ALLAN KALDOJA ⟩ Estonia cannot tolerate a religious institution that supports a war of aggression against us

Allan Kaldoja, who defended his master's thesis on the Russian Orthodox Church. 19.09.2024. Photo: Sander Ilvest

• The church is not some entity levitating in a separate sphere in our society and country.
• It is debatable whether the Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate is a religious organization.
• I think that we should calmly walk the chosen path until the end.

For three years already, Allan Kaldoja, better known to the public as an entrepreneur and theater owner, holds a master's degree in theology, with his research concerning the structure and the diaspora of the Orthodox Church. Kaldoja believes that we should not tolerate a church in our country whose leaders swear death to the West, and we should resolve the issue using secular law.

In spring 2021, you defended your master«s thesis at the School of Theology and Religious Studies of the University of Tartu and the title of your thesis was «The Formation of the Organizational Structure of the Orthodox Church and the Problem of the Diaspora in the Orthodox Church». What led you to this topic?

My first education from the University of Tartu is that of a lawyer and my secondary education is political science. And my first real place of employment was the Ministry of Foreign Affairs – international relations have always interested me. An interesting fact, perhaps, is that hundreds of people worked hard for years to get us into NATO, but I was lucky enough to be able to type up the concrete document – the letter of ratification of the North Atlantic Treaty – upon the reception of which by the US State Department, we became a member of NATO. It was signed by the then foreign minister Kristiina Ojuland. Estonians are, of course, very hardworking and smart, but we are also very lucky, because without this NATO accession, our country would most likely no longer exist – at least since the annexation of Crimea.

After being a diplomat, my main job is being an entrepreneur, but somehow this business world of glass and concrete and measured by Excel started to become too one-dimensional – although it is undoubtedly interesting too. So I returned to the University of Tartu – the School of Theology and Religious Studies, majoring in religious anthropology. I completed the syllabus in a couple of years, but the master's thesis was initially left on the back burner. I have visited quite a few different Orthodox churches in different countries: Armenia, Georgia, Egypt, Bulgaria, Romania, Serbia; of course in Russia and also in Constantinople, or Istanbul, in modern day Turkey.

What does it mean, right faith* – are others wrong then? The topic interested me, and I then thought that in order to understand why there is always a problem with the Orthodox Church in Estonia, too, I need to understand what the structure of this church is, why it is the way it is, how it has come about – I need to understand the substantive basic concepts of the faith. The structure of the Orthodox Church has arisen under the influence of the content of faith on the one hand and historical and social conditions on the other. Thus, in my master's thesis, I researched the Orthodox structure and the diaspora problem today, one part of which is present-day Estonia – as well as the Ukraine case.

Don't you think that our government, more precisely the minister of the interior, made a mistake in relation to the Moscow Church here – first by blowing the trumpets and beating the drums, but there is no result, at least so far?

This is the main problem with today's click-based politics, flashy headlines are sought. But substantive work also needs to be done. I haven't been part of this process myself, so I cannot judge it in any other way than by the result. The latter is yet to be achieved. I know that there are only about one and a half people at the Ministry of the Interior [Ilmo Au, head of the religious affairs department of the Ministry of the Interior, and advisor Ringo Ringvee – T.K.] who deal with issues concerning the activities of this and other religious organizations, and the politicians' understanding of the matter is... of varying degrees of depth.

Now, as a citizen, I want to say this: okay, there are a total of 200,000 Orthodox believers in Estonia across the two churches. But there are 1.3 million of us in total, so there is one Orthodox believer for every six and a half people. It is certainly necessary to take into account the topics that are important to these people, but at the same time the interests of Song Festival participants, the interests of football fans etc. must also be taken into account. The church, especially a specific denomination, is not some entitity levitating in a separate sphere in our society and country, where there is no state church and no special status for religious organizations. The church must be guided by the general norms valid in society.

We have a structure in society that receives direct instructions from Moscow and whose most important decisions are approved by people who want us and those like us dead.

Religious organizations are given certain rights and obligations by law, congregations basically operate like NGOs. I would solve the issue of the Moscow Church in a formal legal manner, and not try to solve it dogmatically – let Constantinople, our local bishops and Moscow argue with each other about dogmas. After all, there isn»t really any doctrinal gap between the Orthodox churches, it is moreso a political and historical dispute. From the state's point of view, it is a situation where we have a structure in society that receives direct instructions from Moscow and whose most important decisions are approved by people who want us and those like us dead.

Can you elaborate on that?

The Moscow Patriarchate has the power and authority to approve the candidates for the head of the Estonian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (MPEÕK) and then to also approve the choice made – the choice is seemingly made on the spot, but the choice must be approved by Moscow. The decision is not made without confirmation from Moscow. And we have Nevsky Cathedral and Kuremäe, or Pühtitsa Convent, which are directly under Moscow. In addition, MPEÕK members pray for the Russian patriarch, Kirill, during service – the same Kirill, or comrade Gundyayev, who has claimed that Estonia (as well as Ukraine) is a native Russian territory, the recapture of which is a holy, i.e. justified and approved action. Kirill's messages as head of the church also reach Estonian congregations.

In fact, there would be every reason for a scientific study on whether the Moscow Patriarchate is the same as the one that received the tomos, the document confirming independence, from Constantinople in 1590. Namely, the Bolsheviks eliminated the church in Russia after the October Revolution. Tens of thousands of Russian clergy were killed and repressed. The church was «restored» by Stalin during World War II, when Nazi Germany invaded the territories of the Soviet Union, seeing it as an additional tool for mobilizing the masses. He kept it, of course, under complete control of the power structures – this hasn't changed to this day. Therefore, it is entirely debatable whether it is a religious organization after all or whether the Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate is, in a significant number of its activities, playing the role of the church of the KGB.

But back to today – in May, the Riigikogu, with 75 votes, recognized that the Moscow Patriarchate is militant and «the calls of the Moscow Patriarchate contain an inherent danger to Estonia's security and survival, including a direct threat to the public and constitutional order in Estonia» – this is what the statement says. A similar statement was previously made by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, so it is far from being a matter that concerns us only, but it is considered a problem internationally. After that, what seem to be negotiations started on the initiative of the Ministry of the Interior.

How long are we going to tolerate this kind of scheming, or do we say as a society that praying for those who declare death to us is not okay and needs to stop.

The local Orthodox Church, which is run purely from Moscow, by Russian citizens, says during the negotiations that «all right, we will change our statutes, we will remove the references to the Moscow Church, but we will keep the reference to tomos». As a lawyer, I say that the references to Moscow in the statute were superfluous anyway – they merely repeat what is written in the tomos – the tomos is the main document, and if the reference to it remains, what also remains is that Moscow controls the activities of the MPEÕK, the election and appointment of important persons and all other important things. The claims made by the figures of the Moscow structure that substantive ties have been severed and that Moscow cannot influence decisions, «only confirms them», is simple scheming. It was only in July of this year that Bishop Lazar of Narva and Peipsiveere went to St. Petersburg to pose for photos with Kirill and swing the incense burner.

This is where we should ask: how long are we going to tolerate this kind of scheming, or do we say as a society that praying for those who declare death to us is not okay and needs to stop. Say it through the legislative process.

It is important to mention that the state is not interfering in religious matters here – no one wants to ban the Orthodox faith in Estonia. Orthodox faith exists in Estonia, it is the largest denomination. But the principle of the structure of the Orthodox faith is «one territory – one church». In other words, contrary to the Orthodox faith's own canons, there are two churches here – this is a situation that should be put in order.

And as if that wasn't enough, according to many Orthodox scholars and clergy, the Moscow Church has fallen into heresy by declaring a holy war and promoting Russian nationalism. This is a deviation that has also been pointed out by Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople.

But in Christianity, nobody's nationality matters – at least there shouldn't be nationalism? Apostle Paul says that there is neither Jew nor Greek…

That's right, there is no nationalism in the Orthodox faith. Christianity came to the «market» so successfully two millennia ago precisely because there are no censuses in it, that you have to be of a specific nationality or class or gender. There is the term ethnophyletism. This is rabid nationalism of the Orthodox faith, which spread primarily in the 19th century – nationality became the basis of self-determination for certain churches in a way that excluded the right of other languages and cultures to live in the church. This is against Christian principles.

Currently, the Moscow Church clearly declares that the Russian past, culture, language are special and holy, Russia is holy, everything they, led by their near tsar, do is holy and others, for example Ukrainian Orthodox believers or those who do not agree with the desires of the Russian Empire in general, are then seemingly unholy. This is not faith, this is politics. In the Orthodox sense, this is heresy, and Bartholomew I has specifically said that Patriarch Kirill has fallen into heresy – the Moscow Patriarchate under his leadership, the entire structure – after all, Kirill is not alone there – has fallen into heresy because he promotes ethnophyletism, which the Orthodox themselves branded as heresy in 1872 . In fact, this is a sufficient basis for the rest of the Orthodox to renounce their association with him.

And then the MPEÕK wanted to cosmetically and misleadingly take the name «Estonian Orthodox Church».

Yes, unfortunately this name is already taken and they cannot take it. To sum up – there is scheming and we are letting ourselves be schemed with. Now the question is: to what extent? I don't think that Estonia should always be at the forefront of all issues, be the first to do all things. Although, as a small country, we can sometimes be an example to others.

Constantinople sees things in an eternal perspective – not immediately, but within 50-100 years we will clear up the situation and there will be one church in Ukraine, but ties with Moscow must be ended immediately.

In this case, we are not the first – namely, a law was passed in Ukraine not too long ago, which says: Moscow-related structures will be banned in Ukraine from now on, as they are distributors of Russkiy Mir and enemies, but the Orthodox faith is not banned. All congregations currently under Moscow will be given a transition period – currently nearly a year – and will have a choice. I understand that there is a process going on right now as to what that choice is: whether to go under the autocephalous Ukrainian Orthodox Church – this is an independent Orthodox Church in Ukraine that gained independence from Constantinople in 2019 – or to create a separate structure so that they can go directly under Constantinople because they do not want to cooperate with the so-called neighbors, or current competitors. Constantinople sees things in an eternal perspective – not immediately, but within 50-100 years we will clear up the situation and there will be one church in Ukraine, but ties with Moscow must be ended immediately.

As a lawyer, do you advise us to do the same?

I think we could do the same. First of all, we should review our existing law so that we have a clear legal provision that associations and organizations that support aggression, potentially also aggression against Estonia, cannot operate in Estonia, that their activities can be banned through the court. It is already present in the current law as a general principle [after the interview was recorded, the Ministry of the Interior submitted a corresponding bill – ed.].

Either you stop the prayerful commemoration of one of the main promotional faces of the death-sowing Russkiy Mir, the patriarch of Moscow, or you stop your activities in the Republic of Estonia.

If we create a situation where the Moscow Patriarchate, headed by its leader Kirill, is declared an institution supporting aggression, and we adopt laws that our Estonian legal entities may not be associated with such an institution, it is a purely legal measure that does not say that the Orthodox faith is prohibited in Estonia – that has never been anyone's goal for a moment. There are a lot of Orthodox believers in Estonia – but we give some of the NGOs created by them a choice – either you stop the prayerful commemoration of one of the main promotional faces of the death-sowing Russkiy Mir, the patriarch of Moscow, or you stop your activities in the Republic of Estonia. The Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church is ready to welcome the former MPEÕK congregations essentially without interfering in their internal decisions and offer them great autonomy.

Jana Toom, for example, is already talking about damage to the rights of believers.

But let's look into it then – what are these rights and possible changes? Orthodox believers consider someone who attends church and communion at least once a year to be Orthodox – so the church's connection with a lion's share of the 200,000 Orthodox believers is quite weak in practice. There are more congregations in the Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church than in the Moscow Church – the ratio is 80:60. There are more congregation members in the Moscow Church, but as I said, those who attend the church once a year are considered members.

What does a believer do in church? There is a church procedure, a service of some kind or another, and they participate in it. What would change for them if their church fell under Constantinople? Would religious beliefs change? No. Would the structure of the liturgy change? No. Would the interior design of the church premises change? No. Would the language of the liturgy change? No – even that would not change: even under Constantinople, Russian-language liturgies can still be held freely in Russian-speaking congregations.

The only thing that would change today for a member of a congregation under Moscow is that at the beginning of the liturgy, Patriarch Kirill, who has declared a holy war against us and blesses the tanks that are attacking Ukraine, is not commemorated. If they go under the Estonian Orthodox Church, Metropolitan Stephanos is commemorated, and if they go directly under Constantinople, then Patriarch Bartholomew I. Most of the congregations members, if they go to church once a year, do not even notice who exactly is being commemorated there.

Thus, for the believers themselves, essentially nothing would change, apart from the severing of another soul bond with «mother Russia», which is not a religious bond in the sense of the Orthodox faith. However, there would be changes for some of the approximately 80 clergy who currently work in the structures of the Moscow Church. And there would, of course, be changes for the Russian Empire, as its grip here would loosen.

I think that we should calmly walk the chosen path until the end. We shouldn't rush, but we can't give any slack either. Estonian society has told the Estonian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate that it cannot continue in the same form, that all ties with Moscow must be severed. It has been clearly stated, but they are telling some kind of a roundabout story, a scam tale, that yes, yes, we removed the reference from the statute, but the canonical connections and tomos-based activity still remain. It cannot remain. Because the Republic of Estonia cannot tolerate institutions that call themselves religious institutions, but which have interfered in politics, supporting a war of aggression against us.

*Play on the Estonian word for Orthodox faith, õigeusk, which directly translates to right faith.