Nicholas Denysenko – « Orthodox Ideology and Masculinity »

Contemporary conservatism in Russian Orthodoxy is located in two compatible ideological platforms: the Russkii Mir, or Russian World initiative of current Patriarch Kirill, and the comprehensive document presenting a systematic definition of the Russian Church’s theological ethics, the Basis of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church.^[7] The Russian World ideology and the social document are key ideological pillars of Putin’s vision for Russia’s preeminence in Eurasia in the post-Soviet epoch.

The Russian World is relevant to our topic because of its reliance on the traditional values of Russia’s past, including patriarchal constructions of masculinity. Patriarch Kirill defines the Russian World as a global Orthodox civilization grounded in the heritage and values of Russia’s golden age, beginning with the medieval city-states of Rus’ and continuing through the Russian Empire up until its collapse in 1917. Patriarch Kirill presents the Russian World as a traditional defense against the secular humanism unleashed by globalization. Orthodox Christians whose values are incompatible with secular humanism will find their true home in the Russian World, because the Russian World offers a safe haven from secular humanism’s illusion of human progress.

The patriarch defines the Russian World as a multinational community with walls and borders. Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine are the founding nations of the Russian World, but it embraces anyone. One becomes a citizen of the Russian World through the Moscow Patriarchate. Russian is the official language of communication, and Church Slavonic is the language of prayer. The borders of the Russian World reconnect the countries that were part of the prerevolutionary Russian Empire and were important republics of the Soviet Union. The borders of Patriarch Kirill’s Russian World align conveniently with Russian preeminence in Eurasia, and Russian culture dominates, since Moscow is the capital, and Russian is the language of communication.

The Basis of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church is the official document presenting the teachings and core values of the Russian World. Masculinity is a pillar of the social concept because it promotes the model of a strong male overseeing households at the micro- and macro-levels. In the section on personal, family, and public morality, the document canonizes gender complementarity and difference while upholding the equality of women to men. The document is careful to emphasize that equality does not exclude gender difference, and that the Church upholds the calling of women to be wives and mothers.

This section asserts patriarchal constructions of masculinity by emphasizing the traditional role of the husband as the head of the wife, and the wife’s responsibility to obey her husband from the Ephesians pericope appointed to the office of crowning (marriage) in the Orthodox rite. According to the document, women are equal, but also subordinate to men. Their calling is to be wives and mothers, and noble, dignified, and distinct, as only men are divinely appointed to lead in domestic and ecclesial communities, an image of classic patriarchy manifest in the Orthodox Church’s liturgical tradition.

The social concept document’s rejection of homosexuality as a sexual orientation is another instance of privileging masculinity in households. The document argues that homosexuality is a vicious distortion of the God-created human nature that can be overcome by spiritual effort.^[8] This section is important because it refers to the foundational pillar of humanity as man and woman, with this gender complementarity divinely appointed: ‘The Orthodox Church proceeds from the invariable conviction that the divinely established marital union of man and woman cannot be compared to the perverted manifestations of sexuality.’ The Russian Church likewise condemns transsexuality and permits baptism of transsexuals only in their original sex, while prohibiting ordination of transsexuals. Any deviation from the divinely appointed patriarchal paradigm is prohibited, evinced by the Church’s belief that ‘those who propagate the homosexual way of life should not be admitted to educational and other work with children and youth, nor to occupy superior posts in the army and reformatories.’^[9] The document is designed to legitimize and privilege masculinity at the micro- and macro-levels, especially when prototypical masculine actions are employed to defend Russia from the European threat.

The social concept document does not openly call for the subjugation of women to men. In its retrieval of Russian traditional values, the document promotes male-female gender complementarity that includes some mutually exclusive roles as divinely appointed and therefore unchangeable. This ideological principle fits in with the Russian World as a multinational society that promotes moral rigor against the threats posed by the secular humanism promoted by the West. The hegemony of the moral ideal and its implications for gender relations is therefore a primary identity marker of Russia as an empire preserving traditional moral values. The post-Soviet preference for patriarchal constructions of masculinity legitimized the state’s crackdown on feminist challenges and the use of military force to destabilize Ukraine. In both instances, masculinization was employed, with an assist from the Orthodox Church, to pit a strong Russia against its weak, feminine opponents who sought to pollute Russia with feminism and its depravity.