Defining religions as traditional or non-traditional is anti-constitutional, say the participants of a recent roundtable meeting in Moscow, Russia.
Defining religions as traditional or non-traditional is anti-constitutional, say the participants of a recent roundtable meeting in Moscow, Russia.
The discussion group, made up of Protestant journalists, noted religion scholars, and several government representatives, met at the Izmailovsky Hotel in January to address proposed changes in Russia’s religion law. Sponsors of the meeting included a local association of Christian journalists, a Russian journal of religious studies, and the Moscow Helsinki Group, which is a prominent human rights organization.
Representatives of several denominations and academic institutions strongly criticized the Russian government’s practice of dividing religious faiths into “traditional” and “non-traditional” categories. Roundtable members also suggested eliminating the preamble to Russia’s 1997 law on freedom of conscience and religious organizations. This controversial document refers to the Orthodox Church as more historic than other confessions.
While Russia’s constitution guarantees equal treatment to all faiths, most minority groups say that equality is impossible as long as the government is allowed to define the acceptability of various religions.
“Officially our church is defined as traditional,” says Valery Ivanov, who represented the Seventh-day Adventist Church at the meeting. “But in rare cases a local government will decide that we are non-traditional or even a sect. Then we are not allowed to rent halls or conduct public work. And for many denominations, the situation is much worse.”
“During the roundtable I especially appreciated the comments of Yury Noskov, who is a noted military colonel and philosopher,” says Ivanov. “Noskov pointed out that the very concept of traditional and non-traditional faiths is inappropriate in legal discussions. It defies the laws of logic. ‘Non-traditional’ implies something is not authentic, not good, not true. But who has the right to determine what is truth? That is private and personal.”
In practice, Russian government officials refer to four different categories of religions. According to Keston News Service, one official defined the groups as 1) the Russian Orthodox Church and in some areas Islam, 2) “confessions deeply rooted in Russian society,” such as Old Believers, 3) Protestant organizations with a history in Russia longer than 100 years, and 4) new organizations which began working in Russia in the early 1990s. On another occasion, the same official divided the groups somewhat differently, but still based on the principle that newer religious groups are ranked lower than older groups.
“Mainly, we are concerned about the future,” says Ivanov. “For now, the Russian constitution provides protection to minority faiths. But we will have a problem if the government continues this practice of calling churches ‘traditional’ or ‘non-traditional.’ Eventually, someone will want to change the constitution to reflect reality.”
