Metropolitan Kirill sends an open letter to Valery Giscard d’Estaing, Chairman of the Convention on the Future of Europe Presidium
14.02.2003 · English
METROPOLITAN KIRILL SENDS AN OPEN LETTER TO VALERY GISCARD D’ESTAING, CHAIRMAN OF THE CONVENTION ON THE FUTURE OF EUROPE PRESIDIUM
On February 14, 2003, Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad, DECR chairman, sent an open letter to Valery Giscard d’Estaing, Chairman of the Convention on the Future of Europe Presidium in connection with the preparation of the EU Constitutional Treaty draft.
The Convention began its work in March 2002 and is to complete it in April 2003. The Convention is an assembly composed of representatives of governments and parliaments from EU member-states and candidate countries, as well as delegates from the EU institutions. The Convention powers are based on the Laeken Declaration adopted by the EU summit in Brussels in 2001. According to the Declaration, the Convention is to sum up the previous phase of the European integration and outline prospects for its further development. The draft of the Treaty that establishing a Constitution for EU is to be its principal result.
In February 2003, the first 16 articles of the Constitutional Treaty (http://european-convention.eu.int) were presented. They concern fundamental values as well as cultural and national bases of the European Union. The values declared in the Constitutional Treaty draft are based on the Charter of Fundamental Rights of 2000 which has no reference to religious values and their significance for social and cultural development of the European nations. In this connection, major European churches including the Russian Orthodox Church, sent their statements to drafters of the Charter and, later, to those of the Constitutional Treaty urging them to include the reference to traditional religious values in the document that will determine the everyday life of millions of religious citizens in the EU member-states.
The letter of Metropolitan Kirill is another important effort of the Russian Orthodox Church to exert positive influence on the process of shaping of a future constitution for the united Europe.
Mr. VALERY GISCARD D’ESTAING
Chairman of the
Presidium of the Convention on the Future of Europe
Dr. Mr. Giscard d’Estaing,
May I cordially greet you and express my high appreciation of your activities as Chairman of the Presidium of the Convention on the Future of Europe, since this representative assembly is completing its work with serious and specific achievements.
The Convention had an unprecedented task to assess results of the European integration and to provide new legal framework for its development in future. Last October you presented a description of a draft treaty, establishing a Constitution for Europe, and the draft of its first 16 articles was put out in February 2003.
I am convinced that you are well aware of active involvement of the Churches and religious associations in discussing the Convention themes and of their attitude to particular issues. The Russian Orthodox Church expressed its opinion in a special statement on the work of the Convention and also through the Conference of European Churches, being its permanent member. Besides, we have found many ideas harmonious with our position in the statements made by the Orthodox Church of Greece, the Commission of the Catholic Bishops’ Conferences of the European Community, the Evangelical Church of Germany, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland and many other Churches and communities.
The Orthodox Christians of Russia and other countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States as well as the Baltic countries understand that the values laid into the foundation of the European Union will serve as a starting point for domestic life of its member countries and for the relationship of the EU with its neighbours. That is why the Russian Orthodox Church has been interested in the elaboration of the document, which very soon will determine the life of many countries in Europe, including its Orthodox population. This prompts me to share with you, with all participants of the Convention and with European public my views on the first results of the work of the Convention.
Before doing that I would like to refer to the recent experience of our country, through the prism of which those who live in the East of Europe, inevitably assess the present situation. The religious life in the USSR was limited by private sphere, while any religiously motivated public action was persecuted, as it did not conform to the dominant ideology. In the draft (with a reference to the Charter of Fundamental Rights) there are standards, which defend the religious freedom of an individual, including that in his social life, but there are no standards, which guarantee that integral religious philosophy of life will be taken into account, when socially important decisions are elaborated and social order is built up.
An active position of the Churches during discussion of the project of the Constitutional Treaty is based, first of all, not on the care for their narrow interests, but on real anxiety for the destiny of the faithful in Europe, their convictions and lifestyle. The danger of absolute dictatorship of an ideology guided only by the earthly well being of people, their material prosperity and free self-realization in activities of this world without any system of moral values becomes even more evident to many people. Religion is perforce declared a private affair of an individual. The proposed provisions of the Constitution of Europe leave aside a tremendous layer of religious culture, which inspires minds and hearts of many politicians, public figures, scholars, artists, religious leaders and common people on the European continent. Europe that renounces religion and especially Christianity as one of its fundamental life-giving forces can not become Fatherland for many people who live in it. Moreover, it may tear them away. No one has tried so far to explain the reason of active unwillingness to allow even a symbolic presence of Christian values in the Treaty.
Certainly, the values fixed in the project, such as human dignity, freedom, supremacy of law, tolerance, justice and solidarity are not alien to Christian morals. However, they are disputable to the faithful if not linked with concrete moral values. History knows how often these values were exploited to establish tyranny, to manipulate human consciousness, to justify various vices, etc.
The faithful are also anxious for how all these values will be interpreted, when practical decisions are taken, for example, in the field of sexual relations, the institute of marriage, the use of the achievements of science, and in information and cultural policy. Unfortunately, we see persistent efforts to fix on the level of the European Union the standards, which do not conform to religious and philosophical choice of some nations. Suffice it to give an example of the resolution on human rights approved by the European Parliament in January 2003, which contains an appeal to hold the all-European campaign in support of homosexual marriages and obtain permission for women to visit the Holy Mount Athos. In the latter case, the religious tradition of the country belonging to the European Union is outraged, while the established standard is clear and indisputable to majority of the citizens of this country. Why is the minority, which does not understand this standard, given a possibility to impose its viewpoint to the majority through the EU mechanisms of governance? Does the mechanism of democracy become inconsistent, and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe may find themselves in a new ‘Procrustean bed’? Is it possible that the European Union will use the same approach in the dialogue with its neighbours, for example, with Russia, Ukraine, and Byelorussia?
Moreover, there is a predominance of values of anthropocentric humanism in the Constitutional Treaty draft as compared to religious national and cultural ones. Faith, holy places and objects, an opportunity to lead an integral religious life, cultural and national self-identification and the notion of Fatherland are no less important for many people than their everyday well-being, material comfort, health and earthly life as such. That is why religious and cultural-national values, especially in case of any conflict, must be defended by law just as those of life, freedom, human dignity, to say nothing about material and economic values.
On the basis of these considerations the Russian Orthodox Church supports efforts of European religious associations, which insist that the mechanism of defending specific culture and religious philosophy of life of the EU nations must be fixed in the Constitutional Treaty. We believe that the draft should contain:
A reference to the Christian heritage of the European Union, as well as other religious traditions and secular thoughts and ideas. This provision added to the preamble or any article will allow avoiding the monopoly of a single interpretation of the declared values and broadening the range of values recognized as important.
A provision on the mechanism of consultations between the European institutions and religious communities of the European Union. That standard would allow considering the opinion of religious communities when important decisions on cultural, information and scientific policy are taken.
A provision on the prerogative of the EU member-states in regulating the religious sphere. It would be expedient to include Appendix 11 to the Amsterdam Treaty in the Constitution. This move is aimed at preserving cultural and religious identity of European nations that have worked out balanced systems of relations between religion and the state during centuries.
I hope that you, Mr. Chairman, and the esteemed assembly will take into account the presented considerations when drawing up the final text of the Constitutional Treaty. I am confident that lending an ear to the voice of churches and religious communities, whose members are mostly Europeans, the Convention and EU governing bodies will show true democracy in their work, a desire to base their actions on the opinion of people as well as non-acceptance of ideological diktat.
I wish you fruitful work and remain,
Yours truly,
+Kirill
Metropolitan of Smolensk and Kaliningrad
Chairman
Department for External Church Relations
Moscow Patriarchate
See also: