 |
| The demolition of Moscow's Christ the Saviour Cathedral by the Communist government of Russia in 1931. (source: Wikimedia Commons) |
In sentencing Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, 22, Maria Alyokhina, 24, and Yekaterina Samutsevich, 29, Judge Marina Syrova chose to highlight the sacrilegious nature of the crime. Syrova said that the women's “aggressive act” was “abusive of God”, describing it as “blasphemous” and “offensive for all believers” -- quite a good choice of words, I thought.
In her summing up, the Judge also stressed that it was perfectly legal to criticise the Church or any other group within Russia, as long as it is done without the element of hate, which seemed apparent in the Pussy Riot protest. Judge Syrova also highlighted the fact that Christ the Saviour Cathedral was damaged by the Russian state after the Bolshevik Revolution, which makes it a particularly sacred and sensitive site for Orthodox Christians -- who suffered a great deal of persecution under the Soviet system. (Fr Ray Blake has more on the destruction of the Moscow Cathedral on his blog.)
Am I alone in being completely baffled by the Western media's reporting of the whole Pussy Riot story? It seems that nearly every news agency in the West is implying that the sentencing of these criminals is a type of crime in itself. I just logged onto my hotmail account now, and noticed the MSN News headline: "Who are Pussy Riot and why did Putin put them on trial?" This, just like most reports in the so-called liberal press, seems to suggest that the President of Russia somehow ordered the trial of these three women. Yet, they have been freely and openly criticising the Putin regime for years. Also, headlines like that downplay the real nature of the story -- a hate crime by so-called 'progressives'.
Other commentators, such Miriam Elder, writing for the Guardian, seemed to think that the women were only prosecuted (or partly, at least) because of the "vast influence of the Russian Orthodox Church." (What? Does, she mean that Church which was practically destroyed under Communism, and which is still in the process of reconstruction?). In her coverage of the sentencing of the three rioters, the Guardian journalist went on to comment: "Although church and state are formally separate, the church sees itself as the heart of Russian national identity and critics say its strength effectively makes it a quasi-state entity." Oh, so does that make it ok to vandalise its property and abuse its members with hateful speech and aggressive acts then?
According to many commentators in the West, it seems that blame for this hate crime rests with the Church, not the women -- even though it was one of the Church's buildings (already once destroyed by Bolshevik punks) that was desecrated and vandalised. It seems that liberals in Europe and North America also blame President Putin for his alleged intervention in this case; although, as far as I know, he is not a police officer or a legal prosecutor, and didn't really intervene at all. (Personally, I don't think Putin was that bothered by the punk women.) Why can't people admit to the fact that Russia has laws and a judicial system, and that real hate crimes and acts of vandalism should be prosecuted?
Hardly anyone in the Western media has actually published the offending Pussy Riot song in its entirety. So, just to highlight why Russian Orthodox worshippers would have been deeply offended by it, here it is in full: --
Punk-Prayer "Virgin Mary, Put Putin Away"
(choir)
Virgin Mary, Mother of God, put Putin away
Рut Putin away, put Putin away
(end chorus)
Black robe, golden epaulettes
All parishioners crawl to bow
The phantom of liberty is in heaven
Gay-pride sent to Siberia in chains
The head of the KGB, their chief saint,
Leads protesters to prison under escort
In order not to offend His Holiness
Women must give birth and love
S***, s***, the Lord's s***!
S***, s***, the Lord's s***!
(Chorus)
Virgin Mary, Mother of God, become a feminist
Become a feminist, become a feminist
(end chorus)
The Church’s praise of rotten dictators
The cross-bearer procession of black limousines
A teacher-preacher will meet you at school
Go to class - bring him money!
Patriarch Gundyaev believes in Putin
Bitch, better believe in God instead
The belt of the Virgin can’t replace mass-meetings
Mary, Mother of God, is with us in protest!
(Chorus)
Virgin Mary, Mother of God, put Putin awayNow, I am not denying that many Russian people might have legitimate concerns about their leaders, both spiritual and political. But the fact that these women claimed during their trial that a few Pussy Rioters were believers and that their song was a genuine prayer being offered by them in a church seems quite disingenuous -- I have not yet heard an authentic prayer to God in which the Lord of Heaven and Earth is referred to as 's***' (yes, that is the 's' word for excrement). [Update 18/8/12: Please see the comments' thread for corrections to the above translation, which suggest that the women did not mean that the Lord is s***.]
Рut Putin away, put Putin away
It seems that journalists and politicians in the West are determined to portray this story as an example of repression by Putin -- who, I'm sure, is not the kind of man one should cross. But, in fact, the three women jailed this afternoon were sent to prison because of their 'hatred' of Christians and their aggression towards worshippers in Christ the Saviour Cathedral. (Their aggressive hatred is evidenced by the language used in their song and the way their so-called protest performance was conducted.)
These women, and their accomplices, committed a religious hate crime, yet ill-informed commentators here in the UK seem to think it's the Orthodox Church that was the aggressor in all of this! Again, though, the judge stressed in her summing up that anyone can criticise the Russian Church within the law, but people cannot just enter a sacred building and desecrate it – that’s hate, it's vandalism. If people want to debate and discuss religious questions, there are ways of going about this -- ransacking a cathedral and blaspheming God and the Virgin Mary crosses the line, though. That kind of behaviour moves matters from debate and protest to desecration and abuse.
I thank God for Russia and the fact that her judicial system seems to have promoted justice today. Yes, two years in prison is harsh, and probably too harsh, but these women blasphemed God in his holy house, using the most disgusting language and behaviour. Not only that, they committed a hate crime on the actual site of another, much worse, act of hatred and vandalism -- one that had been instigated by the political ancestors of these punk performers.
If some person in Europe or North America decided to rampage inside a mosque, uttering all sorts of nasty words against the Islamic 'prophet' and his followers, most Western liberals would call such action a 'hate crime' -- and rightly so. If someone entered a gay bar to verbally abuse the customers, the police would turn up and arrest the offending person -- and rightly so. Yet, when churches and Christians are targeted in the same way, it seems the victims themselves get blamed!
Yes, I am sure that the Putin regime is quite repressive, and the Patriarch of Moscow might be politically motivated for his own gain, but why is it that so-called liberals in the West seem to think it's fine to desecrate churches and the sacred things of God? Why is it that hating one group (Christians) is often dismissed as irrelevant, whilst moderate criticism of other sections of society can be regarded as the worst crime ever? Why can't the liberal press actually see the hateful aspects of these women's rather disgusting and sacrilegious act? The answer might be something to do with the confused and intolerant aspects of so-called progressive liberalism.
No comments:
Post a Comment