Jehovah's Witnesses in the Modern World and Ukraine

This article highlights the history of Jehovah's Witnesses as a Christian religion in Ukraine from its occurrence on the territory of Ukraine in the early 20th century to the present day. The response of the Witnesses to the massive attempts of the Nazi and Soviet regimes to marginalize and suppress their religious manifestations is described separately. In particular, the biblical nature and confessional content of one of the fundamental teachings of the Witnesses – neutrality – is analyzed and explained. It includes the information about what it means and what it does not mean for believers. This makes it possible to better understand the current display of the neutrality of the denomination members when it comes to compliance with certain requirements of the local government. The growth statistics of the denomination members throughout history are given, which indicate the failed attempts of the totalitarian governments repressive system to eradicate the faith in the controlled territories. For the first time, information is published from the memoirs of Witnesses who tried to obtain state registration in 1949 when under the communist regime and the reaction of the government officials to believers’ attempts to be recognized by the state and society. There is a link between the recognition of the state through state registration and the increase of confessional activity, by which the Witnesses actually disprove the myths and labels produced and imposed on society by totalitarian regimes for decades. Emphasis is placed on the Witnesses’ current activities, which gives an idea of their attitude towards Ukrainian society and their role in strengthening and affirming Christian values among fellow citizens. Their publishing activity, evangelization work, religious and family values, public worship, educational programs, charitable and social work, attitude to representatives of other religions are analyzed. The view of health care is particularly examined. It describes the principles of a reasonable balance that Witnesses follow between the right to make informed treatment choices (including the refusal to use blood) and the attitude toward life and health as one of the highest human values. The significant contribution of Jehovah's Witnesses to the development of alternative nonblood treatments in world medicine is acknowledged. Therein are recorded the conclusions from numerous religious studies of Ukrainian and European institutions regarding the social and pedagogical value of materials published and distributed by Jehovah's Witnesses through their periodicals and official online resources. The involvement of Jehovah's Witnesses in providing charitable assistance to civilians during the conflict in Donbas is highlighted. The activities of Jehovah's Witnesses in the context of their attitude to the culture, history, and traditions of the local people are considered. In particular, the part of the tourist program for fellow believers, who come from abroad to join in the ministry or assemblies, is to get familiar with Ukrainian monuments and the historical heritage. Witnesses publish and distribute Bible publications in 14 languages spoken by small indigenous communities in Ukraine. The social significance of biblical teaching, which is meant to meet the spiritual needs of Ukrainians with hearing and visual impairments as well as those who currently remain in places of correctional centers is outlined. For the first time, significant decisions of higher courts in Ukraine and other countries regarding Jehovah's Witnesses are considered. In recent years, the issues of military service and the right for alternative (non-military) service have been considered in higher domestic and foreign courts; denomination’s compliance with the requirements for the provision of state subsidies guaranteed to recognized religions; the right to build and use their places of worship, and proper assessment of religious hate crimes against Jehovah's Witnesses by law enforcement agencies. The decisions of the courts in the above-mentioned cases show that states consider Jehovah's Witnesses to be a recognized religion with the right to exercise freedom of conscience and religion.

Freedom for me and, perhaps, you – but surely not them? Attitudes to new religions in contemporary democracies

Throughout history, new religious movements (NRMs) have been treated with suspicion and fear. Although contemporary democracies do not throw members of NRMs to the lions or burn them at the stake, they have ways and means of making it clear that pluralism and freedom of religion have their limits. The limits to pluralism are evident enough in countries such as Saudi Arabia or North Korea that have regimes stipulating that citizens must adhere exclusively to their one and only True religion or ideology. Limitations to pluralism have also been manifest in countries such as Northern Nigeria, Sri Lanka or Myanmar (Burma), where terrorists have used violence to eliminate religions other than their own. Even otherwise peaceful democracies – that have signed the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights, and other statements affirming freedom of belief (and non-belief) for all – can discriminate against religions, especially the new religious movements in their midst, and this they do in a variety of ways [Richardson 1994; Lindholm 2004; Kirkham 2013]. This paper outlines, from the perspective of a sociologist of religion, some of the ways in which such attitudes toward, and treatment of, NRMs can demonstrate more subtle, but nevertheless marked and serious limitations to freedom, even in societies that pride themselves on their progressive and inclusive approach to diversity.

Between religious freedom and national security

The article deals with the OSCE Document "Freedom of Religion or Belief and Security. Policy Guidance"(2019) from the perspective of the status of freedom of conscience and belief, as well as the political and legal realities that prevailes in the Western countries (USA, Canada, EU member states), in Russian Federation, and in Ukraine. Author proves that attempts to balance issues of religious freedom and national security in Western countries after the 9/11 led to the establishment of a new security regime, primarily in the United States. Some essential changes designed for an effective response to current and future threats were introduced in national legal system by lawmakers in Germany, United Kingdom, Spain, France, and Italy. With all this going on, many policymakers and commentators called governments to use all necessary means to not allow terrorists and religious extremists to take advantage from what could be regarded as a vulnerability of Western democracies, namely their openness, liberal legislative regime, democratic procedures, sensitivity to human rights and human dignity. The author emphasizes that, despite some shortcomings that followed the shaping of the new security’s regime, it contains obvious components that are quite in the line with the 2019 OCSE Document’s fundamentals. Absolutely opposite, author argues, is the approach to the religious freedom and national security dichotomy in Russian Federation. The restrictions of the religious freedom in this country motivated by the interests of national security, are such brutal that destroy the main pillars of the international law in this realm and put Russia on a par with the most flagrant violators of religious freedoms all over the world. Finally, inspired by the Ukrainian model, author is proving that almost thirty years long experience in forming a model of state-church relations adequate to the spirit and letter of internationally recognized principals in the field of the freedom of conscience and belief can be productive even if the country faces enormous external and internal challenges and the balance between religious freedom and national security can be achieved even for a country at war.

Announcements of publications

Announcements of publications

Religious diversity as a factor in public security

The article deals with topical issues of religious diversity in the framework of the religious situation in modern Russia. The article analyzes important indicators of the religious situation. They include public sentiments created by the subjective perception of the country's population of their religiosity and non-religiousness, in the context of the realization of the freedom of conscience right. Additional indicators of the religious situation are the following: inter-religious, inter-denominational relations and relations between believers and non-believers; the state and nature of public opinion in relation to religion. The criteria for the "complexity" of a religious situation have been determined through delineating of 1) internal and 2) external circumstances that create the conditions for the tension of the religious situation. The first group (1) includes: the degree of satisfaction / dissatisfaction of believers and groups of believers with the implementation, provision and protection of their rights and interests; instability and unsettledness of inter-religious and ethno-religious relations; the presence of contradictions and conflicts within religious associations. The second group (2) includes: the condition of state-religious relations associated with the implementation of legislatively enshrined principles and norms in the sphere of freedom of conscience by state and local authorities; the degree of mutual trust, loyalty, law-abidingness of religious associations; the state of public opinion in relation to religion, its adequate / inadequate expression by the media; the presence of conflicts between believers and non-believers, as well as the nature and intensity of missionary activities of religious organizations. The study of the religious situation, its comprehensive and objective analysis, serve as the basis for information support of state-religious relations and as help in the implementation of the principles of the state's religious policy in the practical activities of the authorities and administration. Using the example of a number of religious organizations, it will be shown that their persecution, especially of religious minorities, does not strengthen the security of the country, but, on the contrary, creates a number of quite serious risks for the stable functioning of society both “inside” the state and internationally. Considered through the prism of various models of state-religious relations, the religious situation in the country seems to be most favorable (both for the state and for religious organizations of various types) when there is religious freedom and the corresponding state-religious relations.

UARR Appeal

UARR Appeal concerning the Law about sects

Review of the online conference "Jehovah's Witnesses and Their Opponents: Russia, the West, and More"

An overview of the online conference "Jehovah's Witnesses and Their Opponents: Russia, the West, and More," held on September 3, 2020 at the initiative of CESNUR

Authors of the journal

The list of the authors of the journal

International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) in the time of War in Donbas (2014 – 2019)

International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) in Ukraine faces different kinds of challenges – practical as well as spiritual – since the war in Donbas had been started. The practical challenge deals with taking care of fellows believers from war areas. The spiritual concerns what the community stand for in the conflict. The response on the first one was the foundation of “Ukrainian Vaisnava Refugee Fund” which provides temporal shelter for the refugees and makes the premises in Vaishnava retreat centers ready for the cold season. Concerning the second challenge – ISKCON claims principal and conscious detachment from the war. One could not expect different positions from this religious organization taking to account its theological particularities of the religion. Firstly, Vaishnavism claims a strong division on material and spiritual (transcendental) worlds so that worldly deals including wars treated less important and valuable. Secondly, the Hindu imagination on time implies that Earth is facing the period of degradation (kali yuga) when wars are inevitable and no one can influence it, so there is no point in active participation in them. Thirdly, Vaishnavism does not think about its position on war as on the detachment rather it claims the different type of participation which derives from the understanding of its mission in any conflict which differs from missions of other religious organizations. The mission of ISKCON in the war not to take one or another side but transform the quality of ignorance (tama-guna) into the quality of goodness (sattva-guna) which is reached by transcendental, not worldly methods. Therefore, any ISKCON charity project does not deals with the help one or another side of the conflict directly but strive to be universal and provide help irrespective to war affairs. As a result of this position only two ways of charity was possible for the Krishnaites in a wartime – the project “Food for life. Donbas” and taking care of abandoned cows in the conflict zone. However, the individual position of devotee could differ from organization’s one. Usually it depends on his or her personal experience or background, especially before coming to Krishna’s consciousness. There are devotees who follow pro-Ukrainian position as well as those who follow pro-Russian, thus Vaishnavas’ attitude to the conflict reflects, in general, the Ukrainian population attitude to it on particular territories. It does not mean that devotees on the Ukrainian territories are all pro-Ukrainian and those who are on the uncontrolled territories are all pro-Russian. Both positions exist on the both sides from the frontline. But because of curtain reasons one or another position is louder on one side from the frontline and almost silent on another. It could be concluded that Vaishnavas accepted the spiritual challenge successfully on both collective and individual level. As field work has shown ISKCON avoided inner conflicts and schism on the political ground. Furthermore, Ukrainian Vaishnavas have not lost the connection with their fellow believers on the uncontrolled territories. Moreover, they also have not lost the good relationships and connections with Russian fellow believers. Though the intensity of such contacts decreased drastically it is more due to technical reasons connecting with the difficulties on the borders. Regarding ISKCON yatras on the uncontrolled territories of Donbas and in Crimea they are facing difficulties with selflegalization due to strict religious laws.

Editor's word

Introductory word of the editor about the content of the journal