathedral church, parish or district church, or chapel of the Church of England, or in any chapel of any religious denomination, or in England in any place of religious worship duly certified under the Places of Worship Registration Act 1855, 18 & 19 Vict c 81, whether during the celebration of Divine service, or at any other time, or in any churchyard, or burial-ground, or who shall molest, let, disturb, vex, or trouble, or by any other unlawful means disquiet or misuse any preacher duly authorised to preach therein, or any clergyman in Holy Orders ministering or celebrating any sacrament or any Divine service, rite, or office in any cathedral church or chapel, churchyard, or burial ground shall on conviction thereof before two justices of the peace, be liable to a penalty of not more than level 1 on the standard scale, or may, if the justices before whom he shall be convicted think fit, instead of being subjected to any pecuniary penalty be committed to prison for any time not exceeding two months.
Under s28 of the Crime and DIsorder Act 1998 a “Religiously Aggravated Offence” is committed when
(a) at the time of committing the offence, or immediately before or after doing so, the offender demonstrates towards the victim of the offence hostility based on the victim’s membership (or presumed membership) of a racial or religious group; or
(b) the offence is motivated (wholly or partly) by hostility towards members of a racial or religious group based on their membership of that group.
“Religious Group” is defined as
“a group of persons defined by reference to religious belief or lack of religious belief.”
So Pussy Riot could have been convicted in England of a Religiously Aggravated Offence probably either s5 or s4A of the Public Order Act. Section 4A carries a 2 year maximum sentence when it is an aggravated offence and s5 caries a fine
Intentional harassment, alarm and distress – Public Order Act 1986, s. 4A
(1) A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, he–
(a) uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress.
Harassment, alarm and distress – Public Order Act 1986, s. 5
(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he–
(a) uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby.
There is also the offence of Aggravated Trespass under s68 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 which carries a sentence of up to 3 months imprisonment and which says
Offence of aggravated trespass.
(1)A person commits the offence of aggravated trespass if he trespasses on land and, in relation to any lawful activity which persons are engaging in or are about to engage in on that or adjoining land, does there anything which is intended by him to have the effect—
(a)of intimidating those persons or any of them so as to deter them or any of them from engaging in that activity,
(b)of obstructing that activity, or
(c)of disrupting that activity
……..there is one aspect to the incident which has not been commented on in the British media and may explain why Orthodox believers in Russia were quite so outraged. The Cathedral of Christ the Saviour is of special importance. It is a reconstruction of a Cathedral which was deliberately
destroyed in 1931 as part of the persecution of Christians in the Soviet Union . During this persecution groups such as the League of Militant Atheists often desecrated Churches and engaged in parodies of religious ritual whilst singing obscene songs.
In the West we seem to have almost forgotten Communism and the evils it brought but people in Russia have not. I notice that in Court one of the Pussy Riot demonstrators wore a R Shirt bearing a clenched fist and the words “No Pasaran” which was a slogan of the Spanish Communist Party during the Spanish Civil War. It was a bit like appearing in a German Court wearing a T Shirt with a Nazi Slogan. In those circumstances perhaps it is not surprising if Russians have taken a rather less rosy eyed view of the incident than that of the Western media ‘
While the Russian Orthodox Church shows signs of being actually Christian through their meekness, good for them, I would rather these women be thrown into an oubliette and have them disappear and be forgotten. People like that thrive on publicity. It may be a sort of false compassion to think that going easy on these people will stop their blasphemous ways.
I was wondering whether you had seen this news, for example here at
http://sainteliaschurch.blogspot.com/2012/08/femen-supports-pussy-riot-by-sawing.html.
Now a group of Ukrainian female exhibitionists shows their support by desecrating a crucifx memorial to those who died at the hands of NKVD.
I saw that at Rorate Caeli. Clearly, young people have no understanding and knowledge of history. (It takes effort to read history, and even more to understand it) and one can clearly blame the “Who cares? School sucks. I’m going to be famous anyway.” attitude when they had when they were growing up. Or maybe the blame lies in their parents and teachers for failing them and not caring in their part.
One can attempt to educate them, but as the Jews once said “No one is more deaf than a man who will not listen.” Hence we can’t try to reason with these “women” as the only language they’ll understand is either visual or tactile and both must be colored with the emotion of outrage and anger, not with reason and civility. They only speak in the language of violence and roughness. Were it not so, they would not consider using angry, violent, visual means if they feel they have something to say.
As in dealing with rabid, feral dogs, one must shout and beat them to break their will and have them cause no more trouble. Had they been civil, there would have been a discussion, and no anger nor violence would have been necessary. Yet they chose to act uncivilly, and so they must be treated with reciprocity on the basis of their own actions.