www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Met. Kirill: No future for Russian Cath Ch.

Dear Alex, you "leader of men" --

I agree with your post.

"Survival of the Church is still a priority and will be for some time as the Churches "over there" find their feet once again."

Of course, this is correct. It *should* be obvious -- but it doesn't seem to be. The attitude of some (not you, not Maximus, either) reflected even in this string seems to be "well, the Russian "Church" is getting what it deserves. From the Russian Orth. perspective, it really can *appear* that others (not only Catholics, and probably not *primarily* Catholics) are taking advantage of the current state of affairs there and elsewhere in the CIS to expand their own religious agendas at a time when the local churches are, well, weak after 70+ years of official state persecution. That is unfortunate. Again, as I've stated a few times in this thread, I do not believe that this is the Vatican policy -- but I do very much think that it is the personal policy of more than one Catholic living in the CIS, and if that is the case, the "official policy" doesn't matter very much, I'm afraid.

Brendan

Dear Brendan,

Thank you for your kindness.

Now we can all get back to work . . .

Just love y'a, Big Guy, just love y'a!

Alex

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Brendan:
[QB]"It seems I have heard of Orthodox missions in traditionally Latin Catholic countries such as Mexico"

Nope. The OCA Exarchate in Mexico has an interesting history, but it's not one of proselytism.

Brendan,
A curious question: What does the OCMC and Project Mexico do down there? I am concerned about proselytising, but I'm sure many people are only nominally Catholic at best.

Michael

Michael --

My understanding is that Project Mexico is designed to provide assistance to the faithful of the OCA Exarchate in Mexico -- it is *very* poor, and in need of basically everything. As is the case with many of OCMC's missions, these are not evengelical trips like the Mormons are engaged in, but rather are designed to help the poor in Orthodox communities (like Romania, Albania, Russia, etc.) where there is a need for help. OCMC is not involved in proselytizing among RCs in Mexico -- nominal or otherwise.

Brendan

Dear Michael,

As a Catholic, I've supported this project myself as it does great work among the poor in Mexico.

Proselytism in Mexico?

You mean in that "Catholic" country with its history of oppression of Holy Mother Church and anticlericalism?

The Mexican government has done its historical part in contributing martyrs to the Catholic calendar.

But somehow I don't think of that as a positive thing.

Alex

Orthodox C, You and Brendan have made me consider some things here about the Russian Church in a different perspective. While I still reject some of Brendans positions about the Russian Church he, and you, both offered some rather good points of consideration. One of which was to take the history of the Russian Church into more consideration. And you two are absoultly right about this - how many times have I argued the same about the Roman Church and the Pope, that it's historical experience has helped shape it's present.

And Brendan, I have always felt that some of the best political training if not the best, comes out of *internship* in the Vatican.

Dear Maximus,

Yes, I wish I had some Vatican diplomatic training before coming to work for politicians . . .

Brendan isn't a bad sort really .

The more you get to know him, the more you will find him to be the irresistably wonderful fellow he is!

Alex

I have just a couple of comments regarding this discussion.

Many have come to the defense of the ROC - MP, trying to understand the historical circumstances that lead up to its current position of what I see as triumphalism. Some have seen the OCA's (Russian Church in English) acceptance of the church in Mexico in a positive light, not as proselytizing.

Be that as it may, I offer one alternative interpretation:

If, as is stated, the small Mexican Exarchate of the OCA has its origin in the conflict between the Roman Catholic Church in Mexico with the national government during the time of the Mexican Revolution, and if an Old Catholic body was formed to serve those who may still have wanted to worship in the Catholic tradition or to encompass those who felt that the closing of Catholic churches was unreasonable or unnecessary, then in the 1930s, when peace was established between the Roman Church and the Mexican government and the Catholic Churches re-opened, should not (using Moscow's current thinking) this Old Catholic body have "canonically" reverted in its entirety to the Catholic dioceses to which they belonged?

Now I understand that there may have been other reasons that some members of the Old Catholic Mexican jurisdiction did not want to return to unity with Rome. Perhaps some liked being independent from the Vatican and local Roman dioceses. Maybe there were canonical difficulties which prohibited a number of members to return to Rome. Surely I believe that they have a human right to remain separate if they want to. But, by accepting the Old Catholic group into Orthodoxy, the "Metropolia" or now, the OCA merely acted along the lines of what the Russian Catholic and Ukrainian Catholic Churches are doing today. They accepted a group that was historically Roman Catholic, a people who wished to remain outside of the Roman communion and opt for communion with Orthodoxy.

If these were Catholics before the time of the closing of the RC churches in Mexico and I assume liturgically Roman Rite (at least until acceptance into the OCA, the former Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Metropolia), then using the principles outlined by Moscow in relation to the situations being discussed here today, these Mexican churches should have returned to the Roman Catholic Church. The readiness of the OCA Metropolia to receive them could surely be seen as a form of prosyletizing, using the tenets outlined by Metropolitan Kyril, Alexy II and the rest of the Russian Orthodox administration.

Rome accepting faithful in Russia into the Catholic Church is the same as the OCA-Metropolia receiving the Mexicans. "Mexico is traditional Roman territory, the churches should have gone back to being Roman" = "Russia is Orthodox, therefore the ROC-MP is the legitimate body within which to propagate the Gospel and Catholic presence and establishment of churches for Catholic Russian people is proselytizing." Plain and simple, it is the same thing.

Personally, I believe that any church to which people sincerely wish to turn for spiritual fulfillment, has a right to exist and serve those who Christ sends to them. This is far different from missionaries who outrightly target Orthodox or Catholic people and try to convert them. I have not problem with the OCA serving a small amount of Mexicans who voluntarily belong to their jurisdiction, but that being the case, so should the Catholics, Roman and Greek, have the right to serve those who find their presence as a way to encounter God. What is good for one must be ok for the other. Neither in Mexico or in Russia does the size of the alternate church pose a real threat to the historical one. But, as we know, Moscow is so threatened by a Catholic presence that they use it as an excuse for many of their actions, particularly a freezing of ecumenical dialogue and attempts to discredit the Catholic Church for serving their own community within Russia.

I say that neither group should worry about the peaceful and non-aggressive presence of the other.

Joe

The main problem with "Joe's" interepretation offered here is that it overlooks the significance of the historical phenomenon of "uniatism" in Eastern Europe. As is known, the Catholics did pursue a "policy" of uniatism in Eastern Europe at the expense of Orthodoxy, and this historical experience has poisoned the wells. Even if the contemporary Catholics active in Russia are not proselytizing openly (and I think that this is mostly the case, with some unfortunate exceptions), the burden of that history of proslytization creates a poisoned atmosphere and raises legitimate suspicion that can only be considered prudent in light of history. That is markedly different than the situation in Mexico -- the Orthodox Church never tried to "uniatize" a portion of the Latin American Catholic Church.

The other obvious difference is the massive disparity in resources involved. It's true that the OCA Exarchate is not a threat at all ... it has no resources to constitute a threat of any kind to the RCC in Mexico. The RCC, on the other hand, is flush with cash and resources .. much moreso than the Russian Orthodox Church is .. and therefore it is much more of a threat.

Brendan

Russia:
Orthodox-Vatican Relations Thaw,
But Papal Visit To Russia Still Looks Distant

By Kathleen Knox

Pope John Paul II has long wanted to visit Russia, but has faced stiff
resistance from the Russian Orthodox Church, which accuses the
Catholic Church of trying to convert Orthodox believers. Russian
President Vladimir Putin recently entered the fray, saying he is ready
to extend an invitation to the pope.


Prague, 29 January 2002 (RFE/RL) -- When Vladimir Putin visited
Pope John Paul II in the Vatican 18 months ago, one topic was
notably absent from their talks -- an invitation by Putin for the pope
to visit Russia.


Putin's predecessor Boris Yeltsin had extended an invitation, as had
Mikhail Gorbachev before him. But Putin did not renew the offer. A
spokesman for Patriarch Aleksii II -- the head of the Russian
Orthodox Church and a staunch opponent of a papal visit to Russia --
called Putin's stance "wise and moderate" and one "worthy of
respect."


But earlier this month, as the Russian president departed for his first
state visit to the pope's home country, Poland, Putin gave an
interview to the daily "Gazeta Wyborcza" in which he said he is
ready "at any moment" to invite the pope to Russia.
And last week (24 January), the Orthodox Church sent a delegation,
led by Metropolitan Pitirim, to Pope John Paul's "Day of Prayer"
gathering of spiritual leaders in Assisi.


Do these latest developments indicate that traditionally chilly
relations between the two churches are undergoing a thaw? John
Jillions, head of the Cambridge-based Institute of Orthodox Christian
Studies, says yes.


"Definitely. This is part of a trend that's been going on for the past
10, 15 years. There's been a lot of surface tension, but underneath
there's growing -- maybe 'warmth' is a little too strong [a word] -- but
there's growing appreciation that we've got to find a way to break
through these barriers. I think that with these preliminary visits going
on you will find the groundwork being laid for something more
substantial and visible."
There is clearly some way to go before any papal visit takes place in
Russia. Putin himself acknowledged this in his comments to the
Polish daily, saying any official trip by John Paul "means putting
relations with the Russian Orthodox Church on a firm footing. And
that, unfortunately, does not depend on me."


The person it does depend on is Patriarch Aleksii, who responded to
Putin's interview by saying there are still no grounds for believing
relations between the Catholic and Russian Orthodox churches have
grown any warmer. Speaking to the ITAR-TASS news agency, the
patriarch cited continuing concerns of Catholic proselytizing on
traditionally Orthodox territory.


Tom Reese is a U.S.-based expert on the Vatican and editor of the
Catholic weekly "America." He says he can understand the
patriarch's concerns and finds a parallel within his own church.
"The reaction of the Orthodox officials and bishops and the patriarch
in Russia is frankly somewhat similar to the reaction of Catholic
bishops in Latin America who have been very concerned about
evangelicals coming down to Latin America and stealing people
from their churches. So the Catholic Church understands the
concerns of the Orthodox Church and we're trying to be sensitive to
those concerns."


Reese says the Catholic Church has no interest in converting
believers from another Christian denomination, and that there are
plenty of atheists in Russia to keep their missionaries busy.
Moreover, practicing Catholics make up just a tiny fraction of the
Russian population -- some 500,000 in a country of 145 million.
Ministering to that tiny and far-flung minority, Reese says, occupies
the church's agenda far more than proselytizing to Orthodox
believers.


Father Romano Scalfi is founder of the Russian Christian Foundation
in Milan, which promotes ecumenical dialogue in Eastern Europe.
He says Russian Orthodox claims of Catholic proselytizing are
"fantasy," and cites as an example the city of St. Petersburg, where
the number of Greek Catholic or Uniate churches has dwindled in
recent years while many Orthodox churches have sprung up.
"[Russian Orthodox] should accept that [Catholics] have the right to
live and work quietly, and should stop talking about issues that don't
exist."


If the pope does manage to visit Russia, it will be the crowning
achievement in a series of visits to largely Orthodox countries John
Paul has made in recent years in a historic attempt to mend relations
between the Catholic and Orthodox churches. The pope traveled to
Romania and Georgia in 1999, followed by Greece, Ukraine, and
Kazakhstan last year. He is scheduled to visit Bulgaria in May.


Not all of the pope's trips have been free of controversy. One of the
more enduring images from the Pope's Ukraine trip last summer (23-
27 June) was of Russian Orthodox believers carrying banners calling
John Paul "the forerunner of the anti-Christ." The trip was also
condemned by Russia's Patriarch Aleksii, who accused the Vatican
of attempting to "buy the souls" of Orthodox Christians.
The pope also ruffled Orthodox feathers when he visited Kazakhstan
(22-25 September) without first negotiating with the Moscow
Patriarchate, which sees most of the former Soviet republics as its
"canonical territory."


Jillions of the Institute of Orthodox Christian Studies says the pope
could help assuage Russian Orthodox concerns by following the
example he made during his May 2001 visit to Greece -- the first
papal visit to that country since the 11th-century schism that divided
the Catholic and Orthodox churches.


"[The pope] made it very clear that his desire is the unity of all
Christians and he apologized for past mistakes by the Catholic
Church. And that, I think, was received very well by the Greek
population. The Orthodox Church has a very long historical memory
and relations with the Roman Catholic Church have not always been
easy, although of course it goes both ways, and the Orthodox have
also to be willing to ask forgiveness for what they've done to Roman
Catholics in the past. But in my view, what the pope and the Vatican
need to do is to keep reiterating that their desire is for the unity of
Christians in a world where Christianity is often under threat and that
there must be a way to overcome the past -- draw a line under it and
move forward."
Jillions says such an approach would make headway with the
patriarch, though lay people will be harder to convince.


"[The pope] has to be able to show the rest of the Orthodox Church,
which still remains hugely suspicious -- and not just the bishops; lay
people are extremely conservative and often will have much harder
positions even than the hierarchy -- he has to be able to show them
that there's an opening. And if the Vatican can give them this kind of
official opening it will be much easier for patriarchs not just in
Russia but elsewhere to say, 'We're ready to respond to your offer,
let's see what we can do to bring you to our own country.'"


John Paul is now 81 and often appears extremely frail during his
public appearances. So are we likely to see a visit to Russia during
his papacy?


Jillions says it's risky to make predictions, but says the pope's
physical weakness actually may be a "strong point" in this regard.
The image of a visibly weak pope struggling at the end of his life to
achieve some reconciliation is a very powerful one, he says. And if
that was felt in Athens, it could also be felt in Russia.
* * *

No interest in converting believers from another denomination! Since when was the Catholic Church a denomination? I find this kind of statement from a so called expert problematic.

God bless,

Patricius

[ 01-31-2002: Message edited by: patricivs ]

Patricius --

My guess is that Fr. Reese didn't use that exact terminology, but that this is a paraphrase designed for secular consumption (which does, in fact, view the various churches as various denominations).

What I found more interesting was Fr. Reese's mentioning of the atheists. I think this is where the rubber hits the road, because there seems to be a different understanding at play. I think that the main complaint in this regard does not actually refer to Catholics attempting to proselytize active members of the Orthodox Church, as was the case in the uniate movement, but rather Catholics attempting to expand the Catholic Church among those who are un-churched in Russia -- in a sense, trying to compete with the Russian Orthodox Church (albeit with far more resources) for these as yet un-churched persons. In effect, this view seems to say that the Russian Revolution and its aftermath created a "reset" of the situation in Russia, such that Russia is valid mission territory for any and all comers, with respect to those who are unchurched. In effect, this runs the risk of overturning the legacy of the Byzantine Orthodox Church in Russia, and, ironically, uses the Russian Revolution and its aftermath as an opportnuity to expand Catholicism in Russia at Orthodoxy's expense.

That's one view. It's confusing, however, to try to understand what the real view of the RCC is on this matter. Elsewhere, for example, I have read that the RCC aims to help the Orthodox Church evangelize these un-churched persons -- ie, help the ROC in its effort to make these un-churched persons Orthodox. In other places, such as the reference in Fr. Reese's statement or in "Joe's" statement above, it seems closer to the "open season/reset/competition" approach -- at least with respect to those persons in Russia who are unchurched.

Brendan

[In effect, this view seems to say that the Russian Revolution and its aftermath created a
"reset" of the situation in Russia, such that Russia is valid mission territory for any and all
comers, with respect to those who are unchurched.]

What the Russian Orthodox Church cannot understand is why there is even considered a need to have Roman Catholics competeing with them while they are recovering from their 70+ years of persecution in the first place.
Especially since the Roman Catholic Church, claims they have valid Sacraments, are 'sister churches', and the 'other lung'. If this is so, then why the need for them to come into Russia an COMPETE AGAINST THEM for the souls of their fallen away children in the first place.
That would be like me going into my sisters house without being invited and attempting to take away her family without her permission. Claiming that even though we are equal in every way, and have all the qualifications necessary to nurture them to maturity, I still have the right to take them away from her.
It a double standard.

OthoMan

So Bob, Roman Catholics should just sit back while souls are lost, due to the inability of the ROC to be everywhere at once?

anastasios

[So Bob, Roman Catholics should just sit back while souls are lost, due to the inability of
the ROC to be everywhere at once?]

No, Roman Catholics can do what I would do if my sister was in a weakened condition due to circumstances beyond her control. I would assist her in every way I could to get back on her feet rather than attempt to take her children away from her so I could claim them as my own.

Bob