There are established areas of cooperation between Church and state. They need to be followed.
There are types of human activity where cooperation between the Church and the state is natural and necessary, for it corresponds to the very nature of the Church, its calling. And there are such worldly matters where the Church does not have the right to provide assistance to the state and cooperate with it.
The Church has always been guided in its relationship to the state by the ideal of synergy - cooperation or co-working. The Church did not go to the extremes of, on the one hand, apocalyptic withdrawal and flight from state life, and, on the other, pseudo-autonomy of politics from religious and church life, i.e. extreme division between the spiritual and secular principles of human existence.
According to the Fundamentals of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church, church participation in public works must correspond to the nature and calling of the Church.
State dictatorship in the social activities of the Church is unacceptable. She should not be involved in those areas of state activity where Her works are impossible due to canonical and other reasons.
Russian Orthodox Church
In the Orthodox tradition, the idea of a symphony of spiritual and secular power as an ideal form of relationship between the Church and the state has formed. The symphony involves providing the Church and believers with conditions for free church life, leading believers to eternal salvation, “so that we may live a quiet and quiet life in all godliness and purity” (1 Tim. 2:2).
Since, according to the word of God, “the world lies in evil” (1 John 5:19), the ideal of such a symphony was never fully realized. As a result of Peter's reforms, the symphony was actually replaced by a system of state churchism, in which the state deprived the Church of complete independence.
In the twentieth century, after the Bolshevik revolution, an unprecedented persecution of the Church in Russia began. During his years, through the Providence of God, the Russian Church revealed a great host of holy New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia. Not everyone survived during the time of persecution. Some clergy and laity, trampling on the truth of God, contributed to the persecutors in their actions aimed at destroying the Church. Such acts cannot be tolerated or justified under any circumstances; they deserve every condemnation in order to prevent their repetition in case the Lord allows the resumption of persecution.
Under conditions of persecution, different approaches to understanding the relationship between the Church and the state emerged. Some church leaders considered it necessary to choose the path of compromise with the authorities hostile to the Church, for the sake of preserving church structures for open service to the people of God. Others rejected this path. Ultimately, both were subjected to brutal repression. These two approaches were reflected in sad divisions in the Russian Church, which gradually disappeared in subsequent decades.
Taking into account the bitter experience of the Church in the twentieth century and based on the testimony of the New Martyrs, it is necessary to distinguish between what is permissible and what is unacceptable in the relations between the Church and the state, especially such a state that pursues the goal of the complete destruction of the Church and the faith of Christ. Orthodox Christians have come to a clear understanding of the inadmissibility of the absolutization of state power. In particular, it is unacceptable to use texts of Holy Scripture (for example, Rom. 13:1-5) that are inconsistent with the interpretation and spirit of the Holy Fathers. The earthly and temporary power of the state is recognized as valuable to the extent that its power is used to maintain good and limit evil.
The relationship between the Church and the state was discussed at length in a document important for the history and self-understanding of the Russian Church Abroad - the District Message of the Council of Russian Bishops Abroad in 1933:
“As long as the Church exists on earth, it remains closely connected with the destinies of human society and cannot be represented outside of space and time. It is impossible for her to stand outside all contact with such a powerful organization of society as the state, otherwise she would have to leave the world. An attempt to delimit spheres of influence between the Church and the state according to the principle: the first belongs to the soul, and the second to the human body - never, of course, achieves the goal, because a person can only be divided into two separate parts in the abstract, but in reality they form one inseparable whole, and only death dissolves this union between them. Therefore, the principle of separation of Church and state never receives its full implementation in real life.”
The Jubilee Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church in 2000 also spoke out on this issue in the Fundamentals of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church:
“In everything that concerns the exclusively earthly order of things, an Orthodox Christian is obliged to obey the laws, no matter how perfect or unsuccessful they are. When fulfilling the requirement of the law threatens eternal salvation, involves an act of apostasy or the commission of another undoubted sin before God and neighbor, a Christian is called to the feat of confession for the sake of the truth of God and the salvation of his soul for Eternal life. He must openly speak out in a legal manner against the unconditional violation by society or the state of the institutions and commandments of God, and if such legal action is impossible or ineffective, take a position of civil disobedience” (IV. 9).
“The Church remains loyal to the state, but above the requirement of loyalty is the Divine commandment: to carry out the work of saving people in any conditions and under any circumstances. If the authorities force Orthodox believers to apostatize from Christ and His Church, as well as to commit sinful, spiritually harmful acts, the Church must refuse to obey the state” (III. 5).
The Church is called upon to exert spiritual influence on the state and its citizens, testifying to Christ and defending the moral foundations of society. While interacting with the state for the benefit of the people, the Church, however, should not assume state functions. The state should not interfere in the internal structure, governance or life of the Church. The Church must support all good initiatives in the state, at the same time resist evil, immoral and harmful social phenomena and always firmly confess the Truth, and when persecution occurs, continue to openly testify to the truth and be ready to follow the path of confession and martyrdom for the sake of Christ.
The areas of cooperation between the Church and the state today are:
* peacekeeping at the international, interethnic and civil levels, promoting mutual understanding and cooperation between people, nations and states;
* concern for the preservation of morality in society;
* spiritual, cultural, moral and patriotic education and upbringing;
* works of mercy and charity, development of joint social programs;
* protection, restoration and development of historical and cultural heritage, including care for the protection of historical and cultural monuments;
* dialogue with government authorities of any branches and levels on issues significant for the Church and society, including in connection with the development of relevant laws, regulations, orders and decisions;
* care for soldiers and law enforcement officers, their spiritual and moral education;
* works on crime prevention, care for persons in prison;
* science, including humanities research;
* healthcare;
* culture and creative activity;
* work of church and secular media;
* environmental conservation activities;
* economic activity for the benefit of the Church, state and society;
* support for the institution of family, motherhood and childhood;
* counteracting the activities of pseudo-religious structures that pose a danger to the individual and society.
Church-state cooperation also seems possible in a number of other areas in cases where it serves the fulfillment of tasks corresponding to the above areas of church-state interaction.
Relations between the state and religious institutions
Relations between the state and religious institutions are a set of forms and methods of organizing the system of interaction between government bodies and religious institutions, characterized by historical conditionality and orientation towards the implementation of the main directions of the country’s religious policy.
Currently, the relationship between the state and the church is expressed as state-confessional and state-religious. The latter does not contradict the presence of various religious beliefs and religious associations in the state.
The relations between the state and religious institutions involve the legislative and executive authorities of the state, regions and local self-government bodies, industry departments, judicial authorities and the media, religious organizations and associations, their management staff, institutions that carry out worship services and religious events.
These relationships arise on the following issues:
- Issues of implementation of the legal right of every citizen to freedom of religion.
- Realization of the right to conduct religious and other social activities by religious institutions.
- Issues of implementation of the constitutional principle of separation of the state from religious institutions.
- Issues of the secular nature of education and the exclusion of its religious orientation.
- Issues of building a system of productive interaction between government bodies and religious institutions, focused on solving issues of implementing religious policy and other socially significant issues and programs.
- Coordination of interfaith interaction for the purpose of prevention and elimination of conflict situations.
Interaction between state and church
Lawful Conduct
Lawful Conduct
is a massive, socially useful, conscious behavior of people and organizations that complies with legal norms and is guaranteed by the state.
Lawful behavior has the following characteristics:
· lawful behavior meets the requirements of legal norms. A person acts lawfully if he strictly complies with legal requirements. This is a formal legal criterion of behavior. Lawful behavior is often interpreted as behavior that does not violate the rules of law. However, such an interpretation does not entirely accurately reflect the content of this phenomenon, because behavior that does not contradict legal regulations may be carried out outside the scope of legal regulation and may not be legal.
· lawful behavior is usually socially useful. These are actions that are adequate to the lifestyle, useful (desirable), and sometimes necessary for the normal functioning of society. It also plays a positive role for the individual, because thanks to it freedom is ensured and legitimate interests are protected.
· lawful behavior is characterized by a feature that characterizes its subjective side, which, like any other action, consists of motives and goals, the degree of awareness of the possible consequences of the action and the individual’s internal attitude towards them. At the same time, motives reflect not only the direction (violates the law or not), but also the nature, degree of activity, independence and intensity of behavior during implementation. The subjective side indicates the level of legal culture of the individual, the degree of responsibility of the person, and his attitude to social and legal values.
The social role of lawful behavior is extremely high. It represents the most effective implementation of the law, which is protected by the state. It is through lawful behavior that the ordering of social relations is carried out, which is necessary for the normal functioning and development of society, and a stable legal order is ensured. Lawful behavior is the most important factor in solving the problems facing society. However, the social role of lawful behavior is not limited to satisfying social needs. Its equally important function is to satisfy the interests of the subjects of legal actions themselves.
Since society and the state are interested in such behavior, they support it with organizational measures, encourage it, stimulate it. Acts of subjects that interfere with the commission of lawful actions are suppressed by the state.
At the same time, the social significance of various options for lawful behavior is different. Their legal status is also different.
Some types of lawful actions are objectively necessary for the normal development of society. This is the defense of the Motherland, the performance of labor duties, compliance with internal labor regulations, traffic rules, etc. Variants of such behavior are enshrined in mandatory legal norms in the form of duties. Their implementation is ensured (in addition to the organizational activities of the state) by the threat of state coercion.
Other behavior options, while not so necessary, are desirable for society (participation in elections, marriage, appealing against unlawful actions of officials, etc.). This behavior is established not as an obligation, but as a right, the nature of the implementation of which largely depends on the will and interests of the person authorized. Many variants of such behavior are enshrined in dispositive norms.
Legitimate socially acceptable behavior is possible. Examples include divorce, frequent job changes, and a strike. The state is not interested in their prevalence. However, these actions are legal, permitted by law, and therefore the possibility of their implementation is ensured by the state.
Socially harmful behavior that is undesirable for society is normatively enshrined in the form of prohibitions. Legal behavior in this case consists of refraining from prohibited actions.
Lawful actions can be classified on different grounds: subjects, objective and subjective sides, legal consequences, etc. (see diagram on p. 406).
Thus, depending on the subjects of law carrying out lawful actions, the latter are divided into lawful individual and group behavior. By group is meant the unification of actions of members of a certain group, which are characterized by a certain degree of commonality of interests, goals and unity of action. This includes the activities of a labor collective, government body, or organization—legal entity—as enshrined in law.
From the external, objective side, lawful behavior can be expressed in the form of active actions or inaction. Close to this is the division of lawful behavior according to the forms of implementation of legal norms, which include their compliance, execution and use.
Depending on the legal consequences that the subject of implementation wants to achieve, legal acts, legal actions and actions that create an objectified result are distinguished (here legal actions act as legal facts).
The classification of legal actions according to the subjective side is very important. The subjective side of lawful actions is characterized by the level of responsibility of subjects who may relate to the implementation of legal norms with a sense of high responsibility or irresponsibility. Depending on the degree of responsibility, the subject’s attitude to his behavior, and his motivations, several types of lawful actions are distinguished.
Socially active behavior
indicates a high degree of responsibility of the subject. When implementing legal norms, he acts extremely actively, striving to implement the legal prescription as best and more efficiently as possible, to bring maximum benefit to society, and to realize his abilities. Legal activity can manifest itself in various spheres of social life - industrial, political, etc. Thus, in the industrial sphere it is a creative attitude to work, a constant increase in its productivity, initiative and discipline in work.
Law-abiding behavior
- this is responsible lawful behavior, characterized by the conscious submission of people to the requirements of the law. In this case, lawful regulations are used voluntarily, on the basis of proper legal awareness. Such behavior predominates in the structure of lawful behavior.
Conformist behavior
characterized by a low degree of social activity. The individual passively complies with legal regulations, strives to adapt to others, not to stand out, to “do like everyone else.”
Marginal behavior
although it is lawful, due to the low responsibility of the subject it is, as it were, on the verge of antisocial, unlawful (translated from Latin “marginal” - located on the brink). It does not become unlawful due to fear of punishment (and not due to awareness of the need to implement legal norms) or due to some selfish motives. In these cases, subjects only obey the law (for example, a passenger pays for travel only because there is a controller on the bus who can impose a fine for traveling without a ticket), but do not recognize or respect it.
Habitual behavior
– this is behavior in which lawful actions, due to repeated repetition, turn into a habit. Habitual behavior becomes an internal need of a person. A feature of habitual behavior is that a person does not fix in his consciousness either its social or legal meaning, and does not think about it. Thus, an experienced driver stops at a red traffic light automatically, without thinking about the content of the signal or the consequences of violating it. However, habit does not deny understanding of the actual elements of one’s action, although there is no proper social assessment of its consequences. This is habitual but not unconscious behavior.
Offense
- this is a socially harmful, illegal, guilty act for which the law provides for legal liability.
Signs of an offense:
Harm to society
. An offense always harms public or private values.
The result of an offense can be both actual harm caused and a real threat of causing it. Most offenses are of a formal nature, that is, responsibility for their commission occurs regardless of whether real damage has been caused or whether negative material consequences have arisen or not.
Illegality
. The very name “offence” indicates that we are talking about a violation of existing legal norms. The elements of offenses must be formally defined, i.e. enshrined in the law.
Guilt
- this is the mental-volitional attitude of the offender to the offense and its consequences. An offense is possible only where subjects have the opportunity to choose their behavior, when they can act in different ways - lawfully or unlawfully, depending on their conscious-volitional choice. That is, a person must have a conscious opportunity not to commit an offense. Guilt determines the offender's choice of unlawful behavior. His individual will here comes into conflict with the will of the legislator.
There are two forms of guilt: intent and negligence.
Intent
- this is a form of guilt in which the offender was aware of the unlawful nature of his act, foresaw its harmful consequences and desired them or consciously allowed them to occur.
Carelessness
- this is a form of guilt in which the offender foresaw the possibility of harmful consequences of his act, but frivolously counted on preventing them, or did not foresee the possibility of such consequences, although he should have and could have foreseen them.
All offenders are subject to a presumption of innocence: everyone is considered innocent of an offense until proven guilty in the manner prescribed by law.
The reality of the offense
. Legal responsibility occurs only for an act actually committed, that is, an act objectified externally. An offense may take the form of an act or omission. Action implies failure to comply with prohibitions, and inaction implies failure to fulfill duties. Responsibility for any manifestations of mental activity: thoughts, feelings, intentions, beliefs or for certain personal qualities: nationality, religion, social status, family or friendly ties is not allowed.
Punishability
. Not every failure to fulfill a duty or failure to comply with a prohibition is an offence. They recognize only an act, the commission of which entails the application of penalties established by law.
An incident should be distinguished from an offense - an objectively unlawful act containing certain, but not all, signs of an offense.
Composition of the offense
- this is a set of elements established by law, the presence of which makes it possible to qualify an act as a certain offense.
The corpus delicti includes four interrelated components, in the absence of at least one of which there is no corpus delicti:
Object of the offense
- these are social relations that are harmed by an offense. These are various kinds of public and private values: law and order, the natural environment, property, human rights and freedoms, etc.
Subject of the offense
is a tortious individual or organization that has committed an offense. For an individual, delinquency includes reaching a certain age and sanity; for an organization, it includes having the status of a legal entity.
The objective side of the offense
- this is a characteristic of an unlawful act: time, place, instrument, method, setting of the offense, the size and nature of the harmful consequences, the causal relationship between the act and the harmful consequences. Thus, the objective side represents the unity of three elements - an unlawful act, harm and a causal relationship between them.
The subjective side of the offense
- these are conscious-volitional signs of an offense, the main of which is guilt, and the optional ones are the motives and goals of the offender. Motives represent the motivating reasons that guided the offender, goals are the final result that the offender sought.
Measures of responsibility for offenses are normatively enshrined in the sanctions of legal norms. Bringing to responsibility in its essence is the state-authoritative implementation of the sanction of a norm in relation to a specific offender. Therefore, liability measures always contain additional burdens, penalties, and negative deprivations for the offender as negative consequences of his offense. They always represent suffering, legal damage, encumbrances and are by no means reduced to the forced fulfillment of only one obligation, which the violator for some reason did not fulfill. Depending on the nature of the encumbrance, liability measures can be of a personal, property, or organizational nature.
In the process of bringing to justice, the offender acquires a special legal status, which includes a number of restrictions on rights and freedoms, additional responsibilities, and legal guarantees against arbitrariness.
Responsibility measures are imposed taking into account the principles of one-time, proportionality and individualization of punishment.
Legal liability
- this is a protective legal relationship between the state and the violator, where the state, represented by authorized bodies and officials, has the right to impose penalties for the offense committed, and the violator has the obligation to suffer certain deprivations as a result of the imposition of these penalties. Responsibility measures are always reactive in nature and express the negative reaction of the state to the offense committed.
The purposes of legal liability are:
· punitive, meaning punishment, punishment, retribution;
· preventive-educational, which involves the re-education of the offender, the prevention of crime.
There are so-called private prevention, aimed at a specific offender, and general prevention, aimed at an indefinite number of people.
The grounds for legal liability are the necessary conditions for bringing to legal liability:
· normative basis is the presence of a valid rule of law establishing a certain act as an offense.
· the factual basis is the actual offense committed;
· procedural basis is an act of an authorized government body or official that has entered into force to bring the offender to justice.
The main function of legal responsibility is to protect law and order.
Signs of legal liability are as follows:
· legal liability is exclusively of a legal nature, that is, in all aspects it is regulated by substantive law: general principles, elements of offenses, legal status of participants, sanctions, etc., and procedural law: the procedure for bringing to responsibility;
· legal liability applies for violation of the norms of all branches of law, public law and private law. But the connection between the offense and liability is not absolute; in some situations, exemption from liability is possible;
· legal responsibility is accompanied by public condemnation of the violator and consists of applying penalties to him, enshrined in the sanctions of the law;
· legal liability applies to both organizations and individuals. State bodies can also be held legally liable, primarily property-related;
· legal responsibility is of an official nature and is a type of state coercion. The subjects holding people accountable are the courts, other authorized government bodies and officials;
· bringing to legal responsibility is formalized and always occurs in certain procedural forms, judicial or administrative.
Types of legal liability:
Criminal liability
- applied for committing crimes as the most socially dangerous acts. In the Russian Federation, their exhaustive list is determined by the Criminal Code. Criminal penalties are the most stringent, among them the exceptional, highest measure of liability - the death penalty. These penalties are imposed only by court verdict. Only individuals are held criminally liable in Russia.
Administrative responsibility
— applied for committing administrative offenses. Compared to crimes, they are not as dangerous and cause less significant harm to public and private values. In the Russian Federation, administrative offenses are established by the Code of Administrative Offenses, as well as by individual federal and regional laws. Both individuals and organizations are held administratively liable for violations of the norms of branches of public law. Subjects with the authority to bring to administrative responsibility are numerous government bodies and officials. Along with the judicial procedure, which is less common in this area, there is also an extrajudicial - administrative procedure for bringing to administrative responsibility. The administrative procedure is characterized by comparative simplicity, less formalization and efficiency. Administrative liability is not applied in the order of subordination and does not entail a criminal record or dismissal from work.
Disciplinary responsibility
- applied for violations of labor, service, educational, or military discipline within the framework of linear relations “employee - employer” or “boss - subordinate”. In the Russian Federation, the regulatory framework for disciplinary liability is the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. Thus, disciplinary action is carried out in the order of official subordination. Disciplinary sanctions may be supplemented by restorative measures of a material (property) nature.
Civil liability
- applied for violations of civil obligations - torts, encroaching on property or related personal non-property legal relations. This type of liability in the Russian Federation is regulated by the Civil Code. The scope of application of civil liability is in the branches of private law. It is always of a proprietary nature. The main goal here is full compensation for the harm caused by the offense. Entities subject to civil liability are courts of general jurisdiction and arbitration courts.
⇐ Previous27Next ⇒
Recommended pages:
