Family

According to Chaplin, he grew up “in a non-religious family” and came to faith on his own when he was thirteen years old. Not married, no children.

Biography

In 1985, Chaplin joined the Publishing Department Moscow Patriarchate. According to his stories, already at that time he advocated that " The Church gave the right to life to a variety of forms of preaching and communication".

Thus, in 1989, he became one of the organizers of the first exhibition of avant-garde painting on religious themes, and in the early 1990s, he authored the preface to the first Christian rock record.

In 1990, Chaplin graduated Moscow Theological Seminary. In the same year, he went to work at the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate (DECR MP), which since the end of 1989 was headed by the Archbishop of Smolensk and Kaliningrad.

In 1991, Chaplin was ordained a deacon, and a year later he became a priest, and the ordination (sacrament of ordination) in both cases was performed by Kirill, who by that time had already become a metropolitan.

In 1991, Chaplin was appointed head of the public relations sector DECR MP. While holding this post, he graduated from the Moscow Theological Academy in 1994 and received a candidate of theological sciences degree.

In 1996-1997, Chaplin was a member of the Council for Interaction with Religious Associations under the President of Russia Boris Yeltsin.

In 1997, the priest headed the DECR MP secretariat for relations between church and society (he held the position until 2001).

In 1999, Chaplin was elevated to the rank of archpriest.

In 2001, Chaplin became deputy chairman of the Department for External Church Relations of the Russian Orthodox Church under Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad, and remained so until 2009. In this post, he oversaw the Secretariat for Church-Society Relations, the Secretariat for Inter-Christian Relations, the Communications Service and the Publications Sector.

In 2004, since the creation of the Committee’s expert council State Duma for the affairs of public associations and religious organizations, Chaplin joined it.

In addition, in the 2000s he became one of the members of the Central Committee World Council of Churches(WCC) and Advisory Council OSCE on issues of freedom of religion and belief.

Chaplin consistently defended the need to introduce in schools a subject called “Fundamentals of Orthodox Culture,” which caused many fears due to the threat of clericalization of society.

The subject became one of the options for the course “Fundamentals of Religious Cultures and Secular Ethics,” which was introduced experimentally in 19 regions of the country in 2010.

In December 2008, after the death of the patriarch Alexia II, Metropolitan Kirill was elected locum tenens of the patriarchal throne, and on January 27, 2009, at the Local Council, Kirill was elected Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'. Soon the position of Chaplin also changed, who until 2009, while remaining deputy chairman of the DECR, served in the Church of the Life-Giving Trinity in Khoroshevo in Moscow.

In February 2009 at World Russian People's Council he was elected one of the two deputy heads of this forum - the patriarch.

March 31, 2009 by decision Holy Synod ROC Chaplin became chairman of the Synodal Department for Relations between Church and Society, formed at the same meeting with the aim of establishing relations with legislative authorities, political parties and “other institutions of civil society.”

The media wrote that the changes that took place at that meeting of the Holy Synod were associated with the desire of the newly elected Patriarch Kirill to place people whom he had known for a long time, “Kirillites,” in key positions.

After the Russian Orthodox Church and the party agreed on cooperation in 2009, Chaplin and the structure he headed were tasked with monitoring bills discussed in the State Duma, making their proposals and conducting consultations.

In May 2009, by presidential decree Dmitry Medvedev Chaplin was reintroduced to the Council for Interaction with Religious Associations.

In the fall of 2009, Chaplin, by decree of President Medvedev “On the approval of members of the Public Chamber,” became its member. In the Public Chamber, he became a member of two commissions - on interethnic relations and freedom of conscience, and on regional development and local self-government.

In December 2009, Chaplin became rector of the Church of St. Nicholas on Three Mountains in the Presnensky district of Moscow.

In January 2012, Chaplin’s proposal to create an “Orthodox” or simply "Christian" political party, or corresponding groups in existing large parties. At the same time, the archpriest emphasized that the Russian Orthodox Church cannot give blessings or provide “exclusive” support to this kind of party.

In the spring of 2012, Chaplin took an active part in discussing the controversial action of a feminist punk band Pussy Riot in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow. Five girls from this association “sang” the song “Virgin, Virgin, Drive Out Putin” in front of the church altar; after some time, a criminal case was opened against them, and several members of the movement were arrested.

Chaplin called PussyRiot's performance a "boorish challenge" to Orthodox Christians, and stated that " blasphemous action must receive proper legal assessment".

In March 2012, Chaplin attracted the attention of the press with a proposal to test for extremism." works of Lenin, Trotsky and other Bolshevik leaders".

In April 2012, commenting on the scandalous statement of the lawyer Dagira Khasavova who threatened" flood the country with blood"If Muslims are prevented from introducing Sharia courts in Russia, Chaplin said that the Islamic community should be allowed to " live by your own rules"and called this path" relevant in the future both for Russia and Western Europe".

In December 2014, he expressed the opinion that dominance USA the world is coming to an end and Russia is called upon to bring it to naught:

"It is no coincidence that we often, at the cost of our own lives, at the cost of a very serious physical weakening of the state, stopped all global projects that did not agree with our conscience, with our vision of history and, I would say, with God’s truth. This is a Napoleonic project, this is a Hitler project. Let's stop the American project too!".

On December 20, 2014, in an interview with the Kazan newspaper BUSINESS Online, Chaplin made several controversial statements:

"I constantly tell my liberal friends with whom I have been communicating for more than 30 years: you are in vain in thinking that you will benefit from the “Orange Revolution” in Russia. In this revolution, if, God forbid, it takes place, it will not be you who will participate, but pseudo-Russian Nazis on the one hand, and pseudo-Muslim militants on the other".

In May 2015, Chaplin commented to the Russian News Service on the logo invented by the Yekaterinburg designer Anatoly Patrushev for the Russian Orthodox Church. The sign is a combination of the recently approved ruble symbol with the outlines of an Orthodox cross.

"I would recommend this gentleman to make a picture of his face in conjunction with the price tag. All. Absolutely everything about this, and not a word more", said Chaplin, who called the designer-provocateur “this gentleman.”

Anatoly Patrushev presented the “ROC logo” at the festival of unrealized advertising concepts Fakestival. He gave a detailed explanation of his concept and even a name - “A Church understandable to people.”

In May 2015, Chaplin saw behind a discussion about the high-profile wedding of a 17-year-old girl and a 57-year-old head of the local police department in Chechnya an information attack by opponents of the traditional family.

"It is curious that those circles that now criticize the actual polygyny in the North Caucasus, that is, polygamy, often advocate same-sex marriage", Chaplin told Interfax.

According to him, at international events he had to listen to speeches from supporters of any so-called new forms of family, " up to pedophilia or including five or six people of different sexes or the same sex, but Islamic polygamy was denied".

Chaplin is known for his conservative views. According to media reports, he believes Darwin's theory"hypothesis" and protests against its being taught as " undisputed scientific truth".

It was also reported that Chaplin opposed euthanasia and abortion, calling them unacceptable methods. Chaplin also denies homosexual marriage.

Chaplin has many awards. Already in 1996, he received the Order of the Holy Blessed Prince Daniel of Moscow, III degree, in 2005 - the Order of St. Innocent, Metropolitan of Moscow, in 2010 - the Order of the Holy Blessed Prince Daniel of Moscow, II degree - "in connection with the 25th anniversary of service in the Synodal structures of the Russian Orthodox Church."

In 2009, he received the Order of Friendship - “for his great contribution to the development of spiritual culture and strengthening friendship between peoples.” It is also known that in 2003 Chaplin was awarded the Imperial Order of St. Anne, II degree (a dynastic award of the House of Romanov in exile).

Rumors, scandals

In 2003, he spoke out in defense of believers who destroyed the exhibition "Beware of Religion" in the museum named after Sakharov (they were offended by the image of Christ against the background of a Coca-Cola advertisement with the words “This is my blood”, a road sign in the form of an icon meaning “other dangers” and other elements of the exhibition). Commenting on what happened, Chaplin said that " our legal system must... respect this view".

In 2006, Chaplin, on behalf of the Russian Orthodox Church, strongly recommended that Orthodox Christians not go to the concert of the American singer Madonnas, whose performances have previously caused an angry reaction from representatives of different faiths, since she during her show " to illustrate his own passions, he uses the crucifix, statues of the Mother of God and other religious symbols".

In 2008, Chaplin came up with a proposal to create Orthodox folk squads that could " bring order to your place of residence"In the same year, reports appeared in the press that they were already being created, but information was also published that rumors about the creation of such squads were greatly exaggerated.

At the end of 2010, Chaplin expressed the opinion that Russian women, with their provocative appearance and manners, provoke men to rape, and then proposed to invent "all-Russian dress code". This statement caused a storm of criticism in the media; it was even called “shocking” and violating the Constitution.

They began collecting signatures on the Internet for a petition to Patriarch Kirill, the authors of which insisted that a person’s appearance is his private matter. At the same time, the head of the Chechen Republic supported Chaplin’s idea, saying that “ The Russian people have always respected both decency and modesty in women"The All-Russian Muftiate also liked the archpriest's proposal.

Another statement by Chaplin regarding his appearance also caused a wide response in the press. In 2011, the archpriest expressed the opinion that clergy need to have expensive vestments in order to raise the prestige of the church and speak on equal terms with " the powerful of this world, who measure their attitude towards a person by money".

For the same reason, he said, they also need to drive good cars. His statement again became the reason for critical remarks in the press, which, commenting on Chaplin’s speech, recalled the Breguet watch of Patriarch Kirill, worth about thirty thousand euros, seen on the hand of the head of the Russian Orthodox Church during his visit to Ukraine in 2009.

In December 2015, it became known that member of the Public Chamber Vsevolod Chaplin was suspended from the activities of the Russian Orthodox Church. According to rumors, Chaplin decided to create his own media.

However, the media continue to discuss Chaplin's scandalous snack at McDonald's.

Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin is one of the most odious figures at the top of the Russian Orthodox Church MP. His provocative statements most often become the basis for discussions in the media and blogosphere. Perhaps the most odious statement of this Orthodox PR specialist is that he knows exactly what God says on this or that occasion (as if God had once spoken to one of the people).

Portal-Credo.ru in 2012 began to compile a detailed portrait of Vsevolod Anatolyevich. So far, only the first part has been written - dealing mainly with the hero’s childhood and youth.

Archpriest Vsevolod Anatolyevich Chaplin, Chairman of the Synodal Department for Interaction of Church and Society of the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (OVTSO MP), member of the Patriarchal Council for Culture of the Russian Orthodox Church MP, member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, rector of the Church of St. Nicholas on the Three Mountains in Moscow, born March 31, 1968 in capital of the USSR. There are many mysteries in his biography.
The first of them. According to the Open Orthodox Encyclopedia, Fr. Chaplin is a mitred archpriest. According to the current “Regulations on Awards of the Russian Orthodox Church”, for archpriests the award with a special headdress - the miter - is made by decree of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' for no less than 30 years of immaculate service to the Church. Chaplin was awarded the miter by Patriarch Alexy II in June 2006. Thus, the “immaculate service of the Church” of Fr. Vsevolod can be counted not from the moment of his ordination to the rank of deacon in 1991, but from 1976, when he was only 8 years old. However, most likely, this incident is explained by the fact that at the time of the adoption of the “Regulations” Fr. Vsevolod already wore a miter, and, as is known, the law has no reverse effect. In addition, there is no special rite in the liturgical practice of the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate for removing the miter from a cleric who was prematurely awarded it.
In his partly autobiographical, partly ideological books “Shreds” and “Shreds-2” Fr. Chaplin writes that he grew up “in a non-religious family” and came to faith on his own when he was... thirteen years old.

Childhood. Adolescence. Appeal
The future priest spent his childhood and adolescence in the Moscow microdistrict of Golyanovo, he studied at secondary school No. 836 (now UVK 1688 - Kamchatskaya Street, building 13), where Chaplin’s brother, who is three years younger than the archpriest and subsequently followed a different path, also studied. has nothing to do with religion. The boy Seva was not particularly sociable. According to his classmates, Seva was always “a little strange”: neatly dressed, combed, and smiled little. Some of the classmates with whom the “Portal-Credo.Ru” correspondent spoke, “in the distant memory”, almost in the subconscious, still have a childhood story with a sewer hatch, which Seva, probably by accident, did not close, and another schoolchild because of this broke a leg. It was apparently forced into her subconscious by Sevino’s decision to “go to seminary,” which was discussed for a long time by her classmates in the 6th and 7th grades. According to their stories, “the teachers were whispering, but they didn’t let us know that they themselves were in shock.”
In “Patches,” Chaplin describes his conversion as follows: “Even in my early school years, with some special, “premonitional” attention, I collected from Soviet textbooks all the crumbs of knowledge about faith and the Church that were contained there.” The coming to faith occurred during Seva’s first independent, not “excursion”, visit to the temple, “to buy a then “fashionable” cross,” after which Chaplin realized: “I’ll stay here.” Obviously, the temple in which young Seva discovered Orthodoxy was the Epiphany Patriarchal Cathedral in Yelokhov - the largest operating church of the Russian Orthodox Church MP in the capital in those years. Although the operating temple closest to the place of residence of the Chaplin family was the relatively small and not very widely known Church of the Nativity of Christ in Izmailovo, where, probably, the newly converted Vsevolod later visited more than once.
“The first person I spoke to,” recalls Fr. Chaplin, “was a very noble-looking old woman behind a box at Elokhovsky Cathedral. With her explanations - simple-minded, but very convincing - my path to Christ began.” “Soon the late Father Vyacheslav Marchenkov performed the rite of announcement on me, and in the summer of 1981 in Kaluga I was baptized by Father Valery Suslin, also now deceased. The baptism took place in the hotel room where Father Valery (?!) lived., “secretly from everyone, including my relatives, who did not approve of my choice at all,” says the archpriest.
The second mystery of Chaplin's biography. Seva’s decision was not a secret to anyone, including teachers and the school director, and therefore should have naturally led to his exclusion from the pioneers and the subsequent refusal of the Komsomol to accept him into its ranks. Moreover, in “Patches” Chaplin calls his family “close to science and the party elite.” At that time, a boy leaving such a family “to join religion” was a scandal. However, according to the recollections of the then deputy secretary of the Komsomol school committee, Olga Dolgova, she had never even heard of anything like this, although “such information would probably have reached her.” Personally not acquainted with the future father Vsevolod, she, however, believes that “during his school years he did not show himself in any way as a believer and trying to discuss this with anyone or guide anyone on the right path.”
However, perhaps the fact is that after the 8th grade, Seva Chaplin’s parents transferred Seva Chaplin to the neighboring school 314, and thus a scandal at school 836 was avoided. But the director of school 314, Larisa Andreevna (now deceased), had troubles related to Chaplin’s religiosity; she was then called to the district committee of the CPSU about this.
Invisible forces protected Seva from retribution from the atheistic regime and helped her overcome all obstacles. When he arrived in Tula for Easter in the first half of the 80s, he inexplicably entered the church through the then usual cordons of vigilantes, set up specifically to prevent young people from entering the service. Whether the forces that helped Seva were of heavenly or earthly origin is another mystery of his biography.
Classmates who knew Seva personally recall that “when they played war games in the yard and conquered ice fortresses, Seva did not participate in this, he said that fighting and causing mischief was bad.” This statement, quite natural for a future priest, is in an interesting contradiction with the words of the current, venerable Archpriest Chaplin: “Western Christianity, largely carried away by pacifism, in the face of current threats has a future only if it again teaches its followers to fight and die. Just like their ancestors did."
In his own memoirs, Fr. Chaplin says that he hardly studied physics, chemistry and mathematics in high school, knowing that these subjects “would not be useful to him” in life, but he would still be given a “satisfactory” grade. According to other sources, Chaplin completely refused to study chemistry in the 7th grade. Unfortunately, it is no longer possible to verify the extent of Seva’s refusal from chemistry: his chemistry teacher Valentina Ivanovna Titova died in the fall of 2011.
According to the memoirs of geography teacher Galina Vasilyevna Turgeneva, she noticed that in the 8th grade Chaplin began to systematically skip classes: “I once asked: “Seva, why weren’t you at school yesterday?” - “I was in church, I I didn’t go for a walk.” I said: “But this can be done after school.” - “And I was at the morning.” - “And what do you want there?” - “I’m interested in it.” You understand, you won’t have a conversation in front of the class. lead. I say: “Okay, sit down. But there is no need to skip lessons." According to the teacher, Chaplin achieved what he set out to achieve, and this earns her respect. Sometimes she sees him at the bus stop in Golyanovo. Apparently, Chaplin comes there to visit his mother, although, according to other sources, he continues to live in the same area where he was born. “He gained weight, became such a respectable archpriest, but before he was an elegant, thin, frail boy, modest, well-mannered, exemplary, calm, from a very intelligent family,” recalls Galina Vasilievna.

Father and matrimonial status of Fr. Vsevolod
Another mystery is the father of Vsevolod Chaplin. An article about Anatoly Fedorovich Chaplin (1931-1993), whom Vsevolod once called an “agnostic professor,” only recently appeared on Wikipedia in Ukrainian. He was an outstanding scientist in the field of antenna theory and technology, who in recent years taught at the Polytechnic University in Lviv (now the National University "Lviv Polytechnic"). Judging by the biography of his father, who spent the rest of his life in Ukraine, most likely Anatoly Fedorovich left the family when his son was still in school. Nothing is known about the relationship between Vsevolod’s son and him, except that Vsevolod went to Lvov, most likely to see him. It was the father who, apparently, was “close to the party elite” and spoke out sharply against Vsevolod’s coming to faith. The mother showed more understanding, although, according to Chaplin's teachers, she was not a believer.
In open sources there is much more information about the father than about the mother of Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin. His father, Anatoly Fedorovich was born in Moscow on September 21, 1931, graduated from the Moscow Military Mechanical College and - with honors - from the Moscow Energy Institute. I worked at this university for most of my life, where I defended my candidate and doctoral dissertations. He moved from Moscow to Lvov in 1978, when his son was 9 years old, heading the department of radio engineering devices at the Lvov Polytechnic. He was buried at the Lychakiv cemetery in Lviv.
Apart from the fact that Vsevolod Chaplin himself has no children, nothing is known about whether he ever had any intention of getting married. O. Vsevolod, having the rank of archpriest, belongs to the “white”, that is, married clergy - the ordination of “celibates”, that is, unmarried persons, but who have not accepted monasticism, has always been looked askance in the Russian Church. The practice of ordaining “celibates” was repeatedly condemned by Patriarch Kirill (Gundyaev). When else about. Vsevolod worked under his leadership in the DECR MP; the question of his tonsure and consecration to the rank of bishop arose more than once, but Fr. Each time Vsevolod somehow managed to evade tempting offers. The real reasons for his refusal to become a monk are still unclear. Previously, an article about Fr. Vsevolod on Wikipedia gave an unequivocally positive answer to the question about whether the priest had a family. Subsequently, however, the recording was erased. Her traces lead here, where it is stated that “V.A. Chaplin is married, there are no children in the family.” After the sensational statements of Fr. Internet users are especially actively speculating about Chaplin’s dress code for Russian women: “He doesn’t have a wife, he is the chairman of the synodal department, and there are only those who have the status of celibacy, that is, monks...”. “He is an archpriest, not a hieromonk or abbot. He has a wife, no children...” Along with who is the wife of Fr. Vsevolod, if there is one, is unknown; his appearance with his wife has not been recorded anywhere in the public space. In any case, various statements about. Vsevolod on the topics of family and household ethics express the archpriest’s good familiarity with this issue and give more reason to believe that he had relevant experience than vice versa. (A particularly interesting experience in relationships with women was demonstrated by Fr. Chaplin in his statement that girls who are openly dressed and brightly made up provoke men to sexually assault themselves.)

Publishing department and MDS
One way or another, before starting or not starting a family, Vsevolod Chaplin successfully graduated from school in 1985 and, since he was not accepted into the army for health reasons (asthma), he was accepted into the staff of the expedition department of the Publishing Department of the Moscow Patriarchate, which he now headed the late Metropolitan Pitirim (Nechaev), who provided patronage to the new talented employee. At the same time, in his free time from work, Chaplin studied in absentia at the Moscow Theological Seminary in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, where he was recommended by the professor of the Moscow Academy of Science and Culture, Metropolitan Pitirim. Chaplin graduated from the seminary in 1990.
While serving in the Publishing Department of the Moscow Patriarchate, Vsevolod Chaplin, apparently, became a more active, sociable and cheerful person than he was at school. For example, as the archpriest himself recalls, during some boring inter-Christian meeting with the participation of foreign guests, for the sake of appearance he put on headphones for simultaneous translation, and he himself connected to them a tape recording of Gennady Khazanov’s speech.
During his years of study at the seminary, Vsevolod Chaplin became close not only with official church teachers, such as, for example, Archimandrite Georgy (Tertyshnikov), known for his ultraconservativeness, who wittily explained to subdeacon Vsevolod, when he was late for class, the church origin of the word “bastard” as a synonym for subdeacon, whose duties included “carrying” the mantle behind the bishop. Since his school years, from the age of 14-15, Vsevolod was also a member of the “underground” dissident Orthodox communities: and the community of Fr. Alexandra Men, whom he calls “the apostle of the Soviet intelligentsia,” and to the community of Fr. Dimitry Dudko, into whose social circle, as Chaplin admitted, “unlike Me’s circle, it was very easy to get into.” Thus, Chaplin was mentored by both the “Westernizer” Alexander Men and the monarchist Dimitry Dudko, who in the last years of his life became close to the Stalinists. Many of his colleagues and classmates were amazed at how knowledgeable and informed Vsevolod was from a very early age in the various intricacies of church life, both official and unofficial. In this sense, he was a kind of “star” and a prodigy. Later, in one of the interviews, Fr. Vsevolod admitted that he was once keen on the search for “true” Orthodoxy and looked skeptically at the leadership of the “Soviet” Church, but gradually, having understood everything, he can competently testify: there was and is no Catacomb Church, there is only one canonical ROC MP.
Vsevolod Chaplin began speaking publicly as an employee of the Publishing Department. His first performance took place at the Teleshev House in 1990, it was dedicated to Patriarch Nikon. In the early 90s, the Teleshev House was a “cult” place of the Orthodox-patriotic movement: various kinds of congresses and conferences were constantly held there, Vladimir Osipov’s Christian Revival Union met, and next door there was an Orthodox-patriotic book store, where a lot of such things were sold, which in our time would clearly qualify as “extremist literature.” Probably from the circle of followers of Fr. Dimitri Dudko and the meetings in the Teleshev House were learned from Fr. Vsevolod, as he himself says, has his “radical fundamentalist worldview,” which is sometimes quite intricately intertwined with the ideology of a high-ranking official church official. It is this interweaving that gives a certain shocking quality to the archpriest’s statements, especially on political topics.
According to Chaplin’s recollections, in his youth he loved to go to the monastery of Patriarch Nikon - the Resurrection New Jerusalem Monastery on Istra, near Moscow, where many guides were believers and did not conduct atheistic propaganda, as their colleagues did in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra. According to the recollections of the listeners of Chaplin’s first report in the Teleshev House, emotionally he was noticeably inferior to the famous specialist on Patriarch Nikon, Kursk Archpriest Lev Lebedev, who spoke after him, who soon moved to the ROCOR and wrote a brochure very popular among Orthodox conservatives of that time, “Why I moved to a foreign part Russian Orthodox Church". At that time, Vsevolod’s shortcoming related to rhetoric was especially evident - he stuttered and his diction was quite unclear. However, later, in the late 1990s - early 2000s, Fr. Vsevolod managed to completely recover from stuttering and acquire a characteristic, specially designed bass.
Rising through the ranks of the Publishing Department, having begun to regularly publish small articles (mainly of an official nature - about the ministries of the Patriarch, various celebrations and anniversaries) in the Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate and the newspaper Moscow Church Bulletin, Vsevolod Chaplin quickly became a man with to whom the Church consults and entrusts important assignments. Thus, during the celebration of the 1000th anniversary of the Baptism of Rus' in 1988, Chaplin participated in organizing an exhibition of Christian art in Moscow, on Solyanka. Even then, he, a simple subdeacon of Metropolitan Pitirim, was called home by Abbot Sergius (Sokolov), then cell attendant of Patriarch Pimen, later Bishop of Novosibirsk, who died at the age of 50, to get advice on whether to exhibit art objects from the Patriarchal collection.

DECR and MDA
After graduating from the Moscow Theological Seminary, Vsevolod Chaplin’s ecclesiastical and official status changed dramatically. In October 1990, Chaplin had a disagreement with Metropolitan Pitirim, who subsequently, after the failure of the State Emergency Committee in August 1991, was accused by Father Gleb Yakunin of collaborating with state security agencies and putschists. After a disagreement with Pitirim, Chaplin transferred from the Publishing Department of the Russian Orthodox Church MP to the Department for External Church Relations (DECR MP), which was under the command of Metropolitan (now Patriarch) Kirill (Gundyaev) - this is the same department of the Russian Orthodox Church MP that oversaw the excise-free cigarette business, which the media wrote about back in the 90s of the last century.
Chaplin has been working as an ordinary employee in the Department for only a year - his talents are noticed by the Chairman of the Department. At that time, young Vsevolod could sometimes be found at festive services in the Trinity Cathedral of the Danilov Monastery - fortunately, the DECR MP building is located directly opposite the cathedral. At the end of 1991, Chaplin became head of the public relations sector of the DECR MP. True, another 7 years had to pass before he became secretary of the DECR MP, followed by his elevation to the rank of archpriest, and another 3 years, until in 2001, by decision of the Synod, he was appointed by the decision of the Synod to the post of deputy chairman of the Department, that is, a person from the inner circle of the current Patriarch Kirill (Gundyaev).
Accordingly, the spiritual (priestly) career of Vsevolod Chaplin, after moving to the Department of Metropolitan Kirill, began to develop much faster than in the Publishing Department. In his free time from work, he studies at the Moscow Theological Academy (he received education exclusively by correspondence - Father Vsevolod does not like to study. He prefers to teach others), where in 1994 he defended his thesis on the topic: “The problem of the relationship between natural and revealed New Testament ethics in modern foreign heterodox and non-Christian thought.” And even before graduating from the academy, Vsevolod Chaplin was ordained first to the rank of deacon (April 21, 1991), and then to the rank of priest (January 7, 1992, on the Feast of the Nativity of Christ). In 1996, Fr. Vsevolod received the first church award - the Order of St. Daniel of Moscow, III degree.

And this is blogger Olga Shchelokova sharing personal memories of the future father Vsevolod, while meeting her - a young employee of the Publishing Department of the Moscow Patriarchate.

Father Vsevolod Chaplin, the current ideologist of the Patriarchate, appeared on my horizon at the very beginning of the nineties, when I worked at the Moscow Church Bulletin.

The actual Publishing Department of the MP was built by Metropolitan Pitirim in the depths of a cozy courtyard on Pogodinskaya back, if I’m not mistaken, in the seventies, representing a compact, but four-story building, made of flesh-colored brick. This mansion was not visible from the street, and only knowledgeable people flocked to it. In the early nineties, patriarchal simplicity still reigned there, and any person of relatively pious appearance could enter the Publishing Department, but behind the massive desk at the entrance sat the indispensable watchman from former sexots and inquired from strangers who was going to whom and for what reason.

But in the late eighties, Metropolitan Pitirim became friends with the Gorbachev family of ordinary Soviet people, which immediately led to the expansion of publishing holdings. The first step was to donate a huge communal apartment in an old building next door to the Department. The apartment was not renovated, and it was handed over to the new newspaper, “Moskovsky Tserkovsky Vestnik”, exactly in the form in which it was left by the previous tenants who were resettled to who knows where. The communal apartment was full of old, greasy wallpaper; the windows with cracked frames hardly opened; It was not recommended to go into the water closet (the employees performed their natural needs in the main building). And yet, it was still an editorial office, although without any sign.

No one knows where the editorial staff were recruited from and on what basis (I was recommended there by a respected Moscow priest, one of the former metropolitan subdeacons). The percentage of citizens of Semitic origin there exceeded all conceivable limits, and all these citizens were engaged in some kind of cunning business there. They did nothing, in a word. They wandered from room to room, scratching their tongues, and on the day the issue was delivered they wrote some flowery hackwork with the invariable title “Revival of the Temple.” This charitable institution was headed by a natural retired security officer, an unemployed international journalist.

But in the main building of the Publishing Department, life was in full swing. There were many clans and parties warring among themselves, each of which, in turn, suffered from splits and disorder. There was also a clan of adoring women, and there was also a clan of serving boys, whose duties included multilateral information. The boys constantly scurried between Chisty Lane, where the patriarch’s residence was located, and the mansion on Pogodinskaya. Most of the boys were double agents, that is, in Chisty Lane they snitched on Pogodinskaya, and on Pogodinskaya - on Chisty. The bishops were aware, but they still couldn’t do without boys, these Jolies-Garçons, because boys carried out the communication process.
Needless to say, at the same time the Jolies-Garçons pushed each other and knocked on each other. Life was in full swing.

However, at the same time, the boys were listed as editors and received good salaries, although one of these Joly-Garçons graduated from only the eighth grade, began a career as a tractor driver, and then became a reader at one of the Volokolamsk parishes, where he was picked up by the compassionate Bishop Pitirim.

By the way, the most terrifying rumors circulated about the relationship between this cohort of Joly-Garçons and the ruler himself, and it was even hinted that he would form his own harem from them. Lies, lies and more lies! Why? Because Bishop Pitirim was a man of the finest taste and aristocratic morality, and therefore would not have been flattered by this physical and moral rabble under any circumstances. True, the bishop was a gentleman and therefore loved that the serving boys served tea to Raisa Maksimovna and that Raisa Maksimovna was jealous.

According to their appearance, Joly-Garçons were divided into two typological types - the type of Maxim Galkin and the type of Boris Moiseev.

Seva Chaplin belonged to the second type. But this is only in appearance, because Seva Chaplin’s range of interests corresponded to the range of interests of an elderly personnel officer, interested exclusively in the appointments and dismissals of personnel. His voluminous head contained colossal information about all bishops, including vicars, about their ordinations, resignations and behind-the-scenes scandals. In a word, Seva Chaplin’s circle of interests revealed him as an elderly church personnel officer, beaten by life, although at that time he was barely over twenty.

I can no longer remember how and with what instructions Seva Chaplin appeared in our communal apartment. Seva simply appeared, sat down on a chair in the room reserved for the reception, and began to listen. And sometimes he started conversations with me - about this, about that, about personnel composition, about the baseness of the interests of the clergy and about the need to “revitalize church life.” He was probably given this task.

However, I did not have any friendly feelings for Seva Chaplin. It was not very clear why on earth he, without my consent, included me in the list of activists of some new parishes, where “our people” were selected and where it was supposed to “revive church life.” However, I had no time for revival, no time for Seva and his career growth. But Seva, apparently, tried to complete the task assigned to him by his superiors as carefully as possible. Sometimes Seva accompanied me to the metro and tried to get me into a sincere conversation about where I came from and what my plans were. My plans were the most humble, but neither Seva nor anyone else should have cared anything about them.

One day I caught a cold and happily, legally, rested at home, constantly blowing my nose into a wide handkerchief. And suddenly the phone rang. It was Seva. Seva found out the phone number in the office and expressed concern about my health. I said that my health was excellent, but I just had a runny nose. Nothing, in a word, I’ll be back in action soon. “Perhaps I should visit you? - asked Seva. “In a Christian way.” No, I don’t even need the Christian way. I wanted to take a break from people and blow my nose without being embarrassed by anyone.

However, a few hours later the doorbell rang, and, to my surprise, Seva appeared on the threshold with a huge string bag of completely green oranges, about five kilos.

I could never understand the reasons for human importunity, much less for incomprehensible purposes, but it was uncivil to drive away an uninvited visitor. Seva came in, sat down and began asking questions about where I came from, whose person I was and what I thought in general. And since the visit took place under the sign of Christian solicitude, I had to listen.

And then Seva probably made a report to his superior comrades and disappeared from my field of vision for a long time. And then for several years he sent me congratulatory letters, written as carbon copies, at Easter and Christmas.

And now he has soared so high. Herald of church life. Voice of the Patriarchy.

Patience and work will grind everything down, and our careers are always made by people who are not outstanding, but by those who know how to listen to who they order and report to whoever should.

Tags , ,

(1968) — modernist, ecumenist, one of the pioneers. Agent of the radical secularization of the Church. A representative of the Soviet Union, then a liberal activist and propagandist. Globalist. A principled pluralist, a preacher of tolerance. Representative, immoralist.

Since 1985 - employee of the Publishing Department of the Moscow Patriarchate. He started in the expedition department, then as an employee of the Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate and the newspaper Moscow Church Bulletin: At first I was engaged in technical work, then I began writing materials for the “Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate”, the newspaper “Church Bulletin”, and was involved in organizing the work of the English-language edition of the “Journal”.

Since 1990 - employee of the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate (DECR). In 1991-1997 - head DECR public relations sector, 1997-2001. — DECR Secretary for Relations between Church and Society. In 2001-2009 - deputy Chairman of the DECR: subordinate to him was the secretariat for relations between the church and society, for inter-Christian relations, the communication service and the publications sector.

On March 31, 2009, he was appointed chairman of the newly formed Synodal Department for Relations between the Church and Society. December 24, 2015 The Synodal Department for Relations between the Church and Society was merged with the Synodal Information Department. O. Vsevolod Chaplin was dismissed from his position.

Member of the Publishing Council, Synodal Theological Commission. Member of the working group for the preparation of the reformed Catechism (since December 25, 2009). In July 2009, he was appointed chairman of the Expert Council “Economics and Ethics” under the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'. Since July 26, 2010 - member of the Patriarchal Council for Culture.

Member of the OSCE Advisory Council on Freedom of Religion or Belief. Member of the executive committee (presidium) of the CIS Interreligious Council since 2004.

Under B. Yeltsin and D. Medvedev, he was a member of the Presidential Council for Interaction with Religious Associations: from March 4, 1996 to May 14, 1997 and from May 28, 2009. Member of the Commission on the Harmonization of Interethnic and Interreligious Relations.

Member of the Expert Council of the State Duma Committee on Affairs of Public Associations and Religious Organizations. After the Russian Orthodox Church and the United Russia party agreed on cooperation in 2009, Fr. V.Ch. and the structure he headed was tasked with monitoring bills discussed in the State Duma, making proposals and conducting consultations.

From May 22, 2009 to December 29, 2015, Deputy Head of the World Russian People's Council. Since January 4, 2010 - member of the Russian Organizing Committee "Victory".

Member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation since September 24, 2009, where he was included by Presidential Decree. In the Public Chamber he became a member of two commissions - on interethnic relations and freedom of conscience and on regional development and local self-government.

He was ordained a deacon in 1991 and a priest in 1992. He was a member of the clergy of the Church of the Life-Giving Trinity in Khoroshevo. In 1999 he was elevated to the rank of archpriest, since 2009 - mitered archpriest, rector of the Moscow Church of St. Nicholas on Three Mountains in Novy Vagankovo, located next to the Government House (“White House”). According to O.V.Ch., EUThere is every reason to raise the question of allowing believers in the government apparatus to come to the temple that is located nearby, to participate in its services and the activities of the parish.

On the recommendation of Metropolitan. Pitirim (Nechaeva) entered the Moscow Theological Seminary. In 1990 he graduated from the MDS, in 1994 - from the MDA. Candidate of Theology. Candidate's dissertation "The problem of the relationship between natural and revealed New Testament ethics in modern foreign heterodox and non-Christian thought." Associate Professor at St. Tikhon's University.

Author and presenter of television and radio programs “Commentary of the Week” on the Soyuz TV channel (until January 2016), “Eternity and Time” on the Spas TV channel (until January 2016), “About the Main Thing” (“Radonezh” - "Voice of Russia"). Since January 15, 2008, he has been hosting the nightly program “Time of Trust” on the Russian News Service radio.

Member of the Russian Writers' Union. Full member of the Academy of Russian Literature.

Ecumenist

Active participant in the ecumenical movement, propagandist.

In his youth he was part of the circle of the famous Soviet-era ecumenist Sandra Rigi. He still considers S. Riga a knight who dedicated himself one single goal - to follow Christ, communicate with people close to you in faith and spirit, pray with them and preach about God.

According to O.V.Ch., Russia is the birthplace of respect for Truth on a par with lies and heresy, and precisely in the area of ​​faith:

The Russian model of interreligious relations presupposes respect for the traditions of different religions, for the way of life rooted in them, for the social institutions associated with them... Such a model is in demand today in a world where they increasingly understand that it is necessary to respect different civilizations with their religious or secular roots, with their laws, rules, social models and political systems.

Participant in countless interreligious and ecumenical meetings. In particular, the interfaith conference “Religion, National Accord and the Revival of Russia” on March 26, 1993 in Moscow, held jointly with Mohammedans, Baptists, and Buddhists. Signed a joint statement: An important condition for maintaining and strengthening social stability and interethnic peace, a prerequisite for the revival of Russia is mutual consent and tolerance, constructive dialogue and cooperation of people holding different worldviews and professing different religions. In other words, for peace between peoples there needs to be agreement between them. This tautology becomes the main idea of ​​o.V.Ch. in his ecumenical and globalist secular activities.

At a meeting of the Interreligious Council of Russia with Berl Lazar and FEOR President Alexander Boroda (December 17, 2010)

On March 2, 2001, he called on the Taliban to refrain from destroying Buddha statues. Noted that Believers of any religion, including Islam, have the right to live according to their traditions and beliefs. According to O.V.Ch., Muslims have the right to these beliefs, but at the same time they must respect the religious beliefs of other people and the cultural heritage that relates to the traditions of another religion... In other words, how should the world community respect the beliefs of the followers of Islam, in particular their refusal to depict human faces , and followers of Islam are obliged to respect the historical heritage of other religious communities.

O. Vsevolod Chaplin, Chief Rabbi of Russia Berl Lazar, Chief of Staff of the Council of Muftis of Russia Kharis Saubyanov. (Moscow, December 29, 2004)

In 2006, he proposed creating a “Council of Civilizations” at the UN, which would play a certain balancing role in relation to the Security Council… We can ensure that people striving for different ideals: people building a global caliphate and people building a global America - without giving up this goal, can somehow live together. If this is possible, then this is precisely what the dialogue of civilizations should strive for..

On June 13, 2006, at a meeting with the UN Special Rapporteur “on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance” Dudu Dien o.V.Ch. emphasized the importance of the media supporting good interest in the lives of different peoples, their history and culture in order to preach mutual respect.

O. Vsevolod Chaplin, Rabbi Zinovy ​​Kogan and Mufti Rastam Valeev were awarded the medal of the Federation of Peace and Reconciliation “For strengthening peace and harmony between peoples” (Yaroslavl, August 19, 2007)

Participant of the European interreligious meeting “Common values ​​for a changing Europe. The contribution of cultures and religions” May 22-25, 2008 in Rovereto (Italy). Representatives of Judaism and Mohammedanism also took part in the meeting.

Participant of the III Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions on July 1-2, 2009 in Astana (Kazakhstan). Member of the board of trustees of the ecumenical film festival "Noah's Ark", which promotes dialogue between Christians, Mohammedans and Jews.

At the seminar “Religions: the pursuit of peace” in Chennai (India) 2011.

On December 16, 2011, he took part in a seminar on the topic “Religions: the pursuit of peace” in Chennai (India). According to him, There can be only one way out of conflict situations in individual countries and from global conflict: recognition of the opportunity for different peoples and communities to live according to their own will and according to their own rules, including those set by faith, and to maintain peaceful dialogue and cooperation between these peoples and communities. At the same time, he hinted that only extremists can seriously believe and fulfill religious demands: Aggressive proselytism and the influence of extremist groups can sometimes make religion a factor in fueling economic, political and interethnic conflicts.

Participant in the “Orthodox”-Islamic dialogue

On January 24-25, 2001, he took part in the III Colloquium of the Joint Russian-Iranian Commission on Dialogue “Islam-Orthodoxy” in Tehran. Together with other Orthodox delegates, he laid a wreath at the burial site of Ayatollah Khomeini.

Together with Mohammedans and followers, he took part in the XII International Conference in memory of Archpriest Alexander Men “Christianity and Islam. Century XXI" (September 10-11, 2002, Moscow, VGBIL).

On January 12, 2005, he welcomed the initiative of the President of Chechnya, Alu Alkhanov, to introduce the course “Fundamentals of Islam” into the curriculum of secondary schools in Chechnya:

One can only be happy for Muslim children in Chechnya, who will be taught the basics of their religion... It is especially important not to turn religiously oriented disciplines into a dry presentation of historical facts, but to give a clear idea of ​​religious and moral values ​​that offer renunciation of unjust enmity, purity in personal life, willingness to sacrifice oneself for the sake of one’s neighbors and one’s homeland.

I am convinced that the rights, traditions, and way of life of Muslims must be respected, even if they fundamentally contradict the deadening idea of ​​a non-religious society. Islamic society in any country, as well as at the level of the world system, must receive the right to follow its religious and legal norms... But as soon as there is an attempt to impose these norms by force, the response must also be forceful and very tough.

On February 28, 2006, he took part in a press conference dedicated to the publication of the collection “Christianity and Islam: Ways of Real Interaction.” O.V.Ch. said that there are forces both in the world and in Russia that would like to quarrel Muslims and Christians... Our task is to prevent this, our task is to preserve the enormous potential for cooperation and joint life of representatives of the two great world religions of Christianity and Islam, which exists in Russia. This potential could be useful for the whole of Europe, where interreligious relations are worsening.

February 9, 2007 o.V.Ch. declares it important to develop ties with the Mohammedan world and criticizes those who oppose the construction of mosques in the country:

We need to develop contacts with Islamic countries, maintain - both the state and society - ties with the Islamic ummah in various countries of the world... I like it when a large number of mosques are built. I don’t really understand when Orthodox Christians sometimes say: “Why are there so many mosques, why do Muslims even need a place to pray?” I don't think this is correct.

It is necessary, however, that representatives of various religious communities in Russia did not interfere with each other's development, - established o.V.Ch. utopian goals for interreligious cooperation.

Member of the Orthodox delegation at the VI meeting of the Joint Russian-Iranian Commission on Dialogue “Islam-Orthodoxy” (July 16-17, 2008).

He became the first clergyman of the Russian Orthodox Church in history to visit Saudi Arabia. Here he took part in the IV forum of the strategic vision group “Russia - the Islamic World”, which took place on October 27-29, 2008 in Jeddah. Stated:

We, Russia and the Islamic world, have a lot in common. We are mutually intertwined: Russia is inseparable from the Islamic world, since many millions of Muslims live in it, and the Islamic world is inseparable from the Russian and Orthodox world, whose representatives live in many Muslim countries... We have many similar views on family and society, as well as the role of religion and morality in their lives.

Participant in the international conference “CIS Muslims for Interfaith and Interethnic Harmony” (June 17, 2009 in Moscow).

Participants of the conference “CIS Muslims for Interfaith and Interethnic Harmony” in front of the Safira restaurant near Vorobyovy Gory. O.V.Chaplin is in the center.

Member of the OSCE Advisory Council on Freedom of Religion or Belief. Participant in numerous globalist supranational forums.

In 2006, he participated in the VIII Assembly of the World Conference “Religions for Peace” in the Japanese city of Kyoto.

With Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeev) at the General Assembly of the World Council of Churches in Porto Alegre (2006)

At the General Assembly of the World Council of Churches in Porto Alegre (2006) he stated:

It is necessary to look for alternatives to the current global economic system, which is governed by unelected and unaccountable elites. But such alternatives are neither a centralized Soviet-style state economy nor a return to the models of past centuries. We need international economic structures, monetary and banking mechanisms, governed by the people.

On October 30, 2006, he took part in the seminar “The Evolution of Moral Principles and Human Rights in a Multicultural Society” at the Council of Europe. The event was organized by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, the Council for the Development of Civil Society Institutions and Human Rights under the President of the Russian Federation and with the participation of the representative office of the Moscow Patriarchate in Strasbourg.

The section “Churches in Europe” took part in the work of the Russian-German forum “St. Petersburg Dialogue”, in which V.V. took part. Putin and Federal Chancellor of Germany A. Merkel (October 13-15, 2007, Wiesbaden, Germany). O.V.Ch. called for the united efforts of the Churches of Europe in dialogue with other religions and adherents of a secular worldview, to strengthen cooperation in expanding the traditional participation of Churches in educational, social and other spheres of society. In his speech he emphasized:

There is no need to make Germans out of Russians, or Russians out of Germans. Our peoples are equally committed to the ideals of democracy, which often means recognition of the importance of ordinary people in making government decisions, because the mechanisms for implementing this ideal can be very different.

In 2008, he explained that during the period of globalization, people with different social systems and different models of an ideal society will increasingly influence politics and the economy, and we need to teach them to live together.

Participated on March 5, 2008 in Berlin in the plenary meeting of the European Council of Religious Leaders. Signed a declaration on interreligious dialogue, according to which religious traditions have formed various social rules and models, which sometimes come into conflict:

Knowledge of tradition and belief in it contribute to interreligious understanding. Open and trusting interreligious dialogue is facilitated by a confident knowledge of one's own tradition, as well as the traditions of others. Such knowledge should be taught in a spirit of peace and respect for different traditions. Many religions have mutually exclusive truth claims. There is no greater barrier to dialogue and full participation in society than the explicit or implicit truth claims of secular ideologies.

On July 2-3, 2008, he took part in the World Summit of Religious Leaders for Peace, timed to coincide with the G8 summit in Hokkaido in Sapporo (Japan). The summit was organized by the World Conference of Religions for Peace and its Japanese branch. The event was attended by more than two hundred representatives of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Shintoism and a number of other religious communities. Speaking at the plenary session of the summit, he called for to expand the dialogue of followers of different religions among themselves and with non-believers on issues related to the role of religion in the life of society, as well as the philosophical foundations of social structure. One of the best platforms for such a dialogue, in his opinion, could be the UN. He emphasized the importance of the initiative to create an interreligious council at the United Nations.

Participated on July 28-29, 2008 in Istanbul in the OSCE Expert Meeting on Security, Radicalization and Prevention of Terrorism. In his speeches he called for respect for the traditions of various religious communities, as well as individual rights to private life and religious practice, which must be protected from unauthorized interference.

At the Rhodes Forum with Ayatollah Tashkiri and Berl Lazar

For several years (2005-2011) he has been participating in the annual international public forum “Dialogue of Civilizations” on the island. Rhodes. Co-chairman of the sections “Challenges of the modern world and religion”, “Dialogue of religions in the interests of peace”, etc. The forum was initiated by the Center for National Glory of Russia and the St. Andrew the First-Called Foundation and organized jointly with the Indian Kapoor Suriya Foundation and the Greek company Titan Capital. It is attended by government officials, religious and public leaders, representatives of science and business, in particular, Catholics, Monophysites, Protestants, Mohammedans, Buddhists, and Judaists.

At Rhodes in 2005 he stated that interreligious dialogue is already the norm of our life. There are several interreligious organizations, many meetings and conferences are held, but the secular world is expecting something more from religious leaders - not just beautiful words about the need for dialogue, but its real results, real answers to the challenges of the time. In 2006, he presented a report “The Russian Orthodox Church and Issues of Economic Ethics at the Turn of the Millennium” at the section “Problems and Prospects of the Global Economy.”

O.V.Ch. actively includes the topic of economics in the orbit of his secular mysticism. He was one of the main speakers at the section “Christian values ​​of European civilization: a view from East and West” within the framework of the IV Economic Forum “Europe-Russia”, held in Rome from May 14 to 16, 2008.

Agent of the radical secularization of the Church

“Secular mysticism” - i.e. belief in the religious necessity of the secularization of the Church is at the center of the worldview of O.V.Ch. For this reason, he is ready to fight the Orthodox teaching about the Church. He condemns the idea that the place of the Church in churches. — The place of the Church is everywhere.

Thus, in 2006, he announced that he considered the “defensive consciousness”, which, in his opinion, had become established in the Church today, to be destructive: We shouldn’t think that if we occupy some small space of our own in secular media, we will feel comfortable in it. We need to get rid of the defensive consciousness within ourselves. It is destructive, although understandable to a person who does not have power, money and cannot protect himself from aggressive, corrupting external forces. According to him, we should all think about how to go beyond any ghetto, any fenced-in space in which those who don’t like us really want to put us.

This main ideological goal of the secularization of the Church serves for the O.V.C. a justification for his ecumenism, modernism, and immoralism. O.V.Ch. considers ecumenism a means for utopian projects to transform the whole world:

We cannot call ourselves one Body of Christ because our theological differences are too strong, but we can work together to solve the many common problems that confront us, and above all to change society based on the values ​​of the Gospel.

Already in November 2004, during the First International Festival of Orthodox Media “Faith and Word”, he noted with satisfaction the progress of the secularization of the Church. There are more and more religious journalists in secular media, they really influence the self-awareness of the people... We are no longer poor and unhappy, there are many of us, and we sound good in the secular media. This allows us to talk about a gradual transition from the opposition of Church and society to another model: society is perceived as part of the Church, and the Church as part of society, and these “sets” become one whole.

With such a secular approach to Christianity, it is not surprising that during the political upheavals o.V.Ch. is always a zealous apologist for any current government and always denies his responsibility for this support:

We respect any authority and interact openly with it. Especially when it has the support of a large number of people. It would be strange if the Church now fenced itself off from the authorities; this would immediately play into the hands of not only our enemies, but also the opponents of the state, the ruling forces, and the entire people.

In 2007, he welcomed the future appointment of Vladimir Putin to the post of Prime Minister of the Russian Federation:

It is obvious that both Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev are effective statesmen who enjoy the trust of people. The Church knows them as good partners in dialogue and joint work... And if they work together as president and prime minister, this will give the government stability and a broad base of trust.

In November 2010, he positively assessed the message of President Medvedev to the country’s parliament, which allegedly has a pronounced social orientation...

In it, the president calls on the authorities and society to take care of pensioners and support those who most need our help, it talks about support for socially oriented NGOs that should participate in the provision of government social services...

It’s great that the president considers it necessary to provide family placement for children without parental care and to help foster families... The fact that the supreme Russian government is turning its face to the people, and most importantly, to our future, suggests that Russia confidently assesses its historical perspective.

In 2011, he welcomed the reverse transfer of power: from Medvedev to Putin and Putin to Medvedev, who allegedly promised period of stable power:

At the United Russia party congress, where I attended as a guest, the decision was announced that Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin would nominate his candidacy for the post of President, and Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev was ready to become head of government. I am deeply convinced that voicing this decision in the presence of a large number of representatives from different strata of society, by the way, not only members of the United Russia party, is a sign of the openness of the state leadership to dialogue with the people. And the fact that the current President Medvedev spoke about Putin’s candidacy for the first time speaks of the nobility and friendly spirit of the decision made.

He speaks unusually flatteringly about the most influential liberal ideologist in the Russian Federation, Vladislav Surkov:

This personality is legendary in modern Russia. This person is very talented, very creative, in his work he expresses or puts into the mouths of his heroes a very wide range of ideas. Once, congratulating him on his thirty-fifth birthday, I said: “I ask and beg you not to give up creativity,” if only because I know: an official sometimes needs a change in areas of activity. Surkov's role in Russian history is not over, but it is already clear that it is unique.

Positively assesses the changes that took place in Russia after the August 1991 coup:

The country has come a long way in these fifteen years. It became impossible to return to the Soviet past, to the dictates of totalitarian ideology, which tried to create the Kingdom of God on earth without God... The country remained spiritually and politically independent. She is increasing her influence in the world, she has moved away from the wild market, and from blindly copying Western models, from choosing the role of an eternal student.

Thank God that our people, who 20 years ago chose freedom from godlessness, oppression, freedom in order to make proper choices in life, have retained this choice... It is no coincidence that our people, after more than 70 years of ideological oppression and forcefully imposed on them godlessness chose the path to transformation. Let our country always follow this path for the next 20 years, along the right path.

Every year he serves a memorial service for the “defenders of the White House” in 1991. Named Vladimir Usov, Dmitry Komar and Ilya Krichevsky people who gave their lives for freedom and the Fatherland.

August 2011 Memorial service for the “heroes” of the White House.

At the same time, he does not condemn communism as a political doctrine:

The Church does not evaluate political philosophy and political doctrines. Therefore, when they say: the Church should condemn communism as a philosophy, I don’t think this is correct... At one time, many people called on the Church to condemn communism. There is a clear answer to this. The Council of Bishops in 1994 clearly stated that “the Church does not prefer any political system or any existing political doctrine.

Finds something in common between communism and Christianity and on this basis argues that communists can be believers:

There are a number of left-wing political movements that speak about the ideals of justice. And these ideals are important for an Orthodox Christian too. We know very well that property in the early apostolic community was common. We know that the ideas of social justice fully triumphed in the early Church. Therefore, among the people who call themselves socialists, extreme socialists and even communists, there may be believers. And the very philosophy of denying capitalism finds much in common with the Christian worldview.

In 2004, he made it clear that if relatives expressed a desire, he could “perform a prayer” over the body of V. Lenin:

His role in history was quite tragic, but the Church can pray for any baptized person if he is not excommunicated from the Church. Lenin was not excommunicated. If there is a request from relatives, it will be considered.

Assessing Stalin’s personality, in 2010 he noted that he had positive qualities: he was an intelligent person, he was a person who was well versed in politics, selfless. What exactly he did - he did not put family interests above the interests of his activities (as he understood it) ... Stalin had strong character traits, and he had his own morals (one can argue as to whether this was the right morality), it was the morality of a statesman, an arbiter of destinies, but he had his own morality. This was not a disintegrating person. He did not inherit power from his daughter, he did not allow his family to dissolve - he sacrificed it.

Yeltsin, according to O.V.Ch., was also “not a disintegrating person”:

Regarding Yeltsin’s merits: under this president, the godless ideological system, which is responsible for the destruction of our churches, for the monstrous persecution of the Church, for its rejection from society, has finally become a thing of the past. He truly made possible the restoration of churches and monasteries and the development of church life. The most influential figures of the pre-Yeltsin era, for example, stubbornly said: we will never let you on television. And we must keep in mind that the changes that were supposed to happen in society one way or another happened relatively peacefully.

Modernist

Despite the mainly practical and secular circle of interests of Fr. V.Ch., the range of his ideas also includes the heritage of theoretical theology.

He spoke repeatedly and in different ways about his acquaintance with and the influence that had on him:

Father Alexander is still remembered today - including by those who never knew him or knew him fleetingly, like me... Disputes about the “non-Orthodoxy” of the murdered priest are practically a thing of the past. Yes, he - like almost all of us then - too naively believed that the West was a sincere friend and would always help us. And he borrowed a lot uncritically from the West. And sometimes he admitted thoughts that caused heated discussion. But he did this no more than, let’s say, Father Sergius Bulgakov and Father Pavel Florensky... Today it is obvious that the ideas of Father Alexander do not need either canonization or anathematization. For something that caused controversy, he received full credit from critics, both during his lifetime and after his death. This means that thoughts have undergone serious testing and serious screening through the sieve of time and the filter of the conciliar mind.

I think that such a discussion should be open to everyone who is involved in church life and understands what is being discussed, i.e. adequate people capable of participating in the discussion. More and more platforms are appearing today. These include Christmas readings, and the exhibition-forum “Orthodox Rus'”, and various kinds of conferences, and pastoral conferences in different dioceses, and round tables in the Publishing Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, and discussions in the editorial offices of other church media, and Internet forums.

In 2011, he declared the rules of Lent inoperative: The monastic rules of fasting are not obligatory for all Orthodox Christians, the Russian Church notes... The practice of eating fish during Lent is quite common among church workers. According to him, everyone knows this very well, “ but they are afraid to say this in conditions when some media and television channels offer people the strictest monastic rules, which were very rarely used for working people, including people working in the Church. Nevertheless, they are presented by some media as a generally binding norm..

False missionary

I was and remain a supporter of the Church giving the right to life to a variety of forms of preaching and communication - be it a rock concert, a concert of an art song, or an exhibition. At one time, for example, I was one of the organizers of the first exhibition of avant-garde painting on religious themes in Moscow in 1989, and in the early 90s I became the author of the preface to the first Christian rock record in Russia. I am convinced that such forms of participation of the Church in various spheres of social and cultural life (if behind them there is sincerity and openness, and not personal ambitions associated with the cult of self-realization or show business) do not contradict Christian service.

Already in 1994, he wrote the preface to the album “Anthology of Christian Rock in Russia,” published with the participation of the All-Church Orthodox Youth Movement.

He performs at rock concerts, for example, on June 2, 2006 at the pop and rock concert “Road to the Temple” at the Moscow Youth Palace. O.V.Ch. told the audience: May we always, wherever the Lord places us to do His will, including in our creativity, always follow Him, and not the cult of pride, belly, and wallet. Follow God - and then we will truly live a full, happy, harmonious life here on this earth, and, by the grace of God, we will hope for a better life in eternity. The concert was attended by the DDT group led by Yuri Shevchuk, the Ivan Smirnov quartet, Sergei Trofimov (Trofim), Olga Arefieva, Nikolai Skuchenkov, the groups “Klyuchevaya”, “If”, “Rada and Thorn”, rock bards Andrei Selivanov and Vyacheslav Kaporin.

According to him, in youth music, as in other areas of art, there is a lot of good and a lot of bad… There is aggressive, depraved, empty music. But there are performers who sincerely (not for the sake of fashion or popularity) talk about their faith or, at least, about their spiritual quest. For unknown reasons, he believes that Today, fewer and fewer people identify any rock with Satanism or debauchery. Yes, among rockers there are those who appeal to demonism, aggression and the emancipation of instincts. But the same thing happened in folk ditties and in some samples of classical music.

In words he professes boundless faith in the power of propaganda:

Actively participates in the activities of pro-government mass youth movements, in particular, actively interacts with the Nashi movement. In 2007 he states that ready to cooperate with any youth organizations. Meanwhile, it is the Nashi movement that has already managed to manifest itself in the spiritual and educational direction. Thus, together with representatives of the Church, “Nashi” already took part in an action during which crosses, Orthodox literature were distributed to passers-by, and conversations about Orthodoxy were held. Personally, last year (2006) I visited the “Nashi” summer camp on Seliger, where, together with the monks of the Nilo-Stolobenskaya Hermitage, I performed divine services in which hundreds of young people took part.

Organizer of the “Orthodox Shift - 2009” on Lake Seliger, where he performs missionary liturgy. The rationale for this missionary approach is most surprising: Orthodox youth are not only future priests and monks, they are people of various professions and callings who are called to learn to go into the world to preach the Gospel not only in words, but also in the very way of correct, moral, effective life, - which, we must understand, is led by members of pro-government mass organizations.

December 14, 2009 states: Orthodox youth should participate in all spheres of society. I am against the politicization of Orthodox youth work, but I also do not understand those people who argue that Orthodox youth should be at the church all the time and deal only with parish affairs.

The secularization of Christianity, as the goal of false missionary work, is being realized by Father V.Ch. under the slogan “Orthodoxy is a part of life.”

Numerous extravagant projects of the O.V.Ch. are associated with this program for the secularization of the Church, in particular, the national, or, in other words, “Orthodox” dress code. “Orthodox” fashion show under the direction of Father V.Ch. took place on April 28, 2011 in one of the jewelry houses in Moscow. In his welcoming speech at the opening of the meeting, Fr. V.Ch. pointed out the connection between Easter and the current event:

Resurrection is not only the resurrection of the soul, but also the resurrection of the body, and therefore both our internal state and how we look matter. Health and righteousness are interconnected, illness and sin are interconnected, repentance and purity of heart are interconnected, inner content and outer appearance are interconnected, the state of nature and the state of our heart are interconnected, which is why it is important that a person’s inner and outer appearance be beautiful.

V. CHAPLIN: With whom do I have the honor?

S. DORENKO: Dorenko.

V. CHAPLIN: Oh, hello, greetings.

S. DORENKO: Vsevolod Anatolyevich, if I may, I expressed two critical considerations addressed to you in my morning program “Rise”.

V. CHAPLIN: Please.

S. DORENKO: And he immediately said that your activity in taking the church out into the streets, into some semblance of Christian democracy in politics, was absolutely not without interest, which is probably absolutely necessary in Russian political life. Now, look, the critical consideration is that you, of course, cannot argue with the patriarch, and it cannot be of equal magnitude or even of the same order. On the positive side, my interest in you as a politician is that the church needs to create some kind of Christian democracy and come not only to churchgoers, but also to hesitant people, atheists - to everyone. And here I see your contribution. Here, please comment.

V. CHAPLIN: I wouldn’t necessarily call it democracy, but we, of course, need public Christian action, and it should be bold, it should be frank, we don’t need to be afraid of some people in power, even high-ranking ones, or argue with them , say what they are right about and what they are wrong about. And today this needs to be said not behind the scenes, but as widely and openly as possible, so that all people can hear it, because today you can’t achieve anything using behind-the-scenes methods, you need some kind of social action. Well, as for His Holiness the Patriarch, you know, everything was fine until this man stopped understanding that he is a collective project, he must express not only his own opinion, but the opinion of different people in the church, who, in general, “Patriarch Kirill” created this project. When he decided that he was the only one in the church public space, everything went swimming, excuse me, starting with Andrei Kuraev and ending not only with the situation with me, but also, I think, with many, many situations.

S. DORENKO: In your words there is almost doubt that he will hold on, that he will be able to retain power.

V. CHAPLIN: I don’t think he can.

S. DORENKO: Will he not be able to?

V. CHAPLIN: I think that this contradiction between faith in personal charisma, and only in it, and the surrounding reality will intensify. It’s a pity, of course, for the man, but it seems to me that he is not on the right path.

S. DORENKO: Vsevolod Anatolyevich, it turns out that some group brought the patriarch to power, but it might not have brought him...

V. CHAPLIN: Everyone simply hoped that a person would listen to different points of view, consult with people, and make decisions systematically. Now, alas, many decisions are made without any discussion, on the go, somewhere in the corridor, people start running after him with serious questions, trying to discuss something for a minute, half a minute - and this is how the most important decisions are made, while how system documents sometimes lie for several months and are not reviewed. The point is that a lot of questions are confined to His Holiness personally, he is not capable, just as no person would be able, to consider all these questions himself. Therefore, it was necessary to transfer powers in a timely manner, and not try to do everything on our own and lock all power onto ourselves.

S. DORENKO: Or maybe this is your personal? Sometimes it can be difficult to separate a personal feeling from a public one, because we end up passing it through ourselves. It may turn out that you were admitted more often, entered the office more often, were in demand, and then something changed, and you are talking about your personal grievances and feelings?

V. CHAPLIN: You know, no. The fact is that almost all synodal institutions are deprived of the opportunity to systematically discuss issues that concern them; sometimes papers are not reviewed for several months. The Supreme Church Council, which, in a good way, should discuss every problem, meets several times a year and deals with very selected things. So almost no one has an adequate opportunity to access decision-making; if we consider catching the boss in the corridor to decide something along the way as an adequate opportunity, then this is not an adequate opportunity. That is, the system itself works, to put it mildly, strangely, and there are two ways out of this situation. You still need to not take all the powers and all the power upon yourself, or come to terms with the fact that you need to confer with people every day, and not disappear somewhere for a day, two, a week, and so on.

S. DORENKO: Wow! Wow. Tell me, please, will your parish be taken away from you? You know, they write to me very interesting things. I have a nickname and have had it for a very long time. After I was expelled from the Union of Journalists in 1999, of which I was never a member, I took the nickname Rasstriga on the Internet. And they write to me: so this is a real defrock. In what sense are you defrocked? Are you undressed? You will not be deprived of your dignity. Could they, for example, deprive you of your parish?

V. CHAPLIN: I am not afraid and do not expect anything; by and large, I don’t care what status I will be in the church system, and whether I will be in it. No one can take away my ability to say whatever I want. Of course, you can, as they say, kill me, but it will be worse for those who do it...

S. DORENKO: But a parish, just a parish? Remember the parish where you and I broke our fast together with Rurikov. I described this today, the food was very modest.

V. CHAPLIN: Well, yes. I want to say again: I’m not afraid to lose anything, and I don’t expect anything.

S. DORENKO: So you may lose your parish? Does the church authorities have the right to tell you, as in the army, that you are going to Blagoveshchensk or, perhaps, to the Omsk region?

V. CHAPLIN: You see what’s the matter - it may say something, but I may not accept it. I say again, I do not hold on to any positions, I never held on to my previous position, so what is dearer to me is my freedom and the opportunity to directly discuss with the church, as a society of millions of Orthodox Christians, and with society as a whole, the things that I I think it is necessary to discuss.

S. DORENKO: Tell me after all: are you defrocked? Or not undressed? Should the words defrocked mean something else?

V. CHAPLIN: Undressed is a monk who left the monastery and abandoned his vows. I've never been a monk.

S. DORENKO: Now please tell me about the social role of the church. I am interested in the social role of the church. There are two trends. One of them is for preservation, aimed outward, at strengthening the core, essentially, churchgoers, believers, and so on. Here they write to me: in Brazil, in one Protestant church, they mark their presence at the service with crosses on the list. This is core conservation. And the second movement is the missionary movement - to bring the good news. And participate in public life. This balance is difficult, and there are probably disputes surrounding it. It seems to me that you, specifically you, were engaged in that part of spiritual activity that was aimed at moving outward. Is it well developed now? Is more needed in the church? Do you need less of it? How much is needed in the church?

V. CHAPLIN: There may be more of it, of course, but it can only be decentralized. It is a mistake to try to start this activity from above, while there are a huge number of people who themselves will take the initiative in different places, including Moscow and the provinces. Just a few days ago we gathered Orthodox public organizations at the Public Chamber, people came from many regions, and they are all doing something - exhibitions, concerts, organizing charity initiatives. There is a lot of such activity now, and by definition it is connected not with some impulses from above, but with people’s own initiative. This is how it will develop, thanks to the church bureaucracy or in spite of the church bureaucracy. The church bureaucracy in this case should support the initiative of the people, if it is a reasonable initiative. That's what I tried to do. Sometimes you just need to not interfere and give church sanction to people’s good initiative.

S. DORENKO: Please tell me, maybe a situation will arise that you seem to be in a dialogue with those whom you call the church bureaucracy, but they do not answer you. For example, our information service just called Alexander Volkov, head of the press service of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus', and he told us: I’m not going to enter into controversy, Chaplin’s statements are on his conscience. And my message was interrupted. The point is that you make conceptual remarks from your point of view, and they pretend that you are just making a fuss about being personally offended, and no one responds.

V. CHAPLIN: This is one of today's problems. In our country, many church institutions are turning into know-commentary offices, institutions from which no church position can be obtained. Why? Because people are afraid. People understand that His Holiness reads the Internet, reads media materials, and sometimes becomes indignant about what someone said. Therefore, yes, the reaction is very often spontaneous, unfair, and not well-founded, as they say. Therefore, people have become afraid to speak, and therefore now very few church people go on live broadcasts that are not controlled by themselves or their subordinates or their allies, because they are afraid of direct questions. As you know, I always tried to broadcast live programs myself, taking absolutely all calls..

S. DORENKO: Yes, yes, you accepted.

V. CHAPLIN: We must not be afraid to answer any question, but unfortunately, fear is present today, and this know-comment-office situation is present almost everywhere in the church system.

S. DORENKO: As far as I understand, the patriarch was given the Internet, and taught, and introduced to it around 2008 - 2009, one of the high-ranking officials of the secular administration told me about this, that the patriarch was very annoyed then, in 2008 or 2009, when for the first time with I buried my head, was very annoyed at the lies and all that. And since then it has remained that way - does he read?

V. CHAPLIN: Yes, of course, absolutely everything, both critical moments, and, unfortunately, all the gossip, all the nasty things that are written, including unfair nasty things. Another big problem is that some Internet trolls learned to train him, learned to make his psychological state dependent on what they poured into the Internet the next day. A person needs to be able to, as they say, ignore such things...

S. DORENKO: Of course.

V. CHAPLIN: And His Holiness is an emotional person, and I sincerely feel sorry for him, because sometimes he attaches too much importance to all the rubbish that is written on the Internet. And you need to know these things, but at the same time you need to be able to feel your own rightness and not pay attention to any...

S. DORENKO: And then, this could, in essence, be an enemy strike, Sun Tzu writes in “The Art of War.”

V. CHAPLIN: Unfortunately, this is sometimes deliberately done by some church oppositionists, some secular oppositionists, they try to poison a person through comments, posts on social networks, knowing that he reads them, and trying to psychologically destabilize him. Unfortunately, they partially succeeded, and I would like to wish His Holiness not to pay attention to all this, and not in bureaucratic matters, but in matters of the highest truth, to follow God’s path, and not to adapt to the so-called society that barks on the Internet. But this is not a society, it’s, you know, several small groups, several sects, let’s say.

S. DORENKO: Kuraev said that you are a cynic and an atheist.

V. CHAPLIN: You know, if I were an atheist, I would live a slightly different life. I came to church at a young age, absolutely going against the grain, it was 1981. In the early 1990s, huge career prospects opened up in the secular world, in business - I didn’t do all that. If I had been a cynic and an atheist, I probably would not have lived the life I did.

S. DORENKO: Okay, have your assessments changed? So they ask us about the yacht, about the watch, about Pussy Wright. Have any of your previous assessments changed today, when you are not bound by bureaucratic discipline?

V. CHAPLIN: To a minimal extent. I believe that the same patriarch has the right to a dignified residence, where he can receive the head of a particular state, an ambassador, the head of a foreign religious community. Of course, people give him gifts, including expensive ones. What, should he return these gifts? It would be quite strange, just as it would be strange to sell them. Part of our tradition is such a special position of each bishop, and even more so...

S. DORENKO: Yes, and on this score there was a major church decision many centuries ago, we know this.

V. CHAPLIN: But at the same time, now there is a question about the personnel structure of church administration. Unfortunately, in this structure there are fewer and fewer people who do meaningful work, and more and more people who are personal servants. These people serve the residences, are engaged in the personal office work of His Holiness, these people are involved in his life, food, and so on. Now, if someone is to be laid off now, if someone is not paid a salary, then I think that first of all...

S. DORENKO: Servants.

V. CHAPLIN: We should talk about these servants and personal assistants, and secondly about those people who write texts, engage in analytical work, are present in society, and act in essential directions.

S. DORENKO: I remember Konstantin Pobedonostsev, in my opinion, no essential directions are needed, because Konstantin Pobedonostsev accurately pointed out that a Russian Orthodox person directly conducts a dialogue with the Lord. Why all this wisdom? Directly - that's all.

V. CHAPLIN: You know, we need education, we need social work, we need missionary work - but for this we still need people who help a person change in his dialogue with God.

S. DORENKO: Thank you very much, thank you. You are holding up very well, I know you can't help but be excited, but you are holding up very well.

V. CHAPLIN: You know, I sleep peacefully and consider myself right.

S. DORENKO: Thank you. Happily! Goodbye.

V. CHAPLIN: Success in good deeds, all the best! Goodbye.

Vsevolod Anatolyevich Chaplin is an archpriest of the Russian Orthodox Church, former Chairman of the Synodal Department for Interaction between Church and Society of the Moscow Patriarchate, former member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation. Since the beginning of 2016, he has been appointed rector of the church of St. Theodore the Studite at the Nikitsky Gate in Moscow.

Childhood and youth

Vsevolod was born on March 31, 1968 in Moscow in the family of a scientist in the field of antenna theory and technology, Professor Anatoly Fedorovich Chaplin. The parents of the future priest did not participate in the life of the Orthodox Church, and the boy came to faith on his own at the age of 13. At school, Seva studied without much zeal, receiving low grades in physics, chemistry and mathematics.

In 1985, after graduating from school, he entered the service of the Publishing Department of the Moscow Patriarchate, after which he received recommendations from Metropolitan Pitirim (Nechaev) to study at the Moscow Theological Seminary. In 1990, Vsevolod Chaplin became a student at the Moscow Theological Academy, from which he graduated in 1994 with the rank of candidate of theology, having defended his dissertation on the topic “The problem of the relationship between natural and divinely revealed New Testament ethics in modern foreign heterodox and non-Christian thought.”

Monasticism

Since 1990, Vsevolod has become an ordinary employee of the staff of the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate. In 1991, Vsevolod Anatolyevich was ordained as a deacon and promoted to head of the public relations sector, where Chaplin worked for 6 years. In 1992, at Christmas, Vsevolod became a priest of the Orthodox Church. At the same time, Chaplin was a member of the Central Committee of the World Council of Churches and the Conference of European Churches.

In 1996, Father Vsevolod was invited to a public post in the Council for Interaction with Religious Associations under the President of the Russian Federation and the OSCE expert group on freedom of religion or belief. A year later, Chaplin received the post of secretary of the DECR MP in connection with the structural reorganization being carried out (by Gundyaev).

In 1999, Father Vsevolod was ordained archpriest. In 2001, the priest became deputy chairman of the DECR MP. Since 2005, he has been a member of the group of experts of the Holy Synod to develop “a conceptual document outlining the position of the Russian Orthodox Church in the field of interreligious relations.” At the end of 2008, he became a member of the Commission for the preparation of the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, which took place at the end of January 2009.

In March of the same year, he received the post of chairman of the Synodal Department for Interaction between the Church and Society, and in May he began work in the Council for Interaction with Religious Associations under the President of the Russian Federation. Since 2010 he has worked as a member of the Patriarchal Council for Culture.

Blog and scandals

Vsevolod Chaplin regularly appears on television and radio. The priest hosts the “Comment of the Week” program on the Soyuz TV channel, the “Hour of Trust” on the Russian News Service radio, and the “About the Main Thing” program on the Radonezh and Voice of Russia radio stations. In 2003, the press published an interview in which the archpriest spoke in defense of believers who destroyed the exhibition “Beware of Religion,” held at the Museum. Sakharov. The exhibition featured paintings, installations and photographs that offended the feelings of believers.

Father Vsevolod's conservatism was manifested in calls for Muscovites to ignore the performance of an American singer, which took place in Moscow in 2006, since the show used Christian symbols in blasphemous scenes.

In 2010, Vsevolod Chaplin called for introducing the subject “Fundamentals of Orthodox Culture” into the general education school curriculum and replacing it with “Fundamentals of Religious Cultures and Secular Ethics.” The public greeted the call of the Russian Orthodox Church cleric negatively. In the same year, the archpriest spoke out about the appearance of Russian women, which often causes sexual aggression in men. Chaplin proposed developing a nationwide dress code, but the matter did not go further than a petition.

In 2012, after a scandal that occurred in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior involving the women's group Pussy Riot, Father Vsevolod called on society to give a correct legal assessment of the boorish behavior of feminists. In the same year, Chaplin received a proposal to create a Christian political party that could fully participate in the political life of the country.

The Russian Orthodox Church priest also opposes evolutionary theory, calling it a hypothesis, and is against euthanasia, abortion and homosexual marriage.

By 2015, relations between the archpriest and Patriarch Kirill began to deteriorate. Vsevolod Chaplin entered into a controversy with the leader of the church regarding the ongoing dialogue with the authorities. The archpriest voiced his statements on the official website of the Russian Orthodox Church and on his personal page in LiveJournal. Chaplin also openly criticized the Patriarch's reluctance to resolve many issues collectively.

According to the archpriest, the Russian Orthodox Church should not curry favor with either government representatives or the public and, if necessary, must firmly defend its point of view. In August, Vsevolod Chaplin called on the corrupt political elite to make room for religious political and economic leaders. As a result, at the end of 2015, the Synodal Public Relations Department stopped working, and Vsevolod Anatolyevich was removed from his leadership position. The Holy Synod explained the resignation of the priest and the closure of the department by optimizing ineffective departments.

Personal life

Vsevolod Chaplin leads a monastic lifestyle; he has no family or children.

Vsevolod Chaplin now

In 2016, Vsevolod Chaplin was expelled from the Inter-Council Presence, after which the archpriest’s statement about Patriarch Kirill as a heretic appeared in the LiveJournal “Orthodox Politics”. In February 2017, Father Vsevolod’s book “Faith and Life” was published, in which the priest describes the facts of his own biography and the internal structure of the Russian Orthodox Church. In the spring, in a broadcast on the radio “Echo of Moscow,” Chaplin spoke positively about, calling the dictator “God’s involuntary servant,” through whom many communists received punishment.

In June 2017, on the “Let Them Talk” program, which was about a participant in the “Battle of Psychics,” and she, Vsevolod Chaplin was expelled from the studio. Before the broadcast, the priest was invited to comment on the situation surrounding the girl’s suicide, but relatives, having learned about the participation of a representative of the Russian Orthodox Church on the broadcast, asked not to let him into the studio.

Now on the Internet and in the press there is a discussion of the latest news related to the film “” by the director. Vsevolod Chaplin posted on the YouTube video hosting service an appeal to Russian citizens calling for the screening of this film, which is “a spit on our history” and desecrates the memory of the martyr Tsar.