Faith Protection

Why did Alexander Klimenko cross KP’s path?

30 April 2017 17:08

966

Author: News

Why did Alexander Klimenko cross KP’s path?

Envy harms strangers less, but it is the first and the nearest evil for one who has it.

St. Basil the Great

Priest Alexander Klimenko is a man speaking exclusively the pure Ukrainian language, a talented singer, scholar, theologian and missionary with a capital letter unexpectedly crossed the path of "keepers of purity of Ukrainian identity" at Pushkin 36.

And you say: "There are no miracles." Sometimes there are ... "It's interesting to see how a victory in a commercial (!) show (!) is used in attempt to justify the attitude of society (!) To something or someone," wrote on his Facebook page the speaker of the so-called "Kiev Patriarchate". This is how Mr. Zoria responded to the violent reaction of the media related to the victory in the "Voice" contest of the UOC priest Fr. Alexandra Klimenko.

Certainly, criticism is necessary and important. Criticism is always an indicator and measure of truth. Criticizing art, architecture, music helps maintain the silver of talent in the fire of human wisdom. As a singer Fr. Alexander deserves criticism, as well as all the participants in the "Voice" project. But not a dry theory of music or harmony brought the victory to him, but by the reaction of ordinary people, whose hearts were touched by melodies of songs and religious chants in the arrangement of an Orthodox priest. The reaction of the Kiev Patriarchate exposed him in the light of obscurantism and ignorance: one of the main arguments of atheists against Orthodoxy is the stereotype of a "joyless religion" in which there is supposedly no place for simple human joys in which talent must necessarily be clothed in brocade and fragrant with myrrh. Otherwise, we all will burn in hell.

Mr. Zoria in his critique often uses the words "commerce", "show", "secular", but it is hypocrisy and obscurantism that are hidden under the imaginary shell of spirituality. "Everything is permissible to me, but not everything is useful; Everything is permissible to me, but nothing should have me"(1 Corinthians 6:12), writes Apostle Paul. Can’t a person develop their talents? Is there really no place for the secular in the Church? Is it really the logic of the KP that the Church is a prison that is proudly fenced off from the rest of the world? But the Christian is primarily free, and the border of freedom is love: "For you, brethren, were called to freedom; only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love be servants of one another" (Gal. 5:13).

What is then, in view of the "KP" speaker, the mission of the Church? With fire and sword, and language of prohibitions?

An Orthodox priest and theologian is one who strives for communion with God and follows the path of love that covers everything and everywhere in the name of saving even a few. At the beginning of his creative career in the project, Fr. Alexander was asked how the Church relates to the fact that he participates in an entertainment show, to which he replied: "If the image of the priest, even on the scene, inspires someone for prayer - that's fine." We all see only what we want to see. Let us not forget the Savior's words: "The lamp of thy body is thine eye: when thine eye is good, thy whole body also is full of light; but when it is evil, thy body also is full of darkness" (Mt.6: 22).

It's amazing that for a theologically educated speaker an entertaining show is a red rag. But as Fr. Alexander himself said in his recent interview: "There are different entertaining shows, which cannot be put in one row. There are motivational shows, which are called entertaining. In the world in general, everything is mixed up, and to say that I will not go there and there, because worms live there is wrong. After all, there are apples in that garden" [1]. The "Voice" show is worthless because it is commercial?

But nowadays, everything is commercial. For example, higher education is fee-paid, so why the KP does not offer young people to give up this paid PR-campaign to obtain a bachelor's degree, in which "managers" are often non-believers. Why not call public transport "commercial" and exclude from communion all those who spend money on travel that could "go and give to the poor" (Matthew 26: 6), as the notorious businessman and, incidentally, the former Bishop Judah of Kariot once said. Following the logic of Mr. Zoria, we will inevitably reach this senility. The commercial side of the issue suddenly and surprisingly turned into a problem only when a priest of the UOC took part in the project. I wonder why Mr. Zoria did not criticize this show before the victory of Fr. Alexandra? I do not want to believe that all six seasons he got agitated, reluctantly and with his teeth clenched, looking at the fun of "poor pagans."

Criticizing Fr. Alexander, who once cited Chesterton ("Entertainment is in the power of man, but true joy is not in human power, it is in the power of God" [2]) Mr. Speaker himself decided to quote the English writer and journalist: "It has never happened before that the few people mean so much, and all the others do not matter. The newspaper says: "The country will follow the Ham", and we understand that it was supported by three newspaper owners", but did not bother to recall the following saying: "They forgot an important force – the newsmen. They forgot that today ... there are people who are busy with some event not because it is moral or immoral, beautiful or ugly, useful or harmful, but simply because it happened", and one of these journalists is Mr. Zoria.

There was a victory. The winner was the priest of the UOC. It is enough to state the fact. We will not speculate what it gave to people, what changes took place, and what we can learn from it. What for? After all, all the attacks of the KP are reduced to a recount of supporters and outright policy, which no longer has room for Christ.

Such kind of shows are arranged in such a way that an image rather than a voice can bring victory. Often, the victory in such shows is an indicator of the society’s mood. And sometimes, it is very deplorable. Let’s recall the victory of the shocking Finnish rock band Lordi in Eurovision-2006.

In a blind vote, few would have appreciated the vocal performance of the singers, but the costumes and the stage image then played their role, as well as the words of the song: "Wings on my back/ I got horns on my head." You will argue that the show was paid? But diverse media just admired this group. As the Estonian Internet resource "Youth of Estonia" noted: "Shock therapy, which Finnish rockers are famous for, took its own – the viewer simply could not remember what the other nominees looked like after Lordi's performance. Music critics even invented a special term – "Lordi phenomenon": to enjoy the musicians to the full one should not just listen to them on the radio, but watch them"[3].

Against the background of the foregoing, the highly moral performance and the victory of the Orthodox priest Fr. Alexander Klimenko in the "Voice" project, as well as public resonance, is an indicator. As noted by Fr. Alexander: "There was a vote not only for the voice. There was a vote for the image, for the presentation ... Nobody ever votes only for the voice ... Everyone chooses some of their sides, for which they will vote. And the fact that people voted for me in this project means that people have a certain craving for spiritual things. Hence, the people have such a demand and it must be addressed" [4].

Why can’t the KP abandon its imaginary prejudices and rejoice at the fact that the image of the priest is close and interesting to people? Why didn’t Mr. Zoria mention the repertoire of the priest: "Mother's Love", "Chornobryvtsi"("Marigolds"), "Άξιον Εστίν" – after all, even if they are not an expression of Ukrainian musical culture (Άξιον Εστίν – Greek prayer), then they are unequivocally highly moral.

Did Fr. Alexander not contribute to the popularization of Ukrainian music? Why does Zoria not criticize the employer, who once awarded the People's Artist of Ukraine to the presenter of the First Channel Oksana Pekun "for merits on the revival of spirituality in Ukraine ... and the popularization of folk music for the benefit of Ukraine and the Ukrainian people." Why does the speaker not feel resentment and indignation towards the "patriarch", who sat all four hours at the pop concert of his beloved singer [7] Oksana Bilozir in 2015 [5], thanking her afterwards "for contribution to Ukrainian art"? Maybe one should draw a line between "clean and unclean", the righteous and the wicked, and dissociate oneself from hypocrisy? But first and foremost – learn not to be jealous and sincerely rejoice, having acquired peace in the soul.

References:

0 0

Hot spot – Kotiuzhiny

If you notice an error, select the required text and press Ctrl+Enter or Submit an error to report it to the editors.