SERGEI METLEV ⟩ «Satanic» Estonian state looms over the souls of Orthodox nuns

Minister of the Interior Lauri Läänemets visited the the Pühtitsa Dormition Convent and met with Abbess Filareta. Photo: Siseministeerium

A bill in the Riigikogu aims to end the influence of the Moscow Patriarchate in Estonia, which operates in symbiosis with the Kremlin, while ensuring freedom of religion is upheld. However, today, the abbess of the Kuremäe Convent released a statement essentially likening the Estonian state to a thief of souls, Sergei Metlev, editor-in-chief of the Russian-language publications of Postimees, writes.

First and foremost, Estonia is a secular state where all religions and their representatives' right to worship must be respected. No one disputes this. Problems arise when an organized religious association, which holds real influence over people, comes into conflict with the fundamental principles of the state.

In her appeal, Filareta Kalatšova warns members of the Riigikogu: if you vote in favor of the bill that forces the severing of ties with the central authority of the Moscow Patriarchate, the convent, which has operated for over a century, may have to close, and the nuns serving God will be left in distress.

The text is intriguing—crafted to evoke tears while skillfully employing subtle PR tactics.

«You undoubtedly understand perfectly well—by approving these legal amendments, you declare the convent unlawful, leaving only two options: either changing jurisdiction or forced liquidation—you are well aware that your actions effectively shut down the convent,» the letter states. «Our repeated explanations that the convent cannot, on its own, relinquish jurisdiction have not been heeded.»

So, changing jurisdiction is effectively the same as liquidation... It brings to mind her earlier assertion that the bond with the Mother Church in Moscow is akin to a blood tie. It is an understandable and sincere statement. Church tradition, the Russian language and culture, heritage—these elements have been placed on the same level as serving God because even nuns and clergy are people with cultural affiliations.

But there are various reasons why this argument does not hold. Let us recall: last year, the Riigikogu adopted a resolution recognizing the Moscow Patriarchate as an organization that supports aggression. Its leaders openly act as Kremlin apologists. The patriarch considers the Baltic states part of a greater «Russian world».

Is leaving Moscow's authority really impossible?

It is also claimed that switching jurisdictions would mean transferring under the Patriarchate of Constantinople. It is well known that Moscow sees Constantinople—the oldest Orthodox Church in the world—as its rival and prefers to avoid engagement. Moscow considers itself the «Third Rome», asserting that the first two have fallen and there will be no fourth.

Metropolitan Stephanos of the local Orthodox Church under Constantinople, an expert in Orthodox canon law, has previously stated: «There is a church canon that says if a church leader—the patriarch—deviates from the true faith, other bishops and clergy have the right to unilaterally sever ecclesiastical communion without requiring a synodal decision.» Other theologians have confirmed this. So much for the claim that leaving Moscow's authority is impossible

In her appeal, Filareta writes: «The initiators of this bill are forcing us to commit a canonical crime under the pretext of protecting the convent from problems.»

This has clear signs of PR tactics at work. The bill states that by a set deadline, all formal and other ties with the Moscow Patriarchate must be severed. It does not affect the convent's property, religious freedom, activities, or financial management.

What does the current Kuremäe Convent statute say? It begins as follows: «/…/ it is a religious association under the spiritual authority of the Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia (…).»

Within his powers, the patriarch: approves the convent's civil statutes, as well as any amendments and additions; appoints and dismisses the convent's leadership; oversees its religious, social, and spiritual activities, including religious education and catechesis; and, if necessary, controls its financial and economic operations, among other things.

As evident, the Moscow patriarch's control over the Kuremäe Convent is nearly absolute.

This has clear signs of PR tactics at work. The bill states that by a set deadline, all formal and other ties with the Moscow Patriarchate must be severed. It does not affect the convent's property, religious freedom, activities, or financial management.

Filareta also writes in today's appeal: «We have withdrawn from the earthly world; we are far removed from political issues, we live outside politics, serving God through prayer and work. Yet, we are literally being dragged into the center of politics and accused of refusing to engage in dialogue.»

However, when appeals are sent and ties with Moscow are actively defended, it is clear that at least the leadership of the convent and the local Moscow church are not politically uninvolved. PR and legal experts have been hired, and meetings have been held with politician Jana Toom. Meanwhile, the case is being managed from Moscow, where Metropolitan Eugene, who was expelled from Estonia, continues to operate. In Russia, the church is a state institution—completely political. Since Soviet times, there have been countless connections between the church and security services.

It is sad to acknowledge this, but «I am not interested in politics» has become a common excuse among Russians who want to wash their hands of any responsibility for their country's actions in the war. But does the Bible not say: «Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's!» (Matthew 22:21).

This means that secular and divine matters must be distinguished, and one must obey the laws of the state where they reside, unless it is a terrible dictatorship.

Furthermore, they compare themselves to Job, who endured great suffering: «And Jehovah said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thy hand.» Job's soul belonged solely to God.

It is sad to acknowledge this, but «I am not interested in politics» has become a common excuse among Russians who want to wash their hands of any responsibility for their country's actions in the war.

How should this be interpreted in this context? Does it mean that the soul is defined by obedience to the Moscow patriarch, as stated in the convent's current statutes? Does that make the Estonian state «Satan» in this scenario? Or is Estonia being portrayed as the thief of souls? Estonia is trying to protect itself from the influence and weapons of a violent and morally corrupt empire of evil while upholding religious freedom and other values of a free society. Yet this effort is not seen as righteous or justified.

It is saddening to read that this existential concern does not seem to resonate with them. What kind of empathy can one expect when they do not show any in return? The convent may withstand another storm, but to an Estonian citizen, their country, language, culture, family, home, and traditions are just as dear.

I personally feel sorry for Filareta. She is caught between a rock and a hard place. But God has given humans the ability to distinguish between good and evil and the gift of free will. Using it wisely is each person's responsibility, whether they are clergy or not. God resides in people, not in the Moscow Patriarchate. Each of us carries our own cross. One can only hope that for some, it does not become too heavy to bear.