HAND ON THE PULSE ⟩ How to evaluate the expulsion of Metropolitan Eugen

The public letter was published on the Meie Kirik portal. Enn Auksmann, Illimar Toomet and Veiko Vihuri, who signed the letter, stressed that the accusations against Metropolitan Eugen were politically motivated and unfounded. And that the State must not interfere in the internal affairs of the Church.

Interior Minister Lauri Läänemets said that by extending Metropolitan Eugen’s residence permit, “the Church will have the opportunity to find a new leader who shares our values ​​and breathes at the same pace as the rest of Estonian society.”

There is no denying that this is a controversy similar to that following the closure of Russian propaganda channels Sputnik and others in Estonia. Some ERR journalists have complained that this is a limitation of free speech, and they are ultimately right. Since even the three religious authors of the open letter are right in saying that here the State interferes in the internal affairs of the MPEÕK.

But there is another side of the coin. Freedom of speech and freedom of religion have limits. There are situations, ideologies and actors against which we must fight, sometimes by banning them. The question is where the limit is.

This is an eternal debate that must never subside. Every decision, every limitation must be discussed. And there are many factors to consider. Are these individual cases touching the limits of current freedom of speech and opinion? Or it is an attempt to narrow the boundaries of freedom as a whole by making the laws more stringent.

In individual cases it is important to evaluate whether it is a question of repressing internal opposition or limiting foreign influence activities. Sometimes even here the boundaries are not so clear. It is not difficult to create structures of thought in which domestic opposition is represented as an extension of the foreign enemy.

2024-01-28 11:42:00
hand-on-the-pulse-%e2%9f%a9-how-to-evaluate-the-expulsion-of-metropolitan-eugen